When Serki The fashion brand, which has gone viral on Instagram and TikTok for its frothy, luxurious dresses, has released a new collection, and the response has been generally positive. Known for its size inclusivity (sizes range from XXS to 6X), and owned and founded by an independent artist who is vocal about fair pay and sustainability in fashion, Selkie is often highly regarded as an ethically “good” online store One of the brands.
the brand’s Upcoming Valentine’s Day Drops Inspired by vintage greeting cards, featuring sweet images of puppies surrounded by roses or funny fluffy kittens drawn against a pastel background. Printed on bow-embellished sweaters and dresses, the collection pays homage to romance in a nostalgic, cheeky way.It also uses an AI image generator for design halfway.
“I have a huge library of very old art from the 1800s and 1900s, etc., and this is a great tool for making art look better,” Selkie founder Kimberley Gordon told TechCrunch. “I can paint with it on top of the generated art. I think the art is fun and cheeky, with little details like an extra toe. In five years, this sweater will be really cool because It will represent the beginning of a whole new world. The extra toe is like a representation of where we started.”
But when the brand announced that the collection was designed using generative artificial intelligence, there was an immediate backlash. Selkie talked about the use of artificial intelligence in art in an Instagram comment, noting that Gordon believes it’s “very important to understand this new medium and how it works or doesn’t work for Selkie as a brand.”
The brand’s Instagram comments were filled with criticism. One person described the choice to use artificial intelligence as “a slap in the face” to the artist and expressed frustration that the brand was selling for such high prices ($249 for the viral polyester bubble mini dress, $1,500 for the custom silk bridal gown). ) will not simply commission human artists to design graphics for the series. Another user simply commented: “The ‘I’m an artist and I love AI!’ argument.” Pretty disgusting. ” One user questioned why the brand chose to use generative AI, given the “staggering amount” of stock images and vintage artwork that are not copyrighted and “same style.”
“Why make highly controversial and ethically questionable choices when equally cost-effective and more ethical options are widely available?” the user continued. “If you had actually done the artificial intelligence research you claim to have done, you would also understand that this is a technology that requires theft and exploitation of workers in order to function.”
Gordon said it took her about a week to design the collection, but it took several months to a year of development and manufacturing to actually sell it online. In the year since she finalized the design, public perception of artificial intelligence art has undergone a major shift.
As generative AI tools become more sophisticated, the use of AI in art has become increasingly polarized. Some artists, such as Gordon, who used a combination of royalty-free clipart, public domain drawings, digital illustrations and Photoshop collages to design Selkie’s patterns, see AI image generators as a tool. Gordon likens it to photography: it’s new now, but future generations may accept it as another artistic medium.However, many artists verbal objection Application of artificial intelligence in art.
Their concerns are twofold – artists are losing access to cheaper and faster artificial intelligence image generators, and many generators are accepting copyrighted images scraped from the web without the artist’s consent. training.Resistance to generative AI Across all creative industries, not just visual art.Musicians speak out against the use of deepfake coverthe actor questioned whether SAG-AFTRA’s new contract Adequate regulation of artificial intelligence in entertainment, even fan fiction writer Steps are being taken to prevent their work from being used to train artificial intelligence models.
Of course, not all generative AI is exploitative. As a visual effects tool, it’s useful for enhancing animations, from creating more realistic fire in Pixar’s “The Elements” to visualizing complex scenes in HBO’s “The Last of Us.” There are many examples of applications of generative AI that have become morally bankrupt.create Deepfake revenge pornfor example, or Producing “diverse models” rather than hiring actual people of color Objectively terrible. But most debates about generative AI fall into ethical gray areas, where the parameters of exploitation are less defined.
In Selkie’s case, Gordon single-handedly designed all of the graphics on Selkie’s clothing. If someone else designed it, she would make it clear it was a collaboration with another artist. Her designs often involve digital watercolors, stock images, and collages of “old art” that are no longer protected by copyright. Many of her popular designs incorporate motifs from famous works of art, such as Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” and Monet’s “Water Lilies,” which she uses as a basis to create unique yet recognizable patterns. After she modified and built upon existing pieces, they were printed on gauzy fabrics and used to create flowing dresses and frilly garments.
Gordon believes the Valentine’s Day drop is no different, except that she used generated images as the basis for the design rather than public domain artwork. She said the patterns she created for this collection were just as transformative as those she’d designed for previous collections, and involved just as much alteration, original illustration and “creative vision.”
“I say this is art. This is the future of art, and as long as artists are utilizing it, it’s the same thing we did with clip art,” Gordon said. “I think it’s very similar, except it gives more power to artists and allows us to compete in a world where big corporations have all these structures.”
Gordon bristles at accusations that equate her use of generative AI to companies replacing employed artists with AI image generators. She noted that it was impossible for her to “change artists” because she is the brand’s only in-house artist, and the high price Selkie charges for each ruffled dress takes into account material and labor costs. If clothing is cheap, she said, it’s often because the workers who made it aren’t being paid fairly. Gordon added that although she was paid as a “business owner,” she did not include her labor as a designer in her salary to cut overhead costs.
Gordon also noted that when she used Midjourney to generate the basic images, she didn’t use any other artists’ names or works as cues. She turned to artificial intelligence for efficiency—she said it was a “great brainstorming tool” for visualizing what she wanted the series to look like—and for fear of being left behind. Artists are under increasing pressure to adapt to new technologies, she said, and she wants to stay ahead of the curve.
“I’m not using AI models. I’m just using AI as a tool for what I would normally do. I’m not trying to take away anyone’s job in my own company,” she said. “I use it to make myself more efficient. If I’ve been hiring a lot of artists to make my prints, and then I suddenly use artificial intelligence, I’m definitely going to take something away from them. How can I get rid of myself?”
This nuance isn’t always reflected in conversations about art and artificial intelligence. Gordon owns a popular but relatively small fashion brand, which she uses as a vehicle to monetize her artwork. Would she commission another artist to paint paintings of lovesick puppies and kittens? Yes. Is it possible that the generated generic vintage Valentine’s Day card image could enhance the work of any living artist? It’s unclear, but so far no one has publicly accused Selkie of copy their art for the new series. Gordon’s use of AI-generated imagery is far less egregious than other larger fashion brands, but more sanctimonious critics argue that any use of AI in art can cause long-term harm to the artist.
Gordon, for one, said she has listened to the criticism and has no plans to use AI-generated imagery in future Selkie series. She believes there is a lack of regulation when it comes to generating artificial intelligence and suggests artists should receive some kind of payment each time their name or work is used in a prompt. But she does plan to continue experimenting with it in her personal art, maintaining her stance that, ultimately, it’s just another medium to work with.
“Maybe the way I’m doing it and this route isn’t the right way, but I don’t agree with it [AI] That’s a bad thing,” Gordon said. “I think it’s technological progress. It’s neither good nor bad. It’s just a way of life.”
