Over the last decade, it’s no surprise that the relationship between artists and technology has become somewhat strained. With advent of deep learning algorithms, the alleged unlicensed scraping of artists’ online work by major tech companies, there’s a burgeoning animosity between contemporary art and where the internet could be heading. Now, smaller firms are readying up to provide the services that their larger competitors should have introduced in the first place – like Wacom with its recently announced 'anti-AI' platform Yuify.
Take the popularity of Nightshade for instance; an anti-AI piece of free software that allows artists to ‘poison’ deep learning programmes if used as part of their training data, and effectively prevents their work from being stolen. It received 250,000 downloads in the first week of release, marking a crucial first step fighting back against ‘algorithmic plagiarism’.
However, whilst this has been a huge boon for creatives, the intervening months of controversies, relentless news about increasingly detailed AI forgeries, and Adobe’s infamous new (and quickly changed) terms of service appearing to turn Photoshop into borderline AI spyware have soured the attitude toward to creative tech.
Of course, artists across the world are frustrated with deep learning bots farming their work and amalgamating their creations in an algorithmic meat-grinder, but it’s important for tech companies to remember that it’s not just their audience that’s suffering. Soon, it could be their profit margins too.
There’s already a plethora of third-party software eyeing up the art-tech audience. Take the recent announcement of Wacom Yuify, which is offering to invisibly watermark creative’s images and record them online, alongside offering licensing that could potentially be enforced against unauthorised use. The software is promising a lot, and it’s too soon to say how useful it will become in the fight against plagiarism, but it’s a tentative step in the right direction.
The art technology sector relies on its audience, and unlike other areas of the economy, creative practices don’t necessarily follow the latest technological innovations. Whilst fields like medicine, communications, and engineering are all fed directly by the latest scientific advancements, culture’s response isn’t so straightforward, and the production of new art doesn’t rely on cutting edge equipment in the same way.
Though digital culture has produced a fascinating world that couldn’t exist without the development of the internet, art tech CEOs should be cautious, and can’t guarantee that every new product is here to stay.
Whilst the internet, smartphones, and tablets have certainly shaped creative culture this side of the millennium, their influence is largely due to how each brought about a new platform by which to create and share art. Crucially, this was done without trying to replace the artist, or to intrinsically modify their process, but through being co-opted by creatives however they saw fit. The current backlash levelled at tech firms like Adobe has been instigated by the companies’ misunderstanding of their own products, and the art tech market at large.
In essence, this is why Wacom Yuify’s attitude towards its audience is so promising. The firm is offering artists a service, and a means to protect themselves from a digital landscape that has become increasingly hostile in recent times. It’s intriguing for creatives themselves, but investors should also be taking note.
Creative tech needs artists to champion its products, otherwise it stands the risk of alienating its core audience and opening the door for third-party competitors to swoop in and steal the show.
