Today, in conjunction with World Intellectual Property Day, FMT Lifestyle speaks with artist Jon Tham to get his thoughts on the new technology. A caricaturist and occasional painter, Tham views gen AI as something potentially useful that is, simultaneously, worth being cautious about.
“I find it amazing that technology has given us this kind of accessibility, created by a non-human,” he said. And while he acknowledges his fellow artists’ fears, he remains optimistic: “Looking at the AI art that has appeared on my social feeds, mass job losses won’t happen.”
Why not? According to Tham, AI art can never truly replicate the human touch that is evident in non-AI artwork.
Gen AI images might look good at first glance, he said, but that artificial “perfection” quickly loses its charm – assuming, of course, that the software doesn’t botch the design to begin with, which it has been known to do: think blurry backgrounds, distorted faces, hands with extra fingers.
“People like to see handcrafted work; after a few days, they will come back to admire those created with pens, brushes and paints. Each artwork made by a person has its own uniqueness, and that’s something AI can never take away from them.
“The more AI art is exposed to everyone, the more valuable human artists will be,” Tham said.
Nevertheless, he conceded that those in certain sectors, such as digital artists, will be affected more than others. Some companies have already started using AI imagery for advertising purposes, he said, recalling how one local art-supplies shop was criticised for doing so by its customer base of creatives.
Given that resisting the march of technology is tough, what artists can and should do is to find their niche and develop their personal style, Tham added.
Asked about AI proponents who claim there is little difference between a human artist who draws on another artist’s style and AI programmes copying artistic works, he asserted that there is a distinction: inspiration.
“When I am inspired, I first try the artist’s style. Then I merge it with my own to create a new style altogether, so that the final product is different from the one that originally inspired it.”
He is also ambivalent about his artworks possibly being used to train gen AI programmes, saying there is not much he could do if this happened. After all, even posting artwork online could result in them being included in certain AI databases.
“If a human can see it, so can a computer,” Tham said, suggesting that while the government could someday intervene, present laws have yet to be updated to include AI-related matters.
FMT Lifestyle also took a moment to speak with Chan Wen Hwa, Astro Malaysia’s head of design, on companies’ growing use of AI imagery.
Chan believes AI imagery and human art can coexist; to him, the former is ideal for commercial work, and the latter for creative expression.
“When doing commercial work, everything has to be fast,” Chan explained. “Using AI, you can come up with multiple ideas for designs in maybe one hour.”
Ultimately, he concluded, corporate practices demand immediate results, which is a void AI programmes can help fill.