A comprehensive new study has uncovered disturbing data about how extensively artists' work is being exploited through the popular AI image generation platform Midjourney. The research, conducted by AI platform Kapwing, analyzed nearly 5 million prompts to determine which artists' names and styles are most frequently used without permission to create AI-generated images and videos.
Surprisingly, Czech Art Nouveau painter Alphonse Mucha topped the list as the most referenced non-living artist, with his name appearing in 230,794 prompts for images and videos. This figure vastly exceeded expectations, as Mucha surpassed more universally recognized masters like Rembrandt, who appeared in 128,143 prompts, and Leonardo Da Vinci, who was referenced in 61,259 prompts. Norman Rockwell closely followed Da Vinci with 57,583 prompts, highlighting the platform's heavy reliance on established artistic styles.
Among contemporary visual artists, classified separately as illustrators in the study, Chinese digital artist WLOP emerged as the most exploited, with his name used in 166,415 Midjourney images and videos. Following him were Polish artist Greg Rutkowski and Taiwanese illustrator Krenz Cushart. Notably, all three of these artists are still alive and actively creating, underscoring Midjourney's apparent disregard for intellectual property rights and the ongoing harm to living artists.
Greg Rutkowski, who is part of a class-action lawsuit against Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Stability AI, previously expressed his distress about the unauthorized use of his work. In a 2023 interview, he stated, "I still feel really bad about it, like, bad. I'm shocked and anxious actually, because what is happening right now will affect not just me but also many other artists and their future. Someone can create something in a matter of five seconds using my name, or any other artist's name, as a prompt, as a guideline for style."
The study also revealed patterns in other creative fields being exploited through the platform. Film director Wes Anderson dominated the cinema category, with his distinctive visual style referenced in 92,378 Midjourney prompts. Tim Burton followed with 57,000 references, while renowned cinematographer Roger Deakins, though technically not a director, appeared in 22,297 prompts.
In the architecture category, the late Zaha Hadid was by far the most referenced architect, appearing in 63,103 prompts. The study also found that entertainment franchises are heavily exploited, with Star Wars leading at 160,495 prompts and Batman following at 110,586. In the anime category, Akira dominated with 53,333 references, followed by Naruto with 40,494.
Kapwing's methodology involved building seed lists of 100 keywords across eight categories: artists, illustrators, directors, architects, cities, media franchises, fast-food chains, and anime. This resulted in a comprehensive list of 897 keywords, which researchers then tracked across 4,929,594 prompts in the Midjourney database. While the researchers acknowledge that other keywords not included in their study could potentially have higher usage rates, their findings provide a clear picture of the scale at which artists' work is being appropriated.
The research highlights the ongoing controversy surrounding AI art generation platforms and their use of copyrighted material without permission or compensation. Despite facing multiple lawsuits and criticism from the artistic community, Midjourney continues to operate with what many perceive as minimal regard for copyright protection or responsible use policies. The platform faces competition from other AI models, including Google's offerings and Adobe Firefly's more commercially sound options, yet it maintains its position as a popular tool for generating images in the styles of established artists.
These findings come at a time when the art world is increasingly drawing lines regarding AI exploitation. The data serves as concrete evidence of how extensively individual artists' styles and names are being used to generate content that potentially competes with or devalues their original work, raising serious questions about the future of artistic intellectual property in the age of artificial intelligence.
