Procreate Takes a Stand Against Generative AI in Digital Art

This app is rejecting generative AI altogether. Good!

In the tech world, executives rarely brag about the opportunities they've chosen not to seize. So earlier this week, it was a bit of a shocker when James Cuda declared that he @$*#! hated generative AI, and his company's products wouldn't adopt it. And yet, it also made perfect sense. Cuda is the CEO of Procreate, the maker of a wondrous iPad app for drawing, painting, and animating with uncannily realistic digital art supplies. And among my friends who are professional visual artists, @$*#! hatred of generative AI runs deep. They regard the technology's reliance on artwork created by humans for training purposes as intellectual property theft, at least in any instance where a human creator didn't provide express consent. They also don't like the prospect of competing with machines for work, and see AI imagery as devaluing their own craft. Just the aesthetic of stuff churned out by OpenAI's DALL-E and its rivals -- an algorithmically derived simulacrum of artistry, minus the soul -- is like fingernails on a blackboard to them. The creative class's distrust of AI has resulted in several recent controversies involving other software purveyors. In June, Adobe experienced brutal pushback to changes it made to its terms of service that customers interpreted as giving it new latitude to use their art to train its Firefly AI. A month later, Figma pressed pause on a new feature for generating software interfaces after an iOS developer pointed out that its weather app designs looked like knockoffs of Apple's app. In both cases, the companies said that some of the angst was due to misunderstanding of what was going on. But their users' existing hypersensitivity around AI gave them little room for error. By ignoring the GenAI moment, Procreate will please artists who see the tech as a pox on their profession, not a boon to their productivity. It also may avoid creating kerfuffles for itself that could be inevitable even if it tried to implement AI thoughtfully -- as, to be fair, both Adobe and Figma have made a good-faith effort to do. That makes its decision a canny marketing move as well as a defensible ethical stance.

Procreate CEO 'Really F*cking' Hates Generative AI

If you’ve been paying attention this past year, it seems every appâ€"from Adobe’s Photoshop to Canvaâ€"is chasing the white rabbit that is AI. James Cuda, the CEO of iPad-centric illustration app Procreate, came out swinging Sunday with a simple statement: “I really f*cking hate generative AI.†In a statement posted to Twitter, Cuda said, “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 be introducing any generative AI into our products.†The company’s page about its plans for AI is similarly acerbic. It reiterates many of the same complaints artists, illustrators, graphic designers, and other creatives have had about AI art generators. The largest AI models are built on top of billions of scraped images from the web, including the copyrighted work of thousands of professional and amateur artists. Some anti-AI advocates have even suggested that artists poison their images to disrupt AI training. On its page, Procreate says, “Generative AI is ripping the humanity out of things. Built on a foundation of theft, the technology is steering us toward a barren future.†Procreate claims it does not have access to users’ art and does not track users’ activity. Artists online praised Procreate, especially highlighting Cuda’s blunt phrasing. Concept artist Karla Ortiz wrote, “Now THIS is how a company for artists supports artists.†Director and artist Jorge Gutierrez wrote, “Procreate 1, Adobe 0.†We’ve seen some companies that seemed originally hesitant or even hostile to AI eventually come around to extoll its virtues (whatever those may be). Getty Images previously sued Stable Diffusion makers Stability AI for using the stock photo sites’ images without permission. A few months later, it introduced its AI image generator onto the platform. The company claimed the AI model was built solely with images the company controls. Getty isn’t alone there. Shutterstock and Adobe Stock also created their own AI image generators based on images each owns the rights to. The companies effectively grandfathered in every existing creator who shared their work on the stock image sites and promised to pay them some more money for using their images for AI. Artists online have compared Procreate’s anti-AI message to Adobe, a company that has practically drowned its products in AI features. The company has pushed Photoshop’s Firefly AI image generator hard over the past months, expanding its photo expansion capabilities and access among compatible platforms. That model is based on images taken from Adobe Stock, though a Bloomberg report from April revealed the model also incorporates other AI images into its training set. Despite claims it's only using content it owns, the company has been desperate to patch up relations with artists. In June, the company modified its terms of service to imply it might take users’ images and use them to train AI. It modified its TOS to clarify it won’t “train generative AI models on your or your customers’ content unless you’ve submitted the content to the Adobe Stock marketplace.â€

