AI has clearly arrived and is here to stay, creating significant concern across industries, particularly in the creative sector. While we still don’t fully understand its ultimate impact or how dramatically it will reshape established workflows, the potential is undeniable. We can already see this transformation in our daily lives—from apps that bring inanimate objects to life to AI-generated videos proliferating across the internet. The capabilities are simply mind-blowing.
For those unfamiliar with how this process works, let me illustrate with an example from a friend of mine, Pete O’Connell. He works as a compositor for Weta Digital and is something of a tech guru who loves exploring the possibilities of cutting-edge tools.
Using ChatGPT, Pete began with simple tasks: “Create a symmetrical image using a tree,” or “Generate a 2D mapping of an industrial pipe network,” or “Make a picture of a person crossing the desert on a camel.” For each prompt, you can refine the outcome iteratively. For instance, after seeing the desert crossing image, he might say: “Bring the camera closer to the person. I want it to be a woman in her 40s. Make it more photorealistic. I want to feel the atmosphere and heat, and perhaps make the sand pink instead of yellow.” This process continues indefinitely until you achieve the desired result.
Through this method, Pete created an entire series of AI-generated images that could easily pass for movie stills. His secret was using extremely detailed prompts to maintain greater control over the final output, feeding the AI as much specific information as possible to guide it toward his vision.
Another compelling example is Steve Johnson, a legendary figure in practical effects who designed creatures for films like The Abyss, Ghostbusters, and Poltergeist—work few people can match. He’s been experimenting with AI as well, posting images on his Facebook page while firmly stating: “I will defend that producing these images is an artistic process, and I will defend that until my last day.”
My final example comes from Instagram, where I recently discovered an artist whose work literally stopped me in my tracks, his name is @gOnaji. Every video is AI-generated, yet they depict surreal worlds filled with decaying dancing figures mixed with uniforms from different historical eras, colorful costumes in underwater environments blending with wind and dust. The realism is almost unbelievable—reminiscent of the visual aesthetics in The Cell starring Jennifer Lopez. This artist must invest countless hours behind the computer to generate these extraordinary images.
These examples help illustrate how AI functions as an assistant—an incredibly powerful one. Moreover, each AI system can be trained to your specific needs. As you use your AI platform, you’re essentially training your assistant with the information you provide. It learns from you and adapts to your requirements, understanding your communication style, tone preferences, and quality expectations. This personalization makes it remarkably special, like a custom-tailored tool designed specifically for you.
Steve Johnsons work.
This is why artists like Steve Johnson legitimately claim AI-assisted creation as an artistic process. However, this development amplifies an ongoing debate in the art world. Since the Avant-garde movement, art has experienced continuous upheaval as established historical foundations were challenged and conservative perspectives shifted through the work of artists like Rodin, Picasso, Monet, and Duchamp. The past century’s artistic evolution has steadily deconstructed traditional definitions, creating a landscape where almost anything is possible. Today, we can encounter virtually any form of expression in art galleries—which is liberating for human creativity but also somewhat unsettling.
Now AI can create virtually anything you desire, provided you have the patience to guide it properly. This raises a challenging question: Do you agree this constitutes a genuine creative process? I do agree, though not without reservation. It is indeed an artistic process to achieve these results. The concern is that theoretically, anyone can now be an artist. While this democratization opens unprecedented opportunities for self-expression, does it lower the bar for artistic practice? Or does it simply make the field more competitive?
@gOnaji's video work
Exploring possibilities has always been fundamental to artistic practice. What distinguishes artists is what they do with those possibilities. I see AI as a tool for generating raw material that artists can then transform into something meaningful. Why shouldn’t we use it to spark our own ideas and incorporate them into our work? Is this inherently problematic?
Consider historical precedents: Before photography became commonplace, painters worked from direct observation. Today, nearly 90% of figurative painters work from photographic references. Is this wrong? Sculptors once worked exclusively with metals, marble, and wood until resins were developed. Now various synthetic materials are as common as traditional media. Were these mistakes?
AI represents simply another evolutionary step. Even if we resist it, it won’t disappear. It’s like mobile phones—virtually nonexistent in the 1990s, now nearly universal. We adapted and learned to live with them.
The solution lies in learning to leverage AI and navigate its integration into our creative processes. This is easier said than done, but history offers guidance. Printers didn’t eliminate hand made paintings —they evolved together. Similarly, AI and 3D printing won’t replace human creativity—they’ll evolve alongside it. Skills and talent will always be admired and respected. In fact, as these tools become ubiquitous, I believe natural talent and traditional skills may become rarer and therefore more valuable.


