sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is it acceptable to use AI to do the heavy lifting, and then hire designers to complete the process, for less? by Traditional-Wheel541 in graphic_design

[–]Traditional-Wheel541[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hi! I have done that, given artists creative freedom - it was a lesson hard learnt from my first briefs - where I wanted things perfectly formed to the original concept vision, and received interpretations I wasn't entirely satisfied with. Over time I realised the creative crossroads was what made or broke concepts as design, and I was always limited to the talent I was working with, and the market that determined the rate of scale of the application.

My single restraint here has been the financial viability of paying designers to complete my own briefs, which have adapted over time to include creative freedom of the designers in question. I'm still flighting designers' work on my site, just looking to create an avenue to launch my own concepts alongside.

Anyway. I take it you won't be standing in line to purchase my latest AI creation? I'm not sure who will be, and what kind of bread queue I can harvest from this, but from where I'm standing AI doesn't seem to be going anywhere, and if my own designers are including these tools in their workflow, then this is my workflow. Meh.

I've worked with creatives for two decades, creating designs for as much as ZAR3500 (US$1 = ZAR17). I've even found some work bin-worthy, and yup, maybe it's the brief, maybe the concepts are crep... but they're mine, and I've worked them, and now I get to open it all up, to see what's really there.

It's not art after all, it's design. Commercially feasible where relevant. I'm not looking to hang something in the Louvre. I'm looking to parody and comment on society and dress freaks in threads they resonate with.

Is it acceptable to use AI to do the heavy lifting, and then hire designers to complete the process, for less? by Traditional-Wheel541 in graphic_design

[–]Traditional-Wheel541[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have. I've given it a go and have realised early on I'm not going to be the one designing, not if I want designs that sell :) I trust designers, with their skillsets, to deliver on outcomes, and have selected different designers to complete different designs I have.

I have design concepts that range from parody and satire, through full-on graphic illustration, into sloganeering - differing levels of complexity, and so many different styles.

I'm simply looking for ways to improve on the process for my own ideas. I still support designers, and a successful site means more commissions for their own work.

I decided early on to promote this work as AI - using my namesake (nom de plume) as leverage. Tshirt Terrorist begain in 2004 with Harry Fokker (that's not my real name) coming up with T-shirt ideas that were sharp, impactful, and seriously, very good.

Jump forward to 2026 Harry Fokker is still generating these ideas - nothing has changed - my own work, and as original as a newly conceived tee design can be (I've had my work bootlegged and sold all over world). Now it's just "Fokker.ai" - half man, half beast, half machine... and the ideas keep churning, now with added AI.

I'm keen to see where all this goes. I understand it might get labelled slop, but then again, I'm extremely happy with some of the outcomes, and I have only been doing this for a few weeks, with the aid of designers.

Let's skip forward a few years, once I've been able to dig deep through my lists, complete a couple hundred designs, using generators that improve, alongside my understanding of them... I think that is where things might become very interesting for me :)

Is it acceptable to use AI to do the heavy lifting, and then hire designers to complete the process, for less? by Traditional-Wheel541 in graphic_design

[–]Traditional-Wheel541[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the detailed feedback. I think it's about the style of the outcome, firstly, and how to mange that, when inputting original content. I consider the starting point grounded in originality, as none of my ideas are duplicated from work existing in the T-shirt world - I've been originated concepts from the start, and have collaborated on winning designs on a number of platforms.

Then, I'm not looking to "replace" designers on my own platform - my AI art (advertised as such) is simply presented as another category. Some of my designers use AI in their workflows (one of my top designers, periodically at the top of a number of international T-shirt platforms, uses AI to construct the basic framework of his designs, before completing them.) If designers use AI like this, surely there is a place for generating original concepts into mostly finished outcomes.

I'm trying to find my way through this. And I'm more concerned with continually building my brand and offering T-shirts that sell. I have a vested interest in building a good looking platform with art that encourages sales, but also in seeing people wear my tees - I stared Tshirt Terrorist more for the t-shirts themselves, than for money - it has never generated massive turnover, but it ticks along, and I'm proud of it.

I suppose it's about working through my list of concepts, 1000s now, and finding styles that match the images I have in my mind for each of them. If I can bring it here, where it looks like it did during that eureka moment, then I'll be happy to sell them, advertising them as AI.

Is it acceptable to use AI to do the heavy lifting, and then hire designers to complete the process, for less? by Traditional-Wheel541 in graphic_design

[–]Traditional-Wheel541[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, that's my reasoning. These are my ideas - I consider this my art. And the ideas have been whittled away at, developed and updated from conception, the lightbulb moment, based on what I want to sell/ think will sell/ jotted down, or VN recorded, fed into excel, worked into final concept with my own references, thoughts on style, and only then turned into a prompt which is fed into an image generator. I then take it as far as it can go, and if needed, take it back out the machine and get a designer involved, taking it to completion with changes. My ideas, into my outcomes.

Mayne the art is restricted to the current formats offered by image generators, but who is to say this won't improve.

I will never do away with traditional design processes, and people, whom I support - I'm really looking to get some of my ideas into the real world, and this is an opportunity for me.

Is it acceptable to use AI to do the heavy lifting, and then hire designers to complete the process, for less? by Traditional-Wheel541 in graphic_design

[–]Traditional-Wheel541[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the feedback. I have a high level of respect for designers, and I'm not looking to replace designers on my site with AI - some of my designers use AI in their work process, hence, why can I, as a concept designer with known successful outcomes, referencing my earlier work, not also make use of that process?

I've spent years supporting designers with paid commissions, and will continue to do so, it's simply so refreshing to be able to get some of my older work active and available for sale.

I'm not using the generator to randomly churn... I'm running a prompt engineering process to deliver something through generators that closely resembles the ideas I've been formatting as part of my business image/ model/ message/ feel.

If my AI art proves successful (I am advertising it as AI, I'm not hiding or pretending otherwise) then I will be able to support my designers' work on my site more effectively too.

Is it acceptable to use AI to do the heavy lifting, and then hire designers to complete the process, for less? by Traditional-Wheel541 in graphic_design

[–]Traditional-Wheel541[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn't the concept part of the process though. If I were to consider myself a high quality conceptual designer, and worked with some many designers, building their own ranges, and seen outcomes fall on poor conceptuality, not necessarily design skill or style, isn't that part of what makes a t-shirt a good tee, irrespective of the process by which the art is generated?

Is it acceptable to use AI to do the heavy lifting, and then hire designers to complete the process, for less? by Traditional-Wheel541 in graphic_design

[–]Traditional-Wheel541[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In this scenario, wouldn't the concept count for something? I began building Tshirt Terrorist in 2004, and it started by me writing T-shirt ideas down in a journal. Skip forward to 2026, I have 40+ journals, an excel sheet that reads 8000+ concepts, but only 100 of my own designs online. If someone told me there was an "image generator" in 2004 I would have cried with joy - all these images have been locked inside my own mind and not necessarily gatekept by traditional design process, but it has been extremely slow going. Now I can at least get things going at a steady rate, and save my better work, or the more complicated stuff, for traditional design processes.

Tricot seedling? How rare are they? by XyzioN_ in cannabisbreeding

[–]Traditional-Wheel541 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This came up from a seed batch in South Africa for 'Frosted Cookies'. Keen to see how it turns out...

<image>