The development of AI has affected the art industry

In early 2025, it was popular around the world for people to change their SNS profiles into Studio Ghibli's style of painting through ChatGPT.  Using one's profile as an AI-mad

e image has been very popular because even people who were worried about privacy can use it without burden to reveal their face as it is. At that time, many of my acquaintances used Ghibli-style photos made of ChatGPT as their profile photos. However, problems began to resurface in this trend.  

The first issue was the copyright issue. Those who mainly support generative artificial intelligence argue that style is not subject to copyright protection and say that there is no copyright problem. In fact, according to the idea-expression dichotomy and the US Copyright Office, general painting styles or techniques themselves are not protected by copyright. However, if a particular style is expressed in a specific form, and the expression is original and distinctively similar to other works, there is room for it to be judged as copyright infringement. When humans see and learn from paintings, personal experiences/tentimes are reflected, while AI is a slave without free will that only sees what humans show and mechanically follows orders, so some view critically of using standards that seem to be on the same line as humans.  

The second issue concerns the impact on human creativity and labor. With AI now capable of generating Ghibli-like images in seconds, many fear that professional illustrators and animators could be marginalized. What once required years of study and practice can now be produced instantly, not by human effort but by algorithms trained on massive datasets. This raises questions not only about fairness in the creative market but also about how society values originality and skill. Critics argue that if AI-generated art becomes the norm, the space for human imagination and craftsmanship may shrink, reducing opportunities for artists to sustain themselves. 

This concern is not just theoretical. In South Korea, the film I Am Moonhee (나야, 문희), released in 2024, became the country’s first feature film made entirely with the help of AI. When I first read about it, I was impressed but also wondered what it meant for traditional filmmakers. Some people around me praised it as groundbreaking, but others worried about the jobs it might replace. Supporters praised the film for showing how AI could lower barriers to entry in the movie industry, allowing creators with limited resources to produce works that once seemed impossible. 

Another interesting point was cost. I was surprised to learn that I Am Moonhee had a much lower budget than traditional films because AI took over so many parts of production. At a time when movie ticket prices have been steadily rising worldwide, often blamed on ballooning production costs, AI-generated films raise an important question: if production becomes cheaper, should audiences expect more affordable tickets? Or will cost savings be absorbed by studios, leaving consumers unaffected? 

However, critics pointed out that the production process replaced many traditional roles in filmmaking—from concept artists to post-production staff- with AI systems. This raised fears that if such methods spread widely, opportunities for human workers in the cultural and creative industries would shrink dramatically. The case of I Am Moonhee demonstrates how the question of technological unemployment is no longer confined to factories or call centers, but now extends into the very heart of the arts, with potential consequences not only for workers but also for audiences. 

It was fun when I first saw Ghibli-esque pictures on social media, but at the same time, I was worried that 'if I can easily make a picture like this without learning hard, what would a person's effort mean?'. The development of AI gives me a good feeling, and at the same time, gives me a feeling of anxiety. I think that through the development of AI, the barriers to art will be lowered, making it easier for imaginative people to realize their ideas, but at the same time, the value of people's efforts in art can be degraded as they can create works too easily. I think the future will depend not on choosing between humans and machines, but on finding a balance that supports technology rather than replacing human expression. If we can find that balance, I believe AI will enrich our culture and creativity, not weaken it.