Unforced error
I made an unforced error.
One of my recent posts was a story about my grandfather during World War II, an event that took place over 78 years ago. It was my reaction to the new bloody conflict that we are witnessing in the Middle East.
Every time a war breaks out somewhere in the world and becomes international news, I’m reminded of a story from my grandparents, particularly from my grandfather who was a doctor and became a prisoner of war in the Soviet Union for several years after Japan lost World War II in 1945.
This photo above is of my grandfather, a year or two after he came back alive from a prison in Siberia. My father tracked down a hard copy and snapped a photo of it on his phone for me. In his late twenties, he was a doctor in the army who just returned to his motherland, trying to rebuild his life and feed his young family. He started his medical practice but didn’t have money to have an office or a clinic so he would ride his motorcycle to his patients’ homes and treat them onsite.
Most of the reactions to my story were about that, the story. Many sympathized with it and thanked me for sharing something personal while reflecting on what’s happening at the moment in the Middle East and how our perception is formed by the information we consume and the narratives we are fed.
In the story, I used a portrait of a young Japanese soldier that I generated using Midjourney. I made sure that the caption made it clear that it was AI-generated.
Intentions
I had a few intentions behind using generative AI in this instance.
For one, illustration purposes. To heighten the emotional representation of the story I shared but I didn’t have a photo of him from that era. Not only was it close to 80 years ago, it was during the war. To begin with, I first searched for a royalty-free photo that might be representative of the story I was trying to tell. Nothing fit the bill. I was telling an authentic story and was using an artificial image for a dramatization, much like we may see in a documentary film or a biopic.
The second was for practice and experimentation. As a design and visual communication professional, the impact generative AI would have on the industry that I’m in is eminent and profound. I’m actively seeking ways to incorporate AI into my daily tasks. Every week, there is a new AI feature, plug-in, or app in the suite of design tools we use that eliminates pre-existing pain points or makes previously impossible tasks possible.
At the same time, most of the clients I work with are cautious and even hesitant about using generative AI for now. Many are multi-billion dollar companies, and their security, copyright, and/or hallucination concerns are real and legitimate. If something was to go wrong, it could have sizable and disastrous consequences for their businesses.
While we explore areas we can deploy AI, I use space that I own away from my day-to-day client work such as my newsletter where there is more room to experiment. There are fewer consequences also.
And third, speed and convenience. Without AI, I would either look for an image from a royalty-free site, ask a designer/illustrator to create something from scratch, or make one on my own.
The latter two are time-consuming. Between running my business, meeting and trying to exceed client expectations on every assignment, traveling, tending my family errands, looking after my kid’s homework and working on her high school applications (college applications are called high school applications in New York City), etc, I need to look for as many areas as I can to save time, even if it’s 15 minutes.
Creating an illustration or two for my newsletter seemed like a good place to do so.
But here lies the conundrum.
AI = Drop shadow?
Once upon a time, drop shadows were everywhere online. If you get this reference, you are ‘well-seasoned’ like me.
An old friend of mine likened today’s AI craze to the drop shadow craze in the late 1990s.
When Photoshop introduced filters back then, drop shadows were one of those effects that became popular. It became popular because it gave tactility to elements on digital screens, a synthetic medium. Filters like drop shadows made that process quick and easy. Other filters such as bevels further emphasized digital tactility, giving skeuomorphic design a rise and a chance to become a practice.
If we, designer types, see typography with a drop shadow today, we cringe. Every few years, a new design trick appears on the market. Soon enough, it becomes a trend— a cliché—and we become snobby about it.
By the mid-2000s, this trend was replaced by the reflection effect that had a little more longevity. I believe Apple popularized this digital design trend. It lasted longer than the drop shadow effect.
Speaking of Apple, if we look at the evolution of Apple.com, we can see the evolution of trends in digital design. Some, like drop shadows and bevels, had a short life of several years while skeuomorphism lasted more than a decade.
Here’s a surface-level glimpse of digital design history as seen on Apple.com (1997, 2001, 2010, 2015, 2023):
Is generative AI as it relates to creative professions one of those trends like filters in Photoshop?
Judging by the plethora of AI-generated images that have similar looks and feels, certain aspects of AI probably are. Everyone is copying everyone else. Like the metaverse and NFT art, trends end because they are trends. I suspect much of the AI-generated art of today will fade in a year or two. Or at the very least, it’ll feel dated.
Some artists argue how the art is made is not important. “Dissecting something will almost always kill it,” says Jonas Peterson, a photographer who has garnered success with his AI-generated imaginary portraiture in the past year or so. I happen to like the work he’s creating. Time will only tell if I feel the same in a year or two.
