Artists and Illustrators Speak Out as AI and Studio Ghibli-Inspired Illustrations Flood the Internet
From Studio Ghibli-inspired imagery to action figure-style “starter packs,” the internet is once again obsessed with viral AI-generated art. But while these trends rack up likes and shares, the artists and illustrators who built their careers by hand say they’re being pushed to the sidelines—and it’s hitting hard.
Joy Cardaño, a full-time anime-style artist from the Philippines, said commissions that once came in weekly have now slowed dramatically. “It’s so unethical,” she said in an email. “Even if the artists are vocal about how they don’t want their art to be used, they refuse to listen.”
Like many in the art world, Cardaño has taken to Instagram to push back, posting her original Ghibli-inspired fan art with a pointed caption:
“Drawn with my own hands — no AI needed.”
AI Art May Be Fast and Cheap—But It’s Hurting the Community
For freelance and commission-based artists, the rise of AI isn’t just frustrating—it’s threatening their income. AI tools can mimic styles with alarming accuracy, offering faster and cheaper alternatives to human-made work. But many say what these images gain in speed, they lose in soul.
Los Angeles illustrator Hollie Mengert discovered a model mimicking her style in 2022. The AI’s work, she said, looked similar—but felt empty.
“They lacked emotion… they weren’t something I’d actually draw.”
She encouraged people to put the same effort into drawing something for themselves as they do typing AI prompts. “It’s always more personal,” she said.
Some Artists Take It to Court
Others are fighting back legally. Cartoonist Sarah Andersen, known for her viral comics, is part of a lawsuit against three AI companies for allegedly using her work to train their models.
“Credit, consent, and compensation—that’s what we would like,” she said.
The legal case, still ongoing, highlights a major issue in the creative industry: AI models are often built using copyrighted artwork without the creator’s knowledge or permission. And for artists who rely on commissions, it’s more than an ethical dilemma—it’s a financial one.
Tech Companies Say AI “Supports” Artists—But Artists Disagree
OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT and its latest GPT-4o model, has said it’s taking a more “conservative approach” by refusing to generate images in the style of living artists. Their tools, they claim, are meant to support creativity, not replace it.
Still, NBC News testing found that while GPT-4o refused to mimic styles like Andersen’s or Mengert’s, it would still generate Studio Ghibli-style images—just not under the name Hayao Miyazaki.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman defended the AI art boom in a recent interview.
“The democratization of content creation has been a big net win,” he said. “It’s not a complete win… but I think on the whole, it’s been a win.”
Artists Aren’t Anti-Tech—They’re Anti-Exploitation
Artists aren’t against innovation. They’re against being left out of it. As AI continues to evolve, designers, illustrators, and animators are calling for respect, fairness, and inclusion in how their work is used.
“If you work mainly off commissions, you’re probably losing a lot of income,” Andersen said. “And if someone can use your exact style without your consent, it becomes a big financial issue.”
The AI boom may be “democratizing” art for some, but for many artists, it feels more like being priced out of their own profession.
