On Sunday, Procreate announced that it will not incorporate generative AI into its popular iPad illustration app. The decision comes in response to ongoing backlash from parts of the art community that have raised concerns about the ethical implications and potential consequences of using AI in the creative industry.
“Generative AI strips the humanity out of things,” Procreate wrote on its website. “The technology is based on theft and is steering us toward a desolate future.”
In a video posted to X, Procreate CEO James Cuda laid out his company’s stance, saying, “We will not introduce generative AI into our products. I don’t like what’s happening to the industry and I don’t like what it’s doing to artists.”
Cuda’s opinion reflects the fears of some digital artists who feel that AI image synthesis models, often trained on content without consent or compensation, threaten their livelihoods and the authenticity of their creative work. This opinion is not universally held among artists, but AI image synthesis is often a deeply controversial topic on social media, with some taking highly polarized positions on the issue.
Procreate CEO James Cuda lays out his arguments against generative AI in a video posted on X.
Cuda’s video plays on this polarization and formulates a clear message against generative AI. His statement is as follows:
You asked us about AI. You know, I don’t usually like being on camera. I prefer our products to speak for themselves. I really hate generative AI. I don’t like what’s happening in the industry and I don’t like what it’s doing to artists. We’re not going to introduce generative AI into our products. Our products are always designed and developed with the idea that a human is going to create something. You know, we don’t know exactly where that story is going to go or how it’s going to end, but we believe we’re on the right path to supporting human creativity.
The debate over generative AI has intensified among some outspoken artists as more companies incorporate these tools into their products. Illustration software leader Adobe has tried to sidestep ethical concerns by training its Firefly AI models on licensed or public domain content, but some artists have remained skeptical. Adobe Photoshop currently includes a “generative fill” feature based on image synthesis, and the company is also experimenting with video synthesis models.
The backlash against image and video synthesis isn’t just aimed at creative app developers. Hardware maker Wacom and game maker Wizards of the Coast have faced criticism and apologies after using AI-generated content in their products. Toys “R” Us also faced negative backlash after releasing an AI-generated commercial. Companies are still wrestling with balancing the potential benefits of generative AI with the ethical concerns it raises.
Artists and critics react
So far, Procreate’s anti-AI announcement has been met with largely positive reactions in the replies to its social media post. In a widely liked comment, artist Freya Holmér wrote on X: “We really appreciate that, thank you.”
Even some of the most vocal opponents of image synthesis reacted positively to Procreate’s move. Karla Ortiz, who is a plaintiff in a lawsuit against companies developing AI-based image generators, responded to Procreate’s video on X: “Whatever you need, rest assured I’m here for you!! Artists support each other and also those who make it possible for us to continue doing what we do! So thank you for all you do and I’m so excited to see what the team comes up with next!”
Artist RJ Palmer, who sparked the first major wave of AI art backlash with a viral tweet in 2022, also responded to Cuda’s video statement, saying, “That’s how you send a message. Now if only you guys could get a full-fledged competitor to (Photoshop) on the desktop with plugin support. Until someone can build a real competitor for sophisticated (Photoshop) use, I’ll have to live with it.”
Some AI-friendly users also responded to the X post, including AI-powered artist Claire Silver, who uses generative AI as an accessibility tool. She wrote on X: “Most of my early work was created using a combination of AI and Procreate. 7 years ago, before text-to-image was even a thing. I loved Procreate because it used technology to improve accessibility. Like AI, it augmented traditional skills to enable more people to create. No rules, just tools.”
As AI image synthesis remains a hot-button issue among some artists, renewed support for human-centered creativity could be an effective differentiating marketing move for Procreate, which is currently seen as an underdog against creativity app giant Adobe. While some may prefer to use AI tools, people can follow their conscience when it comes to illustration apps in an (ideally healthy) app ecosystem with personal choice.
Procreate’s anti-AI stance is a little risky because it could also polarize part of its user base – and if the company changes its mind and doesn’t want to include generative AI in the future, it will have to go back on its promise. But for now, Procreate is confident in its decision: “In this technological onslaught, we could be an exception or risk being left behind,” Procreate wrote. “But we believe this road less traveled is the more exciting and fruitful one for our community.”
