Wagner James Au / New World Notes

There's quite a lot of excitement about the potential to quickly create art through generative AI programs like Midjourney, but there's one small problem for starters: Most of these "artificial intelligence" programs are churning out images that are really just copies of art work by actual human artists without their consent or compensation.

Is it even possible to create AI-based, ethically sound images? One artist, who goes by the name "Milena Carbone", believes so. In real life Milena is a photographer who's shown her own work off in galleries, experimented with Second Life screenshots as a medium, and is now experimenting with generative AI.

The images you see in this post are from Milena, and by her lights, they're ethically sourced:

"It's impossible to avoid being influenced by an artist," she allows, "but this isn't specific to AI. When we create, we're always influenced by what we're attracted to, by the authors we admire, consciously or unconsciously."

To prevent outright copying, she declines to include artists in her Midjourney prompts:

"I forbid myself from copying or direct influence, out of ethics, but I should say out of respect for the artist and for myself," she explains. "[I]n the case of Midjourney, I prohibit myself from using the expression 'by' or 'in the style of' followed by the name of an artist. Even if I can claim to be part of [that] artistic movement.

"Another way of creating a personal style with AI is to define a set of parameters that define my style. This is what I do for all my images, with a 'recipe' that I don't reveal. Of course, it's always possible for anyone to come close, but it remains my personal touch, which I evolve as AI evolves."

Another ethical component to her practice is making AI just one among many tools she uses to create the final image:

W

Watch Milena's AI artist statement above

"In my latest work, for example, virtually all the images are assemblages of several Midjourney images, but also sometimes real life textures and Photoshop image processing." With recent updates to programs like Midjourney, DALL-E 3, and Firefly in Photoshop, along with new tools like Ideogram and D-ID, she believes digital artists like her will integrate multiple tools. This will lead to more well-rounded or complex works.

"All this, I believe, will contribute to these tools making it possible to create original works, and not just copies of existing artists, or, as is still the case today, works that you can 'feel' are produced with the help of an AI (which I recognize, as far as my current work is concerned)."

Lately she's heard friends and relatives who are artists complain about the rise of generative AI, and has felt the backlash herself. "I understand their reaction, and agree with them for the most part. Recently, I was even insulted and dragged through the mud on Youtube."

Ironically, the very fact that these images are called "AI" seems to give people permission to heavily insult the human creators who generated them, sometimes with great artistry and painstaking time.

But the high level of vehemence also suggests it's time to have a more productive conservation.

"Paradoxically," as Milena puts it, "these emotional overreactions show that these new tools are challenging us and that it would be a good idea to open a debate that would enable AI to serve art even better. I know I'm a pioneer, and it's not easy to be marginalized in this way, simply because you've decided to 'paint with a new brush'." 

Frankly I suspect the real conversation will begin when (if) art critics begin acclaiming AI-based works. Nettrice Gaskins' Deep Dream images have already risen to that level, but it will take others to reach that plain for that dialog to truly start.  

All images depicted here by Milena Carbone.  Normally I'd say they were "copyright" the artist, but given they're built on AI programs and claimed by an anonymous artist known only by her Second Life avatar name, I'll leave that to a judge to decide.