Spawn and Venom creator Todd McFarlane sparks controversy with his thoughts on generative AI. Todd McFarlane is a legendary name in the comic book industry, having risen to superstardom at Marvel Comics in the late 1980s by overhauling Spider-Man and establishing Venom as one of the wall-crawler’s main nemeses. McFarlane later co-founded Image Comics in 1992, a revolutionary move that allowed creators to retain the full intellectual property rights to their work and broke the traditional dominance of the “Big Two” publishers.
While creators have historically fought for ownership over their physical work, the comic book industry is one of many creative industries that now face the highly polarizing threat of generative AI. Writers and illustrators have repeatedly voiced their frustration over the unchecked integration of artificial intelligence in mainstream and independent spaces. Tensions continue to erupt due to suspect background details in prominent panels and covers, to the point that major entities like San Diego Comic-Con have banned all AI-generated pieces from their exhibitions.
As the technology continues to threaten the livelihoods of working artists, the comic book world remains locked in an ever-evolving battle to preserve art completely made by humans.
McFarlane Argues AI Helps Artists Be More Efficient
Speaking to The Escape Pod Podcast, Spawn creator Todd McFarlane explains why he believes AI isn’t an entirely negative invention for artists. McFarlane argues that generative AI is a valuable tool artists can use to increase their output and speed. McFarlane also compares artificial intelligence to major inventions in other industries, like automotive vehicles in the transportation industry and both streaming and DVDs in the home entertainment industry. Read Todd McFarlane’s full comments below:
“I don’t get why people are so worked up. It’s a tool that’s efficient. Every tool that’s come along in the history of mankind put somebody out of business. Somebody along the line was selling a lot of buckboard wagons, and then somebody said ‘I’m gonna invent the car.’ Why don’t we cry for them, right? Then suddenly, the word processor came up and now they’re selling less pencils, because we don’t need pencils anymore; we don’t even need paper. And we didn’t cry for them.
There used to be VHSs and then DVDs, and now you can just stream it, right? The people who were making DVDs are out of business, for the most part. Ninety percent of them don’t exist. Why don’t we cry for them? The problem with every new tool is that it can be for both good and bad. So I can give you a hammer, and you can either build me a house or you can bludgeon me over the head with it. Same tool, right?
So maybe what I think people at times are getting a little bit upset about is that they’re thinking that they’re stealing artwork or something like that. But I swear to you, there’s an efficiency there. I still need to hire you, and I need you to do some gun designs for me. You don’t have to, but if you wanna use that tool, you can now give me twenty options, and I can pick the two best. If I leave it to you and you gotta hand draw every single one of them, and you don’t got any kind of guidance, you’re gonna give me three. And if all three of them are mediocre, I am stuck with mediocrity from you. But if you can give me twenty with a little bit of help, we’re gonna have some cool-looking guns. Our job is to put out our coolest-looking stuff possible.”
The deep friction between visual creators and generative AI surrounds the non-consensual harvesting of intellectual property, with tech companies scraping billions of copyrighted images and digital portfolios from the open web to train commercial models without providing attribution or compensation. The increasing number of AI-made artworks has reduced market demand for human-made work and undercut freelance commissions as corporate clients increasingly favor the near-instantaneous, low-cost output of algorithmic generation. While creation technically gets easier and more efficient for artists, there’s little need for creativity and effort, and the output draws entirely from other artists’ work.
McFarlane’s Thoughts On AI Don’t Sit Well With Fans
Todd McFarlane’s thoughts on AI go against the general consensus on generative AI, and the comments on The Escape Pod Podcast‘s social media reflect it. Instagram user @manu_tndi explains that the innovations McFarlane described, such as “the car, the DVD, streaming, etc,” are a natural evolution of previous technology, whereas artificial intelligence “replaces creativity.” When it comes to art, generative AI creates a blend of existing artworks with little to no direct human input. The subtle sensibilities, and even the unexpectedly valuable errors, of human creativity are lost.
“The things he described, the car, the DVD, Streaming, etc. has little to nothing to do with creativity. AI isn‘t being used as a tool, it‘s used to replace creativity. Big difference. Also, AI steals. Streaming is a new invention, not stealing from DVD‘s. AI can‘t work without feeding it human crativity”
User @cherry_bombz_art counters McFarlane’s argument on efficiency, arguing that there’s a meaningful difference between efficiency in other industries and in art. Technologies like modern cars and streaming solved problems that needed to be solved. Cars improved travel by making trips shorter and more convenient, and streaming “brought [shows and movies] home more easily” instead of replacing those movies and shows with something different. @cherry_bombz_art also brings attention to the environmental impact of AI, as it also affects “clean water sources.”
“The car didn’t replace travel, it improved it, streaming didn’t replace shows and movies, it brought them to your home more easily. AI replaces creativity, it cuts out everything human about the thing meant to convey a story between humans. Not to mention how many jobs and clean water sources it destroys for the sake of billionaires making a few more bucks they don’t need.”
One aspect to highlight about Todd McFarlane’s comments is that, similarly to historical inventions like cars and streaming, artificial intelligence likely won’t go anywhere anytime soon. Likewise, AI can also help artists be more efficient in their work, only not necessarily in the creative process itself. For example, instead of using generative AI to create images, artists can speed up their work with tools like AI-powered image recognition tools that allow them to find similar artworks, exclusively for inspiration and reference. Then, the creation process can be one-hundred-percent human.
What do you think about Todd McFarlane‘s comments on AI?