The backlash against AI has officially begun | Digital Trends

Someone had to be first. Sure, plenty of people out there have been watching the ongoing storm of excitement, overpromising, and disaster with a look of disgust. But few companies have come out and said what lots of ordinary people are thinking. And that's that generative AI can kind of suck. Specifically -- generative AI in the creative world. Recommended Videos Fitting, I think, that it would be Procreate who had the resolve to speak out first. The CEO of Procreate, James Cuda, took to social media to address the question head on. Is the popular drawing app working on generative AI features? Cuda, who says he doesn't like getting in front of the camera, rather bluntly states his disdain for the technology. We're never going there. Creativity is made, not generated. You can read more at https://t.co/9Fgh460KVu ✨ #procreate #noaiart pic.twitter.com/AnLVPgWzl3 — Procreate (@Procreate) August 18, 2024 "I don't like what's happening in the industry," he says. "I don't think what it's doing to artists. We're not gonna be introducing any generative AI into our products. Our products are always designed and developed with the idea that a human will be creating something." Cuda admits that they don't know exactly where this is all heading but remains convinced that they're "on the right path." It's quite refreshing to hear someone come out and say those words, especially from a creativity-based tech company. After all, Microsoft, Adobe, and now even Apple are all-in on adding AI assistance and generation to nearly every creative task. I don't know that Procreate's stance on AI will spark a larger movement to stand firm against the ongoing AI creep -- heck, it may even turn out to be a mistake for the company. It certainly takes some courage though, and likely, at least a modicum of knowledge that Procreate's users agree with him. Based on the replies on the post, I'd say they're onto something.

Procreate adopts a risky stance against Gen AI's influence on digital art apps

"AI is not our future" and "we're never going there", are strong-worded assertions by CEO James Cuda. That's before an official statement further states, "Generative AI is ripping the humanity out of things. Built on a foundation of theft, the technology is steering us toward a barren future." The company has a portfolio of three apps, the popular Procreate illustration app for the Apple iPad, animation app Proceate Dreams that's also exclusive to the iPad and the iPhone optimised Procreate Pocket. This would be, at least as long as it persists (and we'd hope it's a long time), in stark contrast to their immediate competition. This means there are now two very distinct approaches in play within the industry, the other signified by the examples of Adobe and Canva. The former has steadily integrated the Firefly generative AI capabilities in the apps including Photoshop, Illustrator and Lightroom. Canva too has made it clear AI will permeate through the Affinity art suite as well, something we've already seen extensively with recent Magic Studio updates. "I really f****** hate generative AI," Cuda said in a video that's been shared by Procreate's official X handle. It certainly gets the message across from the tech company that has been making the definitive illustration app for the iPad for years (its remained a top-selling paid app on the App Store over the past 7 years), and was established in 2011. "I don't like what is happening to the industry and I don't like what it is doing to artists. We are not going to be introducing any generative AI into our products," adds Cuda. Also Read:Art and iPad: AR, algorithms and coding give artists more tools to work with Procreate says there will also be no changes to the data and privacy policies, which means they will not have access to any artist's creations. Adobe, one of Procreate's main competitors, announced new terms of service this summer, which would allow them to access any content created using their apps through "through both automated and manual methods" - they have however since clarified that user data is not being used to train AI models. If you'd been following this space closely, Procreate's move is clearly in tune with what a lot of users and creatives are demanding. A couple of years ago, Japanese illustration app Clip Studio Paint, owned by Celsys, had to withdraw plans to integrate an AI image generator within the app. Another reason why Procreate remains popular with users is the one-time subscription methodology dictating their premium play - think of it as a one-time, lifetime subscription. The Procreate app for iPad costs ₹1,299 while Procreate Pocket for the iPhone costs ₹599. It is a similar approach with Procreate Dreams, priced at ₹1,999. Cuda and Procreate know the risks of the move they've made. "In this technological rush, this might make us an exception or seem at risk of being left behind. But we see this road less travelled as the more exciting and fruitful one for our community," they say. No risk, no reward, as they say. The fact remains that digital art platforms now seem to be adopting two very distinct approaches - one which is quite heavily reliant on AI, and another that isn't. For users, there's now greater choice to choose what they're most comfortable with. That said, Procreate's high profile announcement about shunning generative AI, could potentially provide momentum for more players in the industry to follow suit.