Every once in a while, though, a few trends become the norm. They are more than a trend or a fad. They stay because they either have real value or utility.
But is it art?
Regarding the image I generated with AI and used in my story, some of my readers reacted, saying that it added to the story. A few thought it was a real image of my grandfather, overlooking the caption. In that case, I reminded them that it wasn’t and was generated by AI for illustrative purposes.
Among those reactions, one reaction from this aforementioned Friend was strong and even critical. I ended up having a prolonged back-and-forth with him.
Here’s part of what Friend wrote. It’s edited for clarity.
I was truly moved by the tale of your grandfather. The viscerality, the suffering, the true story of his experience.
I’m telling you as a friend. The AI photo cheapens your truth. It stinks of a robot. It makes something personal look like an ad. I may be an early ‘repudiator’ but when I see an AI-generated image, it automatically questions authenticity. I know you and I do not doubt the veracity.
But I believe that even simple folk will very soon ‘smell the robot.’
For ads? OK.. go for it. But for personal true stuff. I wouldn’t.
You told me this once. And it’s true. The idea is everything. Concept is king.
But context is queen.
Is it real? Did it happen? Skin in the game? Authenticity, sacrifice, meaning? If it’s fake, why would anyone care? People will quickly become immune.
Friend continued:
When you use AI as a cover image, you may as well be putting a drop shadow on something. It’s already so dated and obvious. Bevels, drop shadows, outer glows... AI. It’s all the same.
Why don't you use your talent to make a piece of art or design to represent your story? You have massive talent. Be the great artist and designer we all know you are.
Make everything count, make it real–human. We only live once. Who fucking cares if we fuck up once in a while.
I totally believe in you. Sensei. Love you man.
Receiving these messages, at first, my heart sank. I felt that I disappointed my audience, even if it was just one person. Perhaps, it weighed heavier as the person was a friend.
I then felt stressed that there was that kind of expectation of my output. “Man, between running my own company, work demands, family duties, long-distance travel, etc, I just don’t have the time to be making art out of every illustration just for my newsletters,” I thought to myself.
After a moment or two, however, I felt appreciative that someone would take the time to write to me with passion and share his honest thoughts. Knowing he cared was touching.
What if I could make art, even just for a little illustration within my newsletter?
There have been many good publications that became great because they took the time and put enough care into making even mundane illustrations into artistic expressions.
A high bar for sure.
The future coin of the land
Creating the kind of imagery that used to take talent, skill, and years of experience is now possible with a prompt and within seconds. In fact, we don’t need much talent or skill. Creating something good used to be much harder. The learning curve was steep.
Now, not only is the distance to “good” much shorter, the opposite is true. Because anyone can make something good, “good” becomes “good enough.” “Mediocrity is now free,” said another friend Nick Law of Accenture Song. While the distance to good has become non-existent, that from “good” to “good enough” is also much shorter than we think. It’s become a slippery slope.
What used to be “great” is now “good.” What is “good” today becomes “good enough” sooner than tomorrow.
That means, conversely, the slope to “great” has become much steeper.
Having said all this, I’m not an AI repudiator. Whether we like it or not, AI is here to stay. The question won’t be whether we should use it or not. It’s how we use it. I happen to have some thoughts on “How to AI” and believe AI can enhance our capabilities and help us become better.
There is, however, a fine line between convenience and enhancement. In our era of efficiency and hyper-productivity, it’s easy to fall prey to convenience.
The unforced error I made in using an AI-generated image for my story was that it appeared authentic.
The way the image was used and where it was placed in the story made it seem like it was a real photo of my grandfather. The fact I made it clear that it was AI-generated didn’t almost matter.
“With the rise of AI, for the first time, the barrier of skill is swept away,” says Claire Silver, a self-proclaimed AI collaborative artist. “In this evolving era, taste is the new skill.”
While she makes a good point about the barrier of skill, I don’t believe taste is the new skill for us to survive and stay relevant. The barrier of taste will also be, more or less, swept away in this evolving era. This statement might be true for now but it won’t last long.
When anyone with no discernable skill or talent can generate something pretty good within minutes or even seconds, what determines the greatness of our creative outputs?
It’s tenacity.
Tenacity to pursue originality, adhere to authenticity, and not compromise on quality.
As Friend said, this statement rings true, more than ever:
“Authenticity is the future coin of the land.”
Thanks for reading. As I was traveling between the US and Asia this past two weeks, I ended up not able to send last week’s newsletter. My apologies. Now back to the usual program.
Please hit reply with any feedback, thoughts, or questions. I’d love to hear from you.
Curious about this “The barrier of taste will also be, more or less, swept away in this evolving era.” - could you elaborate?