The RA Summer Exhibition and AI: Submission to Display to Sale

I think I've uncovered a bit of a problem relating to the legislation and regulations which apply to all info provided to buyers in art exhibitions (who have protected rights) - from Submission to Display to Sale.

Earlier this week, I wrote about how the Royal West of England Academy allows AI into its Annual Exhibition

There have been a lot of comments on the post on Facebook as a result - which you can see here. Mainly this has been confined to whether or not AI should be eligible or only serves to undermine the original work of artists.

What I didn't realise at the time, is that the RWA were not the first.

The Royal Academy of Arts Summer Exhibition and AI

This year's Royal Academy of Arts Summer Exhibition indicated in its Frequently Asked Questions that it was OK to use AI as part of an artwork

Can I enter an AI work?

If your work is generated, partially or entirely, using artificial intelligence, then you must declare it on your artwork form by adding ‘AI’ to the medium field.

Extract from RA Summer Exhibition 2026 - FAQs

In other words, the RWA appears to have just copied what the RA did!

Omission of fact / poor descriptions of art for sale

So I went to look at all the artworks - to find the clearly displayed "AI" in the medium field

I found 59 entries were listed in "all the artworks" when I searched the database for "AI".

I didn't sample everyone. But of all the ones I looked at in detail, not one declared the AI as having contributed to the image or the artwork.

So the RA may know that AI contribute to the artwork - but they aren't sharing that information with the general public.

I then did another sample - of all those that were available to buy online. 

• This time I got 54 entries.
• I looked at a few more - and still could not find any exhibit which openly declared that AI was used in its creation.

AI Findings: Submission to Display to Sale

• The Royal Academy of Art required all artists to declare AI on their form If your work is generated, partially or entirely, using artificial intelligence, then you must declare it on your artwork form by adding ‘AI’ to the medium field.
• The Royal Academy of Art appears to have chosen NOT to disclose the use of AI in any of the information provided to the buying public.
• it's not listed in the catalogue under the medium
• it's not listed on the Sales website for any of the artworks which were triggered by the search term "AI"

I wonder why.

I'm also wondering if anybody asked the RA Solicitors for their advice as to what needs to be disclosed within the context of the range of legislation and regulations which are pertinent eg see "How to sell art" on my website Art Business Info for Artists

• Trading Law and Regulations - see my Trading Law & Regulations for Artists (mainly UK) page
• the various regulations relating to selling online and consumer rights - see my E-Commerce for Artists page

One of the requirements of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 is that

Every contract to supply goods by description is to be treated as including a term that the goods will match the description.

In other words, when describing the medium for an artwork, if AI was used then AI needs to be highlighted.

• I am sure this requirement is essentially what is behind the RA requirement for the artist to spell out AI in the medium box if relevant. 
• So why has that info not translated through to the description of the artwork for the purposes of sale to the public (ie the people protected by the Consumer Rights Act 2015!)?
• My conclusion is that we appear to have "a left hand and a right hand within the RA who are not talking to one another"!

Clearly, use of AI is new and mistakes may be made at the outset. 

However I personally would expect that an organisation like the Royal Academy of Art which has, over time, been absolutely exemplary in its highlighting of changes in legislation (eg re VAT registration for overseas artists; new money laundering regulations for art etc) and spelling out what that means for artists entering the Summer Exhibition SHOULD have picked this up and dealt with it better. 

I have frequently highlighted RA advice contained in its T&Cs and FAQs to other art societies as "this is the way to do it" (whatever "it" was)

I'm now expecting that all mistakes made this year will be corrected for 2027.

I also expect to see next year that the same standard of exemplary guidance produced by the RA in the past will now be also applied to EVERY ASPECT OF AI where people (i.e. ALL THE BUYERS!) have a "need to know" 

In other words - that next year all relevant legislation and regulations will be covered by all necessary parts of the T&Cs and FAQs and any other guidance the RA sees fit to issue.

Royal West of England Academy allows AI into its Annual Exhibition

The deadline for entries to the Annual Open Exhibition of the Royal West of England Academy (RWA) closed at midnight yesterday.

I'm wondering how many entries they got this year.

That's because they have this year allowed people to submit AI entries.

