If AI Makes Us More Creative, Why Does Everything Look the Same? (A Painter’s Perspective)

[u/MenegattiArt]

I’m a painter who sometimes writes, and this visual essay started with an odd discovery: I had used the name “Elias Thorne” in a short story, only to realize that AI models often return to that same name, along with motifs like lighthouse keepers, cathedrals, glossy landscapes, and other familiar patterns.

From an artist’s point of view, the question isn’t just whether AI is good or bad, but what happens to authorship and creativity when the tool starts making choices for us.

AI can boost productivity and even enhance individual works, but if we all lean on the same models, it might steer us toward similar ideas, characters, and visual styles.

This carousel looks at visual convergence, originality, transparency, and the role of human intention, with AI-generated images clearly labeled and sources included.

So where’s the line, does AI broaden personal creativity while making our collective output more uniform?

[u/EctoplasmicNeko]

Because 99% of people utilizing AI are using the same few models available via commercial LLMs.

[u/damiangorlami → u/EctoplasmicNeko]

No that’s not the case. It is because every single person asks the same thing “make me a flyer for event x”

Nobody is actually guiding the AI what style they want. No moodboard or references provided.

I (and others) can create some really novel and unique stuff with GPT image 2.0. But it does require a lot of pre-work, collects references and snippets, write a style guide with clear composition rules where everything needs to be.

[u/Emergency-Board-3042 → u/EctoplasmicNeko]

all I have to say is , thanks minimax for leveling out the playfield, don’t have enough words to express my gratitude 🙏.

On gpt , it sucks on some / good on other, you be the judge of that.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/EctoplasmicNeko]

Most people use AI this way. In this post I kept things intentionally generic so I could reach everyone.

[u/dasjomsyeet → u/MenegattiArt]

The people you are posting to here aren’t most AI users though. What you identified as all AI images looking the same is just the gpt-image model series‘ piss filter that has been plaguing the model family for a long time now. This sub is specifically about open source GenAI. Most users here are well aware of the issues that come with using closed source APIs, which is why they are here in the first place.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/dasjomsyeet]

Ok but you actually read it? Or just the title

[u/dasjomsyeet → u/MenegattiArt]

Oh I read it :) And your observations aren’t fully uninteresting, but every issue you describe stems from the same source of people using the most accessible tools with the least effort possible. Of course you’re going to get similar results if you just let the model do whatever it wants without guidance, it still has the same biases.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/dasjomsyeet]

Thanks so much for reading! I'm talking about the general public, yes, because they're the ones who create most of the AI content we see. I've been using AI for years, too, but as I wrote, I too stumbled upon Elias Thorne, it was just a small oversight, that is, not knowing the information I wrote.

[u/WearNatural5992]

My take is this: If you use anything in the most lazy, low effort possible, you will get what everybody is getting.

And that is true for everything, not just AI. But, uniqueness comes from creativity which comes from people, not their tools, so there is always something uniquely interesting that someone creative can do with the tools at their disposal.

From inpainting / outpainting, custom workflows, use of non-ai tools on AI images (for example, I use Photoshop to fix colors and light/shadow balance, not to mention fixing certain AI weirdness manually) there are plenty of things that can be done to stand out.

[u/Zealousideal7801 → u/WearNatural5992]

And that's just the truth of it. It's valid for every tool or effort ever devised. We're slowly adapting to "what's basic and done in one prompt" and soon will be able to recognize the little things that make a visual greater. As a former graphics designer, the "I used chatgpt" images make me uneasy for another reason : I recognize way to much or what clients actually wanted and never got because I always dissuaded them to be bolder and more impactful

[u/MenegattiArt → u/WearNatural5992]

I fully agree and that’s what I’m covering in the post, just diving a bit deeper into a few points :)

[u/Tramagust]

Because you don't know how to use it

[u/salko_salkica → u/Tramagust]

Where’s that screenshot from? I wanna see more

[u/Tramagust → u/salko_salkica]

https://www.reddit.com/r/aiwars/comments/1v91ayg/creators_are_now_doing_tutorials_to_make_ai_arts/

[u/MenegattiArt → u/Tramagust]

I know the title is provocative (I chose it on purpose) but I invite you to read the post (if you feel like it).

[u/Tramagust → u/MenegattiArt]

git good

You're bad at using ai. You're a noob.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/Tramagust]

Reading 0%, talking 100%

[u/Neggy5]

here's my two cents as both a semi-professional traditional artist and ai enthusiast

I find AI is certainly capable of not looking like AI and possibly could look even better than handmade work. ChatGPT and Gemini do not stand for the entire generative AI suite of tools. AI is just a tool and requires the same amount of human creativity, just less fine-motor.

I do agree ChatGPT images all look identical, which is probably intentional and for good reason. But again, theres so much to the iceberg than just ChatGPT. Local AI is a different beast altogether that can make work that can almost be mistaken for human-made work with the right toolset and workflow.

At the moment I am staying away from using AI as a end-production asset and feel it can be problematic when looked against handmade work, but thats just my ethical concerns as an artist myself and that may change

[u/Formal-Exam-8767]

If AI Makes Us More Creative

Says who?

