14 Comments

On her instagram - read her new story posted a week ago. https://www.instagram.com/stories/highlights/18038652395005968/?hl=en

Expand full comment

Yes I saw this. She’s now fully leaning into the idea that she’s ALWAYS been open about her AI use, which is definitely not the case. She’s even updated her bio to mention AI is part of her process, however whenever she was called out for it in the past, she would deny it. The sad this is most IG users won’t even see this stuff.

Expand full comment
Nov 5Edited

Shall I blow your mind even more the MB logo at the bottom of her statement issued by her agent is also made by AI. But I digress thank you for writing this. I was saving to buy one of there paintings thank goodness I didn't bother. With your research into her Ai scheme I am also willing to major she doesn't create her paintings from scratch either but actually print on to canvas or board and then paint over it. We actually do this technique in the film industry (not using AI) when we have to do digital paintings to look like real paintings and don't have a lot of time. I can't imagine someone who could barely paint properly be able to master colour and comp in the span of 2 years or so at the standard that an atelier would have taken years to learn. The cars which she copied from the other artist is exactly the same down to the small fine lines / details.... which make me think it's possible she just touched up the original and posted it as her own. I bet if you were to put her pic of the cars on top of the original in photoshop and lower the opacity it would be exactly the same. The whole thing is quite disgusting and sad really.

Expand full comment
Nov 5Edited

Just checked out her profile and one of her pics she had the caption "Paint like a printer" and I thought that was rather ironic considering that's exactly what I think her process is. Printing onto canvas or board and then painting on top.

Expand full comment

Now look at the art in the newest DnD One (5.5, 6, 2024, w.e they decide to call it), and use your same approach to lurk those artists on Midjourney. . . . I wonder why the compositions and poses became so dynamic...

Expand full comment

This is really interesting to read as I use AI quite a bit for inspiration, I am now questioning that that is 'allowed'. But where does the buck stop, I use magazine articles for inspiration & photos from the internet as well and photos I take myself, I use other artists work - BUT I don't do direct copies - and I suppose if I did would it be ok if I said this image was generated by AI? It's my input into AI so it's still my ideas from the start? How much do I have to change an image from the original to make it my own - once I have seen it I can't go back.

Expand full comment

To quote Tristan Elwell from Bluesky "I always tell my students: good photos make bad reference, because they're already interesting. If the interesting things about your picture are coming from the reference, that's definitely an artistic problem, and likely a legal one as well."

Inspiration is completely separate from directly copying gAI output. 99% of the decision making has been handled by Midjourney. The idea that you steer generated AI with words is like saying you create things with google - the content is already there, the decisions, the composition, the palette... What are you bringing to the table?

In summary, there's a good reason Manon didn't mention her use of AI (and, flat-out denied it originally). Personally, I would step away from using AI for inspiration. There's infinite real and new ideas out there, you don't need to dip your mind into a mulch of everything that's already existed to find them.

Expand full comment
Nov 5Edited

Let's not forget her prompts weren't abstract concepts either they are blatant rip-offs of contemporary artists one of her prompts literally says in the style of Martine Johanna / Pipilotti Rist. Martine is a contemporary painter too and does not even have half the amount of followers that Manon has. It's quite disgusting actually. Personally if it were me and Manon was profiting off my style I would sue.

Expand full comment
Nov 5Edited

I think there's an obvious difference between inspiration and someone pretending / swearing up and down that the painting they've created does not incorporate or use any form of ai. They're literally trying to fleece the public.... and at the same breath getting recognition, work opportunities and charging a fortune based on a a lie at its foundation. The sole reason why everyone liked her work is because we thought this was creativity at its purest form not to mention the mastery of the techniques involved, light and colour theory / composition in order to create those "paintings" Forget inspiration - would she be able to create these works without ai? Something tells me no.

Expand full comment

wow what's both fascinating and scary... but how did you find them on MJ?? I've had many suspicions of people using AI but I could never find their "sources" to prove it... I thought it was impossible.

Expand full comment

Forgive me if I don't reveal the exact method just yet. I'd rather they didn't know how I found them so my loophole still works, for now.

Expand full comment
Nov 5Edited

No I wouldn't reveal the method if I were you. Keep exposing them. If you reveal the method it will only help them cover their tracks.

Expand full comment

depende de q ia use. En este post según dice se puede con Midjourney pero si usan otras herramientas en local, estas no quedan guardadas en ningún servidor externo

Expand full comment

Of course, I know this! But when artists ARE using 3rd party tools (and many are not technically minded enough to run the local versions) then I have a way...

Expand full comment