Came across some old JPEGs while purging my digital archives to determine which could be kept as ideas to begin writing for this site. Created using Adobe Illustrator CS, I stared at these for some time trying to recall the thoughts and steps behind it. In the absence of any dimensional-assist or automated tool, it was pure perspective and imagination.

     Nearly two decades later I ponder not on whether such task should embrace the use of advanced shortcuts or generative graphics, but on whether I am versed with the concept and its learning if decided to do so. Wishing that 'AI still means Ai', labelling one's profile "No to AI" to protest, or signing off with a 'No AI' symbol aren't means to forward a conversation, seen no more than mere defensive reactions to distinguish us from them. Notice that none from the other side is pausing to address these insecurities despite our cry for attention to what is legit or deemed original?  

     Technological advancement is inevitable as long our appetite for anything better, faster, stronger exist irregardless of industries, creative or not. Wouldn't it be seemingly bias to accept only when it works in our favour, yet reject in entirety even if it work for others? In a time where creation tools and processes are digitalised, what choice do we have as creators paying heed to a craft in which we truly believe requires a certain touch by humane hands that aren't just typing prompts? Are we agitated by its method of input judged as unfair if compared to the old-school hours we put in? Or are we fatigued by consequences that fell out of control, yet having no collective solutions to as we continue to work in bubbles?

     One thing is for sure, this requires 'thinking outside the box' (never liked such a saying anyway) more than ever, only if there really is a box, and that we realise with precision the scope and boundaries of that box. 

     I thought of a thought that came to mind over a recent discussion on the use of generative artworks. If IQ tests were used to score one's intelligence in the past, the use of A.I. would be a test of one's intelligence in the present. The real question is, what good would those intelligence be made for? A double-edged sword is still a sword whether in the hands of a master swordsman or aide-de-camp, it is bound to inflect wounds to the one wielding it and those standing against it.

     This passage alongside its accompanying visuals were created in the absence of any A.I. generators. Not that I am against it. It is just unnecessary when given a choice, without a preference to shout "I am authentic" by putting in a little faith that humanity is capable of choosing their own tolerance of the 'uncanny valley' in a world filled with noise.



▼ Fond memories of how these were created back then. We would cherish and take pride of methods from the past, while looking forward to address inevitable changes that are ahead of us. To look back in comparison is a privilege to our craft.