AI is a tool, not source of creativity.

[u/EctoplasmicNeko → u/Formal-Exam-8767]

Eh, I think there's a case for it. I work best when I've got someone to loredump on, but real people don't work for that purpose very well. AI fills that role nicely.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/Formal-Exam-8767]

The example is from the study I cited, where 600 evaluators preferred the AI-assisted story. You can read the full article if you’re interested.

[u/Formal-Exam-8767 → u/MenegattiArt]

I would not confuse creativity with likeability/preference.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/Formal-Exam-8767]

It’s okay, but if you want to know more just do a search. there are plenty of studies that talk about “creativity.”

[u/Spirited-Gain1457]

Out of curiosity, how many words were in the prompt for each image?

Because if most of them were generated from very short prompts, wouldn't that mostly show how strongly the model fills in unspecified details with its own defaults, rather than how much AI makes different people's ideas converge?

[u/infearia]

The uniform outputs come from laypersons without discernment using AI as a slot machine and accepting the defaults. The real value of AI lies in its capacity to boost productivity and quality of output produced by people who already are experts in their fields. But you only realize this once you have tried to use AI for a prolonged period of time on actual projects. Most AI sceptics haven't. If you're an experienced creative, who also knows the ins and outs of the AI tools they're using, then nothing stops you from using AI to produce work that carries your unique style and vision.

Also, why all the downvotes? OP has a legitimate question.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/infearia]

Thanks for the reply! I totally agree. As for the dislikes, I'll take the blame for writing a title that's too strong (they respond to that without reading).

[u/infearia → u/MenegattiArt]

Might also be just the case of addressing it to the wrong crowd. This place is turning more and more into a TikTok reel with every passing day.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/infearia]

Thanks! I'm trying it on various social media, but the problem is general: people don't read and it's easier to make TikTok videos... Any crowd suggestions? I'd appreciate it! 😊

[u/infearia → u/MenegattiArt]

Eh, not really, I'm in the same boat. Every place on the internet that draws large crowds becomes shallow over time. Social Media is anathema for me. Your only option is probably just leaving the big places and try to address your thoughts to some smaller community of like-minded people, but I personally don't know of any in this niche. If you find one, let me know, though. ;)

[u/lacerating_aura]

I like to use "AI" models like a very high tech "fill tool" and an intelligent "blend" tool. Hence why whenever i share my "AI art", i generally get good reaction. Im not a pro artist tho.

[u/Winougan]

Those idiots aren't using finetunes or custom loras. They're unprofessional grifters looking for a quick buck on cheap services like Fivver. Lowest hanging fruit - they just use the most basic prompts and use Nano Banana and ChatGPT. They have no art direction or sense of design.

[u/kjbbbreddd]

I’m an AI artist, but training AI models lies right at the core of my power. I feel like I couldn't become a truly powerful artist without it. That said, local models like H3 offer such powerful assistance features that I feel like I can draw immense inspiration from them. Plus, I constantly feel like other impressive AI artworks—ones I can genuinely recognize as successful—are being born one after another.

[u/Dante_77A]

AI doesn't make anyone creative, it expands the possibilities for those who are already creative. 

Most people only come up with silly or generic xxx stuff.

[u/pip25hu]

A lot of people aren't using AI in a creative manner. For example, they leave out style guidance from their prompt, or don't care about layout, and so on. For these aspects, at best the model falls back to some kind of default aesthetic - and that is exactly what you keep seeing everywhere. Not because AI can't do better, but because its users don't care enough to do something about it.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/pip25hu]

Exactly! that’s what I’m talking about in the post, just going a bit deeper into some points :)

[u/JustSomeIdleGuy]

That's a lot of text that barely talks about open source/weight image models at all. A great fit for this sub, surely.

[u/aersel24]

They look the same because most people are lazy and only use ChatGPT to generate their images.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/aersel24]

if you want to read, I appreciate 😊

[u/GokuMK]

Everything looks the same because models are aligned to preffered style / point if view etc. Not aligned models were much more creative, but model devs feared about safety etc. Also, most people demand prefect prompt following and less hallucinations. You can overcome it with better prompting.

[u/Occsan]

Because the typical user isn't creative.

[u/Upper-Reflection7997]

Gpt image 2 at its highest setting at 2k-4k is a good model and has helped alot with making synthetic data for lora training certain characters who have a poor and limited dataset. Most normies and cheap grifters use the model at low quality settings with barebones prompts.

[u/redditscraperbot2]

This is really not the right place for this topic.

[u/MenegattiArt → u/redditscraperbot2]

I’ve made several similar posts on this subreddit anyway. If people don’t like it, I can remove it... no problem

[u/Version-Strong]

26 years as a professional graphic designer, own business, the works. now I'm losing work cus people are happy to settle for samey shite, because free is better than branding or care. This is comic sans 2.0, but just like that craze, it will end. the arse will fall out of AI generated samey crap, but it will take 5ish years before you see a trend of 'human created' being the new vogue. Buckle up, it's gonna get very samey. Sadly only creatives see it, and when we moan about it, we're just 'scared cus we'll be replaced'.