R
Rachel
Guest
- Thread Author
- #1
New survey results show growing impact on creative careers
Illustration Credit: Zosia Bonkowska
AOI research reveals how generative AI is affecting illustrators’ livelihoods, commissions and creative control.
Almost half (46%) of illustrators responding to a new Association of Illustrators (AOI) survey say they know they have lost work because a client chose generative AI instead, up from 32% in 2025.
The findings, published in our new report, AI and the Future of Illustration, also reveal significant financial pressures across the profession. More than half of respondents said their illustration income had fallen over the previous 12 months, with 22% reporting a reduction of more than half.
While wider economic conditions are contributing to these pressures, the research shows how generative AI is also changing the work available to illustrators, the way they are commissioned, and the fees and creative control attached to their work.
Drawing on responses from 549 illustrators in 2026, alongside our 2025 survey of 5,000 respondents, the report explores where these pressures are being felt most sharply and what needs to happen next.
Read the full report: AI and the Future of Illustration
Lost work is only part of the picture
For some illustrators, the financial impact of losing work to AI has been substantial. Among respondents who knew they had lost work to AI and could estimate its value, 40% reported losses of £5,000 or more in the previous 12 months, with almost one in four estimating losses of at least £10,000.
But lost commissions are only part of the picture. The survey also reveals how generative AI is changing day-to-day commissioning, even where illustrators are still being hired.
- 62% had encountered AI-generated images in briefs or moodboards.
- 36% had been asked to copy, refine or redraw AI-generated images.
- 31% reported clients expecting lower fees because AI tools exist.
- 27% reported expectations of faster turnaround.
Only 7% said they had noticed no AI-related changes to commissioning.
These pressures can overlap. Illustrators may still receive a commission, but find themselves working from an AI-generated concept that has already been approved, with less opportunity for creative development and tighter budgets or deadlines.
One respondent described agencies using existing illustration to generate concepts before asking illustrators to redraw the approved direction.
The impact varies across illustration
The report also reveals significant differences between areas of practice.
In visual development and concept art, 64% reported clients using AI instead of commissioning illustration. In games and interactive media, 80% had encountered AI-generated material in briefs, while 57% had been asked to redraw or refine generated images.
Animation showed particularly high pressure on deadlines, with 41% reporting expectations of faster turnaround.
In publishing and editorial, the picture is more mixed. Children’s books showed comparatively lower levels of pressure, although 42% of respondents working in the field still reported clients using AI instead of commissioning illustration.
Those already facing barriers are being hit harder
One of the most concerning findings is the disproportionate impact on illustrators who already face barriers within the industry.
Among respondents who considered themselves underrepresented or marginalised, 60% knew they had lost work to AI, compared with 36% of other respondents.
They were also more likely to report significant falls in income, raising concerns about who can afford to build and sustain a career in illustration.
The report also raises questions about the future of entry-level opportunities. Early commissions are where emerging illustrators gain experience, develop their skills and build relationships with commissioners. What happens to the next generation if more of that work disappears?
Illustrators are clear about their rights
Despite the changes taking place across the industry, illustrators’ expectations around their rights remain remarkably consistent.
- 98% believe AI companies should need permission before using copyright-protected illustration for training.
- 97% support transparency about copyrighted works used in AI training.
- 97% support compensation where work has already been used without permission.
- 99% support some form of clear labelling for AI-generated images.
Crucially, 86% of respondents to a separate question said they would not allow their work to be licensed for AI