Will artificial art take over? This question is being asked more and more frequently as AI-generated images gain ground. History shows that art has faced technological innovations without older forms of expression disappearing. Can the past help us understand what is happening now?
Some believe that artificial art will increasingly dominate in the future. I hold a different opinion. If we look from a historical perspective, traditional art has survived several technological revolutions that challenged established artistic practices. On the other hand, we know that there was a tech bubble that burst. It is also possible that some aspects of the current AI boom represent a technological bubble whose long-term significance remains uncertain.
What I’m primarily thinking about is the reproduction of art, digital art, and the entrance of photography into the traditional art scene.
If we look back at art history, we know that many great artists had apprentices and assistants who reproduced the master’s works, often by painting backgrounds or clothing. The master was responsible for the composition and artistic vision, which was common during the Renaissance and Baroque periods. Buyers accepted this, as they paid for the master’s idea and style rather than for every brushstroke to be executed by the master personally. How much of the works are made by the master, and should they then be counted as art?
We might unconsciously reflect on the hard work that a piece of art demands. Before Rembrandt, the Camera obscura was used as a technical aid for creating sketches. The Camera obscura was utilized from the 16th century as an optical aid to project an image of reality. The artist could more easily reproduce perspectives and details. The use of optical aids has later sparked debates about artistic skill and authorship, yet these debates have done little to diminish the status of the artists who used such tools. The value of the work was still considered to lie in selection, composition, color, and interpretation.
If we move further through history, we find forms of mass reproduction that never fully entered the realm of fine art: posters, postcards, and souvenirs. These forms continue to exist, yet they have largely remained outside the realm of fine art. Could it be that the door was not open for this?
There are several reasons why posters, postcards, and souvenirs are not perceived as a threat to the art world. They are primarily considered reproductions rather than original works. The art world values originality and authenticity, which means a poster of the Mona Lisa is seen as a copy, not as a new artwork. Secondly, their purpose has often been commercial or decorative. Postcards and souvenirs are created to share memories or tourist experiences, not as standalone art. Therefore, they are placed in a different cultural category than fine art.
For the third point, they have not challenged the notion of artistic creation. No one has claimed that mass-produced postcards replace the artist. The art world has been able to benefit from the reproductions, such as posters and postcards, which serve as marketing for museums and artworks. They have increased the dissemination and accessibility of art without competing with the status of the originals.
The first major challenge that comes to mind is the arrival of photography in the nineteenth century. But what did traditional art have to defend itself?
When photography was introduced in the 19th century, it was initially met with great skepticism from the art world. Critics argued that photography was not true art since the image was created through a mechanical process rather than the artist’s hand and skill. Many believed that the photographer only documented reality, while the painter interpreted and created it.
There was also concern that photography would compete with painting, especially within portrait art. Over time, however, perspectives changed. Pioneering photographers began to experiment with composition, light, perspective, and expression in ways that demonstrated that photography could be more than a technical reproduction of reality. Throughout the 20th century, photography gradually established itself as an independent art form, represented in museums, galleries, and art education.
Then came the digital era, introducing new forms of computer-generated art. A lesser threat to traditional art, compared to photography.
When computers became available for artistic work in the late 20th century, new forms of digital art emerged. Initially, this development was met with some skepticism. Critics questioned whether works created with the help of computers could truly be compared to traditional painting, graphics, or sculpture. However, over time, digital art established itself as a distinct field within the art world. Today, digital works are displayed in museums and galleries while traditional techniques continue to be significant. The development suggests that new technology often broadens the field of art rather than replacing it.
AI art can thus be seen as a continuation of the development of digital art. Like previous technological innovations, it challenges established notions of creation and artistry, but it is still unclear whether it will fundamentally change the art world or primarily establish itself as yet another medium of artistic expression.
What is today the most important tool for keeping traditional art in focus — is humanity. If we as observers passionately seek the “true” art, it will survive. If artists continue to demonstrate the value of human creativity, traditional art is likely to endure. Gallery owners also play a crucial role in what they choose to display.
In summary, an art historical perspective suggests that technological innovations such as photography and digital art have not replaced traditional art forms, but rather broadened the artistic field. AI art can be understood as a continuation of this development. Although artificial intelligence is likely to play a significant role in the future of art production, there is little historical evidence that it would completely replace human-created art. The longevity of traditional art is closely linked to the continued valuation of human creation, authenticity, and artistic intention.
Literature
- Walter Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction
- Susan Sontag, On Photography
- Christiane Paul, Digital Art
- Marcus du Sautoy, The Creativity Code
- Kate Crawford, Atlas of AI
- Svetlana Alpers, The Art of Describing
- David Hockney, Secret Knowledge
- Giorgio Vasari, The Lives of the Artists
© Björn Blomqvist 2026-07-03
Essays on art, history and interpretation 
Comment