When Silky, the The fashion brand that went viral on Instagram and TikTok for its extravagant frothy dresses is announcing new collections, and the reception is generally positive. Selkie is known for its size inclusiveness – with sizes ranging from XXS to 6X – and because it is owned and founded by an independent artist who speaks out about fair pay and sustainability in fashion, Selkie tends to be highly regarded as one of the ethically “good” brands online. .
trade mark Next Valentine’s Day drop Inspired by vintage greeting cards, it features screen images of puppies surrounded by flowers, or comical kittens drawn on pastel backgrounds. Printed on jackets and dresses decorated with bows, this collection was intended as a nostalgic nod to romance. It has also been designed using AI image builder Mid-flight.
“I have a huge library of very old artwork, from the 1800s to the 1900s, and it’s a great tool for making art look better,” Selkie founder Kimberly Gordon told TechCrunch. “I can kind of draw with it, as well as the art that’s created. I think the art is funny, I think it’s cheeky, and there’s little details like the extra toe. Five years from now, this jacket is going to be something cool because it’s going to 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 AI, the backlash was immediate. Selkie addressed the use of AI in art in an Instagram comment within the drop announcement, noting that Gordon felt it was “important to learn about this new medium and how it may or may not work for Selkie as a brand.”
Criticism flooded the brand’s comments on Instagram. One described the choice to use AI as a “slap in the face” for artists, and expressed disappointment that the brand is selling at such a high price ($249 for a polyester ball gown to $1,500 for a custom-made silk wedding dress). ) Not only will a human artist be commissioned to design graphics for the group. Another user simply commented: “The ‘I’m an artist and I love AI!’ argument is very poor.” One user questioned why the brand chose to use generative AI, given the “huge number” of stock images and vintage artwork that are not copyrighted, and are “identical in style.”
“Why make this highly controversial and ethically questionable choice when cost-effective and more ethical options are widely available?” The user continued. “If you have actually done the research you claim to have done on artificial intelligence, you also realize that it is a technology that requires stealing and exploiting workers to function.”
Gordon said she spends about a week designing the kits, but it takes months to a year of development and manufacturing before they are actually sold online. In the year since she finished designing this grant, public opinion about the art of artificial intelligence has changed markedly.
As generative AI tools become more sophisticated, the use of AI in art has become increasingly polarizing. Some artists, like Gordon, who designs Silkies himself using a mix of royalty-free clip art, public domain paintings, digital illustrations and Photoshop collages, 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 are Oppose loudly To use generative artificial intelligence in art.
Their concerns are twofold – first, that artists are losing opportunities to cheaper and faster AI image generators, and second, that many generators have been trained on copyrighted images extracted from the Internet without the artists’ consent. Backtracking against generative AI It extends across all creative industriesAnd not only in visual art. Musicians speak out against the use Deepfake coversthe actors wonder if New SAG-AFTRA contract Artificial intelligence is appropriately regulated in entertainment, even Fanfiction book They are taking measures to prevent their work from being used to train AI models.
Of course, not all generative AI is exploitative; As a VFX tool, from creating more realistic flames in Pixar’s “Elemental” to visualizing complex scenes in HBO’s “The Last of Us,” are extremely helpful in improving animation. There are plenty of examples of morally bankrupt applications of generative AI. Create Deep revenge pornfor example, or Generating “diverse role models” instead of hiring actual people of color Objectively terrifying. But most of the discussion about generative AI settles into an ethical gray area, where the criteria for exploitation are less defined.
In the case of the Selkie, Gordon alone designs all of the graphics that appear on Selkie clothing. If someone else designed it, it shows that they collaborated with another artist. Her designs typically include a combination of digital watercolor paintings, stock photos, and “vintage art” that is no longer protected by copyright. Many of her famous designs include motifs from famous works of art, such as Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” and Monet’s “Water Lilies,” which she uses as a base to create a unique, yet still recognizable, pattern. After modifying and building on existing work, it is printed on muslin fabric and used to create billowy dresses and ruffled accessories.
Gordon said the Valentine’s Day drop is no different, except that she used created images as the base for the design, rather than public domain artwork. She said the patterns she created for this collection are just as transformative as those she’s designed for previous drops, and incorporate a lot of kaleidoscopic, original illustrations and a “creative eye.”
“I’m saying this is art. This is the future of art, and as long as the artist is using it, it’s the same as what we used to do with clip art,” Gordon said. “I think it’s very similar, except it gives artists more power and allows us to compete in a world that has “It has big companies and all this structure.”
Gordon bristled at accusations that equated her use of generative AI with that of companies replacing working artists with AI image generators. She noted that she could not “replace artists” because she is the only artist within the brand, and that the exorbitant prices Silky charges for each ruffled dress represent the cost of materials and labor. If clothes are cheap, she said, it’s usually because the garment workers who make them aren’t paid fairly. Gordon added that although she is paid as a “business owner,” she does not factor her work as a designer into her salary in order to cut overhead costs.
Gordon also noted that she did not use any other artists’ names or works as prompts when she used Midjourney to create the underlying images. She turned to AI for efficiency — she said it was a “great brainstorming tool” to envision what she wanted the group to look like — and for fear of falling behind. She said artists face increasing pressure to adapt to new technology, and she wants to be on the cutting edge.
“I don’t use AI models. I just use AI as a tool where I normally would. I’m not trying to take away anyone’s job at my own company,” she said. “I use it as a way to be effective instead. If I was using a lot of artists to make my prints, and then suddenly used AI, I would definitely move away from them. How can I take from myself?”
This is a nuance that is not always reflected in conversations about art and artificial intelligence. Gordon has a popular, but relatively small, brand that she uses as a way to monetize her artwork. Could she have commissioned oil paintings of puppies and kittens from another artist? Yes. Is it likely that the images created for generic and vintage Valentine’s Day cards have elevated the work of any living artist? Unclear, but so far no one has publicly accused Selke of this Imitate their art For the new group. Gordon’s use of AI-generated imagery is nowhere near as egregious as those used by other major fashion brands, but more hypocritical critics argue that any use of AI art perpetuates harm against artists.
Gordon, for example, said she has heard the criticism and does not plan to use AI-generated images in future Selkie collections. She believes regulation is lacking when it comes to generative AI, and suggested that artists should receive some sort of payment every time their names or works are used in claims. But she plans to continue experimenting with her personal art, and has maintained her stance that ultimately, it’s just another medium to work with.
“Maybe the way I did it and this way is not the right way, but I don’t agree with that [AI] “It’s bad,” Gordon said. “I feel like it’s a technological advancement. It’s neither good nor bad. It’s just a way of life.”