I’ve written a series of guides for artists on how they can use generative AI as a tool in their practice. One key section focuses on ethics and citing AI contributions. Wanting to implement my own advice, I decided to test it out on the photographic images for my website, TheArts.ai.
As a photograph licensee, here is what I learned: citing AI contributions can be difficult and time consuming.
To source images for TheArts.ai, I turned to iStock by Getty Images—a crowdsourced marketplace offering millions of visuals for a fee. After agreeing to the licensing terms, I uploaded the chosen photos to my website, I cited the artists, and then I cited the platform where I acquired them.
If you’re a photographer, please consider citing
the influence of generative AI in your work.
But what was my obligation to cite the work of generative AI in the photos’ creation? Was generative AI even used? I wasn’t the artist, after all, but I am encouraging the ethical use of this evolving tool, which I believe involves disclosing if and how the tool is used.
There didn’t appear to be a way to ask the photographers directly, so I contacted iStock customer support for guidance, who within minutes responded to my query. They confirmed that direct communication with the artists wasn’t offered on their site and encouraged me instead to search out the photographers on social media.
So I did.
I embarked on a digital journey, reaching out to artists in Perth, Tokyo, Portugal, Ukraine, and Brazil. Sometimes, I could easily identify the photographer by their name. Other times, pseudonyms required a bit more detective work. My search took me through platforms like LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, individual websites, and then back to LinkedIn.
While I’m unsure if my messages reached the intended photographers, if I do receive the information I requested, I’ll promptly update my citations.
But what should you do?
PHOTOGRAPHERS
If you’re a photographer, please consider citing the influence of generative AI in your work. Citing generative AI’s influence is new territory, and I understand many artists, and also non-artists like me, are still navigating this. I don’t fault anyone for omittiing such mentions previously. Yet, as we progress, transparency can foster understanding and more ethical practices.
You can find an example of how to cite the technology in my Photographer’s Guide to Generative AI. My way isn’t the only way, or even the right way, but it’s a starting point for further inquiry.
PHOTOGRAPH LICENSEES
If you’re unsure about how generative AI has affected the images you’ve licensed, it’s worthwhile to investigate. Though research can be time-consuming, simply inquiring about the technology used in your photos can promote awareness. As citation practices evolve, I expect the process will soon become more streamlined.
The future of artistry in the age of AI holds potential, but it’s up to all of us—artists, licensees, and enthusiasts—to chart its course thoughtfully and respectfully.
By Natalie Diggins, Technologist and Founder of TheArts.ai
Proofread using ChatGPT-4.