AI Policy

That's simple, isn't it? AI is not used to imagine. It is not for creating ideas, when sketching, when using Adobe Illustrator, InDesign, or Photoshop (yes, yes, I know. I still use Adobe. Sorry?) Generative AI is outlawed at Studio Legenda. It is not used to generate the next map project to make, let alone generate the maps. None of that! A human brain is asked to come up with creative solutions, and it has a monopoly on that at Studio Legenda.

Firstly, because using gen AI would take all the fun out of design. And, besides, if I don't put effort into my work, why would anyone want to put effort into buying it or giving it attention? Nobody would, so I don't. And it's just no fun, either. So there's that.

Secondly, because it is basically a parasite on human creativity, stealing everyone's work and not having to pay royalties. I'm old enough to remember what happened to Napster when they allowed pirating music. Those AI companies have something to answer for and a massive debt to society (and the creative industry).

Thirdly, I want to keep using my brain and not have it atrophy by outsourcing my creative skill. That art academy bachelor's degree is not for nothing!

Sometimes AI can be useful, for example using AI in a creative tool such as Photoshop. Yes, I know, I mentioned how it would not be welcome in such a program. But the difference is how one uses it. I don't use it to generate ideas. I use it to help me as any tool I use. I remember, years back, spending hours trying to detach a (say) label from a beer bottle. And then having to clone stamp and fiddle with brushes to fill in the blank. Tedious, boring work. AI is great in work like that, and do it in a jiffy. In that case, it is a useful tool. And nothing more than that. The creative decision there is still mine, not its. You could argue about the nitty gritty, about how the light would fall on the bottle and so on and so forth. But in such cases it would take that from the context of the existing image and continue in that vein. There's very little creativity involved in that. And that is an important distinction. 

Having said the above, I do recognize that AI can be a useful tool. Do you remember the blockchain hype? Everything and everyone was into bitcoin and blockchain. It was a promising technology that would revolutionize the world. That hasn't really panned out, has it? But as a technology it still has its use in places. AI is (at the time of writing) enormously over-hyped. It has its uses (for instance when looking for ways to fold proteins). But that use is not outsourcing creativity. 

AI is great as a tool when it comes to doing the dull, boring tasks. If it could clean my house, I would use it for that immediately. We still have to wait for that to happen (if we want that, really). But it's great in fact-checking. It would be great as a bookkeeper (but we still need human bookkeepers to oversee it). And it's great in programming (but we still need humans to oversee it). It's also great in grammar checking. But I do not let it write. This article was written on an Saturday evening, sitting on my bed, typing this on laptop. That's what the photo is about.

AI making suggestions is fine, especially about text. That is really its forte. But as a designer, as a creative, I bring the visual ideas. I do the drawing, the illustrating, the painting, the photographing, the editing. The major creative decisions.