How Professional Visual Artists are Negotiating Generative AI in the Workplace

TL;DR

A survey of professional visual artists about how generative AI has impacted their careers and workplaces finds most visual artists are strongly opposed to using generative AI (text or visual) and negotiate their inclusion in the workplace through a variety of strategies.

Abstract

Generative AI has been heavily critiqued by artists in both popular media and HCI scholarship. However, more work is needed to understand the impacts of generative AI on professional artists' workplaces and careers. In this paper, we conduct a survey of \textit{378 verified professional visual artists} about how generative AI has impacted their careers and workplaces. We find (1) most visual artists are strongly opposed to using generative AI (text or visual) and negotiate their inclusion in the workplace through a variety of \textit{refusal} strategies (2) there exist a range of factors in artists environments shaping their use of generative AI, including pressure from clients, bosses, and peers and (3) visual artists report overwhelmingly negative impacts of generative AI on their workplaces, leading to added stress and reduced job opportunities. In light of these findings, we encourage HCI researchers to contend more deeply with artists' desires not to use generative AI in the workplace.

Figures (4)

• Figure 1: Multiple-choice responses from respondents on the use of, exposure to, and attitude towards generative AI. 85% of respondents never use generative AI in their work, whereas 88% never use image generative AI. 45% of respondents encounter AI-generated images in their practice daily, while 25% do weekly, and 6% never encounter it. The vast majority of respondents dislike generative AI (99%), with 92% expressing a strong dislike.
• Figure 2: Multiple-choice responses on workplace attitudes and changes regarding generative AI. 32% of respondents reported neither encouragement or discouragement from superiors or clients, and remaining responses are about evenly distributed between encouragement and discouragement. A majority of respondents (65%) have not experienced changes in turnaround time of tasks, though almost all of those who reported otherwise have seen shorter expected turnaround times (33%).
• Figure 3: Multiple-choice responses on career impacts of generative AI. The vast majority of artists believe they compete with genAI (80%). Artists also generally believe genAI has diminished many aspects of their career, such as income (54%; neutral 43%), job security or clientele stability (75%), and income opportunities (90%). Responses were overall negative regarding career growth (77%; 1% positive), future of career (61%; 17% positive), and career sustainability (74%; 2% positive).
• Figure 4: Multiple-choice responses on labor disruption and organized labor. 61% of respondents report disruption in employment or business. 38% of artists ($n=137$) work in an industry with organized labor, but only 12% are members ($n=43$). Some respondents perceive diminished negotiation power, with 57% expressing reduction of individual's power (6% for increase) and 26% ($n=71$) for reduction of labor organizations' power (1%, $n=4$ for increase), though note that the latter question includes responses from artists who do not work in fields with a labor organization.