Take a look at these images. Which one do you think is the most beautiful? Which one is technically better executed? Which were created by a human and which by artificial intelligence (AI)?
| Click on the image to view it in full size |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
And how would your assessment change if you found out that they were all created by AI?
We live in a time when AI is increasingly moving into almost all spaces – from social media campaigns to advertisements, posters and informational visuals. It is quite possible that soon a large proportion of the images we see around will be marked with the words “Created using AI.” But does knowing who created an image change the way we perceive it?
(But before you continue reading, we will reveal that: image 1 was created by AI, image 2 by Giedre Gedeikyte, image 3 by Lukrecija Jaseviciute, image 4 and 5 by DI, image 6 by Milda Mockūnaite-Vitkiene).
A bachelor’s thesis research project by Laura Dutkute, a graduate of the VILNIUS TECH Entertainment Production study programme, titled “Consumer Participation in Visual Communication in the Digital Environment: Human and Artificial Intelligence Interaction,” revealed that when evaluating visual content, audiences consider not only its aesthetics or quality, but also how and by whom it was created. Nevertheless, although AI is increasingly becoming part of the creative process, the role of the human is still essential.
Dutkute, who conducted the research, notes that AI is often presented in society as a competitor to creators. However, the research results reveal a somewhat different reality – audiences primarily see AI as a tool that exists alongside humans. Moreover, information about the use of AI can change the way a person evaluates the work itself.
“This means that the label indicating the use of AI is not completely neutral. If for the audience AI has negative connotations, this perception can also be transferred to the work, even if AI’s contribution was minor,” the graduate explains.
One of the most important findings of the research is that AI does not eliminate the role of the human as the creator. It can perform certain parts of the creative process, help generate ideas, create different visual versions or personalise content, but the final decisions still have to be made by a human.
Therefore, according to L. Dutkute, the creative process does not become any less human but, in a sense, becomes a more collaborative process where AI can offer numerous options and the human is still the one making a choice, evaluating, modifying and maintaining the creative direction.
The creator’s own skills become particularly important here. The responses from specialists in the study showed that the outcome is strongly determined by how well a person knows how to use the selected tool.
As AI becomes increasingly integrated into the creative process, the user’s relationship with content is also changing. For users, it is important to know who the content creator is, how it is presented, where it came from and whether it can be trusted.
“With the emergence of AI, users have begun to evaluate content more rather than simply enjoy it. On the other hand, people are not always able to recognise for themselves that visual content was created using AI. Once they learn about its origin, they may change their assessment. Therefore, it is important not only to be able to recognise AI-generated content, but also to improve society’s overall AI literacy,” says L. Dutkute.
The involvement of AI in the creative process inevitably raises the question of what we actually mean by authorship today. If one part of a work is created by a human and another is generated by AI, whose work is it?
“AI is not a replacement for the creator; it simply serves as another creative tool – just like Canva, Google or Photoshop. Its use has expanded the possibilities even further while also it placing even greater responsibility on the person who decides what they create with this tool and how they present that work to the audience. Ultimately, the person remains responsible for the final result,” she says.
Therefore, according to the interviewee, it is important to communicate transparently about AI’s contribution.
All of this is also changing the nature of work for visual communication specialists. In the future, those who simply know how to use one AI tool or another will become less important than those who understand when to use it, what to entrust to it and how to critically evaluate the result.
“Specialists will need to compete with AI less and learn how to integrate it properly into their work more. There will be a greater need for people who can choose the right AI tool, formulate a task, evaluate the result and maintain the creative direction,” says Laura.
According to the graduate, AI is best viewed not as a tool that will take over the entire creative process, but as an assistant capable of expanding human capabilities.
Galerija
