Self-published, or published by a tiny robot threatening to take over our lives?
So, I recently received some valid comments on Pinterest about a book I posted…
- “Not reading a book with ai covers👎”
- “This is ai art, unfortunately”
- “From what I’ve been hearing, not only is the art AI generated, but so is the book content itself. A book with 300 pages, six installments in the series having full novels released within months of each other, apparently”
Well, now that I’m really looking at them…uhhuh…yeah, maybe it was AI-generated artwork. But I also got comments like:
- “I don’t see anything that suggests this is ai?”
- “Can someone tell me how this is ai? Or is this the art that’s fed to ai? All the hair is separated from everything else, the shirts have realistic folding even if exaggerated and the hands aren’t messed up. The ears are well and the eyeballs (on the human at least) aren’t foggy blobs and both of the eyes look the same way. There isn’t accessible detail in them either.”
However, actual artists have commented and pointed out specific details that suggest it was, in fact, AI-generated… I think
Honestly it’s infuriating how hard it is to tell if you know nothing about art.
While we’re in this unique period of uncertainty surrounding how to handle AI—and especially how people should be disclosing what is AI—everyone has a different opinion about how it should be treated.
Until there’s a consensus about how artists disclose how they use AI, we’re left to ourselves to try to work it out.
Let me say, I don’t think this is ever really the fault of an individual not looking closely enough at a piece of art. There’s no governing body or set of norms that lets someone attempting not to support AI covers easily tell between human and AI—and AI is only going to get better.
I don’t support AI being used for covers ever. This is an integral, deeply creative part of the end product: the first thing that people see to represent what’s inside. Part of the beauty of a cover is that it reflects the vision of the editors and artists that brought it to life. Cover designers spend their whole careers honing their craft and style.
What about when the publisher doesn’t have the money for a cover artist? What about when an overworked artist uses AI to assist their own work?
These things still happened before AI. And with brand new technologies like this, the grey area is where artists lose jobs and all of us lose out on quality art.
All of that said, I want to reiterate that without a standardized way to know if something is AI, we should all use some compassion when we see someone else interacting with it. They may not know, and it’s not fair for everyone to have to be an expert.
I am curious to know what everyone’s thoughts are on this topic…
ejbookblog 
I think most self publish authors look for professional artist to do their cover. If they do go the self deign cover rout, there are tools that can help, such as Canva. AI should be the last thing to consider using.
I have played around with Canva by making potential book covers. While I have a leg up in art design I know I’m far from being a professional artist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re right. Writing a book is essentially a labor of love, and most authors do use professional artists for their covers.
Canva is also a good tool, and I say this as someone who uses Canva, but I’m pretty sure Canva uses AI as well. Although I’m not sure to what extent. Idk, at this point, it really feels like we are never escaping it.
LikeLike