top of page

Should an artist sign art created with AI? Who's creativity is it?

I've thought long and hard about whether I should put my signature on pieces I have used AI to generate. It's not an easy question, and the answer has to do with the fundamental question: what is art?

These are my thoughts. I approach each AI creation with an ambition to have the outcome reflect my own personal input, including juxtapositions of art history, art movements, color theory, my own photography, my own digital paintings, etc. This requires not just prompts and descriptions, but uploading image references for the AI and referencing various historical art styles and movements. Then I go through dozens of iterations of a piece or series, running variations, selecting and curating the images that have that extra ‘something.’ (Many images do not speak, or are too much like what many others are generating.)

I take the images I select into digital painting app, where I often spend a great deal of time removing artifacts and AI ‘mistakes’. This involves smudging, cloning, moving, or painting over parts of the image. I enhance the image and add highlights, contrast and detail.

Next, I take the image into photo editing software, where I continue to enhance the ‘presence’ of the piece, tweaking colors, removing noise, adjusting sharpness, etc. Finally, I take the piece into a third software program, where I increase the sharpness and resolution so that it will print at the highest quality. Finally, I print the images with archival ink on archival paper, which often includes further tweaks to make the image print as close as possible to the image on the computer screen.

I believe the results reflect my own style and creativity. On the other hand, I want to be honest about the fact that I used the AI tool. I believe this is similar to the way a photographer would not try to pass off a photograph as a painting or drawing. To balance these considerations, I sign the works "Theresa Corrada/MJ".

1 view0 comments
bottom of page