I gather a lot of artists have been very upset about this - as one might expect given that, by definition, AI means an artwork cannot be the original work of the artist.

Some ventured to comment on the error of the RWA's ways - and promptly got banned from commenting on their Instagram account!

I notice social media posts about the RWA Open latterly have had no scope whatsoever for comments.

I then went back though Instagram looking at other posts inviting entries for the RWA Open and not one of those I looked at had comments.

I rather think they may regret the notion of inviting AI artwork.

Should any other art society think it might be a good idea to be cutting edge and introduce AI as an option for acceptable media, I'd highly recommend you look at the RWA Exhibition when it opens

The 173rd Annual Open Exhibition at the Royal West of England Academy (RWA) in Bristol will run from 12 September 2026 to 3 January 2027. It showcases over 500 contemporary works—including painting, sculpture, and photography—across historic galleries, with all featured art available for purchase. Google AI

Plus maybe have a look at some of the other posts about this 

For any other society anticipating doing similar, consider for a moment how you can possibly have a rule which states that this is all the artist's own original artwork - AND that the society allows AI to play a part.

By definition, the latter is NOT "all the artist's own work"!

It's a complete nonsense!

Ever thought of using AI to help with your artwork?

This is a bit of a weird one.

You may have realised by now that I'm very much against AI as a substitute for artists making art using their own hands and eyes.

However it occurred to me earlier this week that maybe there is some scope for AI in art.

I first wrote about AI and painting back in May 2023 in this post - which is still a recommended read (see more at the end of this post)

RECOMMENDED: Duane Keiser on AI and Painting
Duane Keiser has been writing recently on his blog about the advent of AI and whether it is a serious rival to painting 'for real'.

Would you use AI to help with your "hand and eye" art? 

Anyway, first here's what I said on Facebook - by way of this query......

Ever thought of using AI to help with your artwork?

This was my explanation for the post

So…… Would you be interested to give it a try?
Or is this a complete anathema for you?

The question is a thought which occurred to me while listening to “The Rest is Entertainment” podcast (very educational surprisingly!) - and they were discussing how the first AI model has now appeared in Vogue!!

Or as Conde Nast put it “NOT in the editorial content” (i.e. it was an advert)

They then went on to discuss how much time and budget eg retailers would save commissioning AI models….

Who remembers the Taylor Wessing Photographic Portrait Prize in 2017 when one of the portraits selected was 100% computer generated i.e. android!!!
Read Breach of rules - Taylor Wessing Photographic Portrait Prize 2017

This is the question which appeared on the YouTube version of Q&A Edition of The Rest is Entertainment "Was Vogue Wrong To Publish A Fake Model?"

and this is the video followed by the questions asked.

Consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence ENDS TUESDAY

I'm extremely late to this topic so this is a wakeup call for anybody else like me who did not realise this consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence was happening

The consultation ends on Tuesday 25th February i.e. YOU HAVE TWO DAYS LEFT TO COMMENT. You have two days left if you have a view on how this might impact your career or your income. (I may update this post)

• You can access the consultation here. Responses are by way of a survey of questions. (https://ipoconsultations.citizenspace.com/ipo/consultation-on-copyright-and-ai/)
• respond to the questions in the survey
• say how it would affect you
• or send a letter saying what you want to say via an email
• You can also submit your response by email to: copyrightconsultation@ipo.gov.uk
• The deadline to respond is 11:59pm on Tuesday 25 February 2025.

Cover of the formal Consultation Document published by the Government
Copyright and Artificial Intelligence
Ref: ISBN 978-1-5286-5330-5, E03259461 12/24, CP 1205
PDF, 1.23 MB, 40 pages

The consultation arises because of what has been characterised as

pressure to amend the UK’s copyright laws to make it easier for predominantly American tech companies to train their AI models on other people’s creative work without permission, acknowledgment or payment. Creative industries are among the UK’s crown jewels – and AI is out to steal them | The Guardian

Below you can read about

• what the government has said
• how to respond - according to DACS and AOI
• places where you can find out what others are saying

What I RECOMMEND YOU DO is read carefully the recommendations of how to respond from both 

• DACS (a "not for profit" set up to maximise and collect copyright income) and the 
• Association of Illustrators (AOI) 

What the Government has said

Does AI mean Open Exhibitions / Art Competitions need to rethink digital entries?