'I really f***ing hate it': Procreate CEO slams use of generative AI, says 'AI not our future' - Times of India

Popular digital illustration app Procreate has vowed to never incorporate generative AI into its products, drawing praise from many artists and digital creators. In a video statement posted on social media, Procreate CEO James Cuda did not mince words about his views on generative AI: "I really f***ing hate generative AI. I don't like what's happening in the industry, and I don't like what it's doing to artists." Cuda emphasised that Procreate's products are "always designed and developed with the idea that a human will be creating something." He stated firmly that the company is "not going to be introducing any generative AI into our products." On its website, Procreate further explained its position: "Generative AI is ripping the humanity out of things.Built on a foundation of theft, the technology is steering us toward a barren future." The company acknowledged that eschewing generative AI could put it at a competitive disadvantage, but said it sees "this road less travelled as the more exciting and fruitful one for our community." Many digital artists and illustrators have expressed concerns about generative AI, fearing it could reduce employment opportunities and that AI models are often trained on artists' work without permission or compensation. Procreate's stance appears to resonate with these concerns. "We're here for the humans," Procreate stated. "We're not chasing a technology that is a moral threat to our greatest jewel: human creativity." The announcement has garnered widespread praise from creatives online. It stands in contrast to other digital art companies that have faced backlash for introducing AI features, like Adobe and Clip Studio Paint. While acknowledging uncertainty about the future, Cuda expressed confidence in Procreate's approach: "We don't exactly know where this story's gonna go, or how it ends, but we believe that we're on the right path to supporting human creativity." The TOI Tech Desk is a dedicated team of journalists committed to delivering the latest and most relevant news from the world of technology to readers of The Times of India. TOI Tech Desk's news coverage spans a wide spectrum across gadget launches, gadget reviews, trends, in-depth analysis, exclusive reports and breaking stories that impact technology and the digital universe. Be it how-tos or the latest happenings in AI, cybersecurity, personal gadgets, platforms like WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook and more; TOI Tech Desk brings the news with accuracy and authenticity.

Procreate Doesn't Take Too Kindly to AI, and I Somewhat Agree - Phandroid

With a lot of popular desktop publishing software companies like Adobe and Canva have embraced the continued rise of generative AI, there are still some who don't necessarily think that computer-generated artwork is the key to the future. In fact, Procreate - a popular iPad design app - recently went out of its way to let the world know its stance on gen AI. In a recent statement titled "AI is not our future," the company reiterates how its software is designed to empower human creativity. As per the post on Procreate's webpage: Generative AI is ripping the humanity out of things. Built on a foundation of theft, the technology is steering us toward a barren future. We think machine learning is a compelling technology with a lot of merit, but the path generative AI is on is wrong for us. We're here for the humans. We're not chasing a technology that is a moral threat to our greatest jewel: human creativity. In this technological rush, this might make us an exception or seem at risk of being left behind. But we see this road less travelled as the more exciting and fruitful one for our community. The rise of generative AI's influence in the arts has been a divisive topic over the past few years, with some expressing concern that professionals (as well as budding artists) are likely to lose their livelihood as companies would instead tap software to create artwork for business and such. Others fear that such software can be easily used for propaganda, which is already the case as we've seen before. As a tech enthusiast, I believe that the conveniences offered by AI software are undoubtedly plenty, specifically when it comes to more mundane tasks such as sorting out grocery lists, typing out formal complaints, and organizing a summer holiday, for example. Special emphasis on "mundane" - as expressed by others before, AI was tailor-made to help people get through the boring tasks, giving us more time for the little joys of life such as art, music, and such. However, it seems like things have moved towards the other way around. Additionally, Procreate CEO James Cuda also went online to post a video promising that the company won't be introducing any generative AI into its products. You can check out his statement here.