Why I Don’t Use AI to Create My Artwork

In recent years, artificial intelligence has become an increasingly common tool in visual art. Entire images can now be generated in seconds from a short prompt. For many creators this has opened new possibilities, but for my own work I have chosen a different path.

I do not use AI to create my artwork.

This isn’t a reactionary position, and it isn’t about rejecting technology. My work (in part) is created digitally and relies on modern tools. But there is an important distinction between using tools and handing over authorship. For me, the act of making art lies in the decisions, the observation, and the slow unfolding of an idea through human attention.

When I create a piece, the process is deliberate and often unpredictable. I experiment, adjust, discard, rebuild, and refine. Sometimes a direction appears unexpectedly and the work evolves in ways I did not plan. At other times it resists me completely. That tension between intention and discovery is where the artwork actually forms.

AI generation removes much of that space.

When an image is produced through a prompt, the system is drawing on patterns learned from vast datasets of existing images. The result may be visually striking, but the process itself is fundamentally different from the way I approach making art. My interest lies in the gradual shaping of an image through repeated decisions and observation, not in selecting from automated outcomes.

There is also something important about the trace of the human hand, even in digital work.

Although some of my artwork is created digitally, it is still guided entirely by human judgement. Every mark, texture, adjustment and composition is something I place intentionally. The piece evolves because I push it, question it, and respond to it. It carries the marks of time spent thinking and looking.

Digital? Yes. Painted? Yep

This connection to process matters to me.

My work is influenced heavily by ideas of naturalness, the way patterns emerge in nature without rigid control. In many ways the creative process mirrors this. A piece grows through interaction, patience and subtle shifts rather than through instant completion.

AI generation tends toward immediacy. My practice values emergence.

Choosing not to use AI is therefore less about opposition and more about preserving a relationship with the act of making. I want the artwork to reflect the hours of attention behind it. I want the imperfections, the adjustments, and the unexpected turns that occur when a person stays with an idea long enough for it to reveal itself.

Technology will continue to evolve, and artists will continue to explore new tools. That exploration is part of the history of art itself. But every artist ultimately decides where they want their authorship to sit.

For me, the work must remain human-made.

Every piece you see on this site is created directly by me. The tools I use assist the process, but they do not generate the ideas or the images. The artwork grows through observation, intuition, and the slow shaping of form.

In a time when images can be produced instantly and endlessly, the act of making something carefully, by hand and mind, feels more meaningful than ever.

That is the space where my work lives.

What is matter? Nevermind. What is mind? No matter..

I'll let Bertrand sum it up really. He used to sit among the rocks in Porthcurno and think. What a human thing to do. Good old Berty..