Last week I reshared a post on Facebook (see below) which highlighted how many images are now created using "artificial intelligence" aka AI. 

It occurred to me that ALL those organising open exhibitions and/or art competitions MUST now to factor the proliferation of AI into 

• the calls for entries
• the rules and regulations
• the submission process
• the vetting process
• the judging process
• plus briefings on legal decisions for all those in charge

It simply will NOT be acceptable for all entries to be judged on digital images - only to find that a selected entry is a digital print when it arrives for exhibition.

Below I remind organisers of open exhibitions by art societies and art competitions of things they need to think about

• starting with a very salutary lesson in what happens when you get it wrong - see The AWS Gold Medal Controversy (2008-2010)
• a reminder about normal challenges for organisers in relation to copyright
• some initial thoughts on the implications for art competitions and open exhibitions - by way of a checklist!

The AWS Gold Medal Controversy

Unfortunately, the Gold Medal winning painting in the 2008 exhibition, “Impermanence” by Sheryl Luxenburg has generated a huge volume of controversy. In question are the ownership of the image, the originality of the piece and even the authenticity of the medium. Many have questioned the American Watercolor Society's position on this problem and wondered in their communications to us whether our society is taking these questions seriously. Statement in 2008 by the AWS

Should anybody need reminding - here's the link to my post about the debacle at the American Watercolour Society about an "artwork" which won a Gold Medal . 

Was the gold medal winning painting at the centre of the American Watercolor Society controversy actually painted - or was it a giclee print?

See below for links to posts in September 2008 about the AWS Gold medal controversy - in reverse order of posting

RECOMMENDED: Duane Keiser on AI and Painting

This is about Duane Keiser and his recent writing about AI and Painting - and provides the first real insight I've read into the issues and problems with reproducing art using AI.

Two recent innovations in the realm of art are NFTs and AI - except that neither are art: Put simplistically:

• NFTs are digital tokens (akin to currency NOT art!) - see my blog post last year about What is art? (legally speaking)
• AI stands for Artificial Intelligence which is a machine learning way of creating "more of the same" using machine algorithms. (An algorithm is a procedure used for solving a problem or performing a computation).
  

The art market seems to think AI and NFTs are the way forward for lots of people to make lots of money.

Duane Keiser on AI

Duane Keiser has been writing recently on his blog about the advent of AI and whether it is a serious rival to painting 'for real'. 

It's the result of doing some serious research.

Over the last few months, I've been researching and experimenting with AI to better understand it (I gained early access to the more well-known AIs). In my next few articles, I'll be writing about what I've learned about AI as it relates to art and painting, and where it might be going.

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND a read of his blog posts if you want to grasp what AI and art is and what problems it encounters. It's a well structured series which introduces the notions of AI and where it comes from and then presents a series of experiments he has conducted in AI.

I've extracted short quotes from each to demonstrate what they are about as I know the whole concept of AI will be very new to most of you.

To read his blog posts just right click the titles and open in a new tab.

• pAInting 

As I read some of the reactions to AI, I'm reminded of what the French painter Paul Delaroche said in the 1800s upon seeing one of the first photographs: "From today, painting is dead."

• ChatGPT

It feels like AI developers have gone from pen and ink, to the Gutenberg Press, to the internet in a matter of weeks. The advancements are hard to keep up with, much less fully understand. In terms of tech revolutions, I’ve never seen anything like it. Not even close.

Before I get to my experiences with image-based AI, I thought it would be helpful to start with an introduction to text-based AI, specifically ChatGPT.

• The Woman in the White Dress - in which Duane reveals his experiments with AI and the images and results he (and AI) generated. I was absolutely riveted by this read and recommended it on FB straight away - and found that others were also very interested in what he had to say

The AI is not just a craftsman who dutifully follows orders. It is a collaborator in the true sense of the word— it makes conceptual contributions to your project (whether you like them or not.) The output always comes with surprises. In other words, the AI cannot be corralled into recreating the exact image you have in your head. This, as you may have already discovered, can feel like herding cats.

Duane Keiser on AI - The Woman in the White Dress

Then it got really interesting....