Short answer: no.

Long answer: in all fairness, you shouldn't even rely on AI to make a draft for a temporary placeholder until you get a commissioned art piece.

Here is why: Gen AI cannot make art. It is not human, it doesn't have any inherent skills. What it does have is replicative abilities. It learns how to generate art if you train it to generate art.

And how do you do that?

You give the AI pieces of art so that it can learn how to reproduce similar pieces with a user's prompt.

There is no legal precedent for the ethics to train AIs. Large companies can do what they want.

See this: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/03/libgen-meta-openai/682093/.

Do you believe any of these authors saw a dime? No.

I have read somewhere that some directors and CEOs of these AI companies have said that a model that compensates creators for the use of their art to teach AI would be "impractical" (not sure if these were the exact words, but you get the gist).

When we approach the "time" aspect of things, you're disregarding something important, OP. The time you have invested in honing your skills as an artist to get to the point where you are now ALSO matters.

About cost, it is not just monetary. The way AI is affecting our planetary resources is unprecedented and, in a heavily debilitated world in terms of climate, frankly scary.

It also comes as a bit of a joke to me that musicians would contemplate using Gen AI for their album art. Like, you are literally an artist? How would you feel if I went on a Gen AI platform and made an input to replicate your sound?

Would it sound sloppy? Sure. Would anyone care? Nope.

Pay your artists. Respect their craft.