AI is killing body art creativity, warns tattooist

TL;DR: A Nottingham tattoo artist reports receiving up to 10 AI-generated design requests weekly, a number that has noticeably risen over recent months. Many clients cannot distinguish AI-generated images from real tattoos, creating unrealistic expectations for designs that are physically impossible to replicate, particularly detailed finger tattoos.

When Natasha Thompson opened her family-run tattoo studio in Nottingham almost two years ago, her bookings were full of original designs and creative commissions. Now she says more and more customers are requesting tattoos generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI), some of which are “impossible” to recreate.

Context and Background

Her studio gets up to 10 AI designs requested each week, a number that Natasha said had noticeably risen over the past few months.

“These designs set unrealistic expectations for artists to copy, and we feel like our human designs and capabilities just aren’t good enough,” she said.

The 31-year-old has been tattooing for the past six years and opened Bleeding Hearts Tattoo Studio with her partner, Matthew, in February 2024.

ChatGPT and other AI software can instantly generate images for free from prompts and Natasha says this is already causing issues for her industry.

“Tattoo studios have faced many challenges over the years, along with other small businesses but AI is really changing the creative sector,” she said.

The Challenge: Real vs. AI Distinction

“We are finding that when clients bring in AI designs, some can’t tell the difference between an AI-generated image and a real one,” Natasha explained.

“Most of the AI designs come from ChatGPT or Pinterest. The problem with these images is some of them are too detailed for the placement they want, and they won’t fade well.”

On Pinterest, users can browse both AI and real images when looking for designs, making the distinction even more challenging for clients.

Natasha said people often arrived with AI images showing detailed designs on fingers that are virtually impossible to replicate in the real world due to the small surface area.

“In some cases, customers get annoyed and irate when we tell them we can’t do these designs or highlight that these aren’t real pictures—and that’s upsetting,” she said.

Technical Limitations and Unrealistic Expectations

Natasha said for tattoo artists like herself, it was easy to distinguish between real and fake images but she understands it is harder for clients to tell the difference.

“We spot that AI designs have a dreamy aspect to them, and some inconsistencies, like hands with six fingers, and no real skin texture or redness if it’s a freshly done tattoo,” she said.

“We keep having the same conversations with clients about it, and that is okay, but it’s sad that people are gravitating towards AI rather than human creativity.

“As artists, we pour so much into the work we create and advertise, but sadly we do less of our own designs now.

“People need to be mindful that we are humans and artists. After all, we are people, not printers.”

Looking Forward

The case illustrates a broader challenge emerging across creative industries: AI-generated content that looks plausible but doesn’t account for physical constraints or technical limitations of real-world implementation.

For tattoo artists, the issue isn’t simply aesthetic preference—it’s about managing client expectations when AI generates designs that ignore fundamental realities of skin texture, ink behaviour over time, and the physical constraints of body placement.

The rise in AI-generated design requests also represents a shift in the client-artist relationship. Historically, tattoo artists worked collaboratively with clients to develop designs that balanced creative vision with technical feasibility. AI short-circuits this process, presenting fully-formed designs that may not translate to actual body art.

For creative service industries more broadly, Natasha’s experience suggests a need for client education: understanding the difference between what AI can render as a digital image and what’s physically achievable remains a critical gap. The challenge isn’t AI capability—it’s helping clients understand the constraints of translating digital imagery into physical craft.

Source Attribution:

Share this article