Vicki Pelham 02 Apr 2025

Thank you for adding this option. I put this information in my discretion, but this has a visual acknowledgement as well. AI has created a new category.

Charles Jones 03 Apr 2025

I don't see how putting a few descriptive words in a program has much, if anything, to do with the creative process---at least visually. If you like descriptive words, write good prose or poetry. You'll find that isn't easy either, unless you have another AI program do it for you. Some of us know the generic look of AI instantaneously. BUT it would be nice if some honesty was slipped in. Very probably, the only person being fooled is the AI 'artist' himself---or herself. The pity is, you'll never know the great pleasure that comes with the process itself.

Dave Matke 04 Apr 2025

I think it's important if not standard to denote the medium used when posting your image. Important for potential buyers, galleries etc . Whether artists will use the new AI setting remains to be seen but I'm glad AW made that available.

philip gray 19 Apr 2025

"We have created two new settings for our members to indicate if AI is being used in their ArtWanted portfolio images"

Whilst I welcome the inclusion of the additional feature for artists to indicate that AI has been used in the creation of their artwork, I feel that there are a number of potential issues that this poses:

This is fine as long as the artist in question chooses to be completely honest about whether they have or have not used AI in its creation, unfortunately there are many people who are using AI and are attempting to pass the results off as genuine hand made drawings or paintings, how is Artwanted going to police this ? in other words does this AI rule have "any teeth" or is this setting merely being put there to appease the core traditional artists who have complained about the number of AI art pieces that have already or will invariably flood the site ? Will there also be a limit as to how many AI artworks will be allowed to be posted, as we all know one can literally "Create" 1000's of AI art pieces in a day as opposed to a traditional artists output of maybe one piece per day at best, it is certainly not a level playing field if they will be allowed to upload as many AI pieces as they please. And what of the AI pieces that have already been posted to the site ? will users now have to retrospectively declare that their work was created with AI ? or will those works remain on the site without the AI tag ?

ArtWanted.com Staff 19 Apr 2025

Philip – Thank you for your comments and questions, here is our response to those questions.

As AI continues to evolve into our lives, so will the changes to the websites we use, including ArtWanted. Our first step (like Facebook, TikTok, YouTube & others have done) is to simply indicate if AI was used to create the content of the upload. Other changes are likely to come in the future, but we felt like this was the right thing to do at this time.

There is currently no ArtWanted penalty if this is not done on an AI-generated piece, but it’s strongly recommended. ArtWanted has also gone through many recent uploads and artists and updated this setting manually for artists that appear to be using AI in their art. When we do this, we notify the artist via email and remind them to use this new AI content setting.

It’s not the best use of our resources to manually look at every image that has been uploaded in the last 5 years and guess if it was made using AI and update this tag on the image. We do encourage those AI artists to do this on the art they have previously uploaded.

ArtWanted does not currently have any upload limits for AI-art or other specific styles/mediums of artwork. Limiting this would only make some members not tag their art as AI, so that it could be uploaded. We don’t want to discourage artists from adding this tag for AI generated artwork.

However on our Daily Upload page (which is one of the most popular pages on ArtWanted) does limit the number of uploads per artist to 5 per day. This means that if a Premium Member using AI uploaded 1,000 images in a single day, only their first 5 would show on our daily uploads page to be promoted. The only way to see the other 995 images would be to visit that artist’s personal portfolio.

Thank you again for your questions, we hope that we have been able to answer them. If you have more, feel free to make another comment in this thread.

Charles Jones 19 Apr 2025

Philip, I feel your angst. AI image-creating programs are abhorrent to me, not only because they spit out banal and soulless images but because humans rush to them as something new and wondrous. In short, humans have become addicted to technology and will grab for anything it chooses to dole out. As of right now, AI has the ability to write, compose and populate content for these addicted. I wonder if it has happened yet? The sad thing is, the simple-minded among us (the majority?) can't see anything to be worried about Not won't see---can't. Just don't be a puppet on a string, Philip. I somehow think you won't be. :) Putting disclosure on the honor-system isn't working; there is no honor among thieves.

Maybe AW should have an AI program that sniffs out AI content and labels it as such? Or is that just pouring gasoline on the fire? This is a rhetorical question, by the way. :)

philip gray 20 Apr 2025

Hi Charles you write every eloquently about this subject and we are clearly on the same page with regards to AI art. I really feel quite sad that literally all the art platforms have decided to go with allowing virtually unfettered amounts of AI images to populate their platforms, it has been quite the "kick in the teeth" to all their long standing patreons that have used their platforms for many years, of course it is not only Artwanted but also the likes of Deviantart, Artstation and any number of other sites. I fear that what is behind this is a need by these websites to bring in more images and "artists" is in order to gain financially from the increased volume rather than the (seemingly holistic) approach they put forward in what they say which is always along the lines of "We want to give All artists a showcase regardless of what materials or mediums they use" whilst totally disregarding the wishes of all the artists that were already on the platform in the first place, whose work WILL eventually be crowded out by the sheer volume of AI art. What many do not realize is just how pervasive this AI is going to get....

Crystalwizard 28 days ago

this nonsense needs to stop. people need to STOP caring what tool was used - AI or not. people need to stop mentioninging the tools used.

But since you are doing this, i want you to also require people to list ALL THE TOOLS they used - the cameras they used, the various colored pencil or pen sets used, the brand of paint used, the type of canvas used, what digital programs such as photoshop or other digital programs used

if you're going to vilify ONE type of tool, then let's vilify ALL OF THEM. That way, people that can't stand images created with oil pastels and scanned into a computer can hate on those. And people that cant' stand images taken with a canon camera can hate on those. etc.

all you are doing with this idiotic decision is causing derision and hate, and what you'll succeed in doing is chasing a lot of people off this platform because others will decide to flame them for their choice of tools. I personally, will NOT be making use of these settings - and you're welcome to do your best to try and decide which tools I used - not that it's one iota of your business - and you're almost certain to be 100% wrong no matter what you guess.

Charles Jones 28 days ago

In many respects people HAVE stopped caring, which is why there is a group--probably deemed archaic and obsolete by your standards-- who are opposed to letting 'the machine' make humans even more illiterate, acquiescent and basically 'generic' than they are now. I have been using, building, upgrading, computers since the 80's. I am no technophobe. Not by any means. But I've never liked making art via a computer. I've tried several times but missed the tactile experience of pen on paper, paint on canvas, etc. I know what 'tools' I like and sometimes I branch off into new areas for experimentation. BUT I've never defined as a tool something that basically does all the work for me. I may as well be a Koons or a Hirst. And I wouldn't want to be either of those two walking vacancies for all the money and prestige on this sad misguided planet. There is no hate here, just a vast amount of thoughtful apprehension.

Tak-Sek Chan 28 days ago

Crystalwizard has an important point. Perhaps any tool used should be listed also, including the tools for cropping, sharpening, straightening, editing and optimizing.....

philip gray 27 days ago

As per Crystalwizard's request - If we are required to list all the materials and tools we used in the creation of an art piece plus the type of paper/canvas etc... In that scenario - what would AI artists list ? " I typed in a few words to an AI program and this is what the computer gave me " ? Obviously this does not stand up in anyway to a comparison between having to tick a box to show that AI was used, and requiring actual artists to list absolutely everything they used in their art creation. Personally I often do mention which pencil brand/paper I have used but trying to conflate that with needing to tick a box for AI use is quite hilarious.

christophe vacher 22 days ago

Thank you for posting this. I do believe it is indeed very important to clarify when an image is an AI product or not. Although I am not against AI at all, there has been a lot of chaos in the Art world around the matter. I have recently seen AI works in Art competitions (or even schools) presented as genuine creations along oil paintings and other digital works. This, to me, is a huge mistake. Not only that, but some people are now dishonest enough to enter in competitions works that they present as oil or acrylic paintings, when it is obvious they have either been digitally produced or altered, or worse, entirely produced in AI. I have been working professionally as an artist for more than 40 years, both in traditional art, in digital art, and now sometimes using AI to find references for my work flow that I could not find otherwise. I think it is important to make a clear distinction between the three of them.

Both traditional art and digital art require methodical planning, experience and skills honed for years to produce consistent quality work. The main difference between the two is the fact that digital tools are faster, and allow complete control on all building parameters, including the option to modify or redo all or entire portions of an artist's work, making it an ideal option for modern entertainment and our fast paced world.

AI, on the other hand, doesn't need any skills other than being able to write a few words (and not even necessarily in a skillful way). It doesn't use thinking, emotions or craftsmanship. It does not understand context (at least not yet) or beauty. All AI does is gathering millions of visuals that it dissects and codifies in order to mix them up and produce new images. That's all. It's like a super Google. There is literally zero artistic approach to this.

Just the same way it is important to make the distinction between traditional art and digital art, it is even more important to do so with AI work.

Charles Jones 3 hours ago

I may be beating a dead horse by now but there is one 'tool' that no one has mentioned listing in their vain attempt at total fairness: the human brain. Of course, this also includes that nebulous quantity called creativity and the even more nebulous quantity, the human soul/heart. That is what I see missing when I see AI generated 'stuff.' I see nicely colored images that all seem strangely similar and/or familiar. I see generic beauty and generic themes spitting out derivative content. The artists of the past, the ones I respect, are the ones who used their individuality mingled with their creativity to add something new and different to whatever they produced. Not the ones who used salesmanship to make a lot of money pawning banality off on the easily influenced affluent. Like I said, I'm probably just beating that old dead horse. And I LIKE horses. :)

PS: There are a few admitting to AI generation currently on AW. There are also several regular members who usually upload many images simultaneously on an almost daily basis. Don't think that you are fooling anyone. If asked to, I can call you out. And would have no compunction in doing so. Be honest with yourself and you'll be honest with others, as my daddy used to say.

paul stratton 2 hours ago

You say that you are not making a judgement on AI generated artwork but you actually are by allowing it on this platform .I personaly do not agree with art that is generated on a computer by just telling/or imputing information to generate a picture .Just my opinion.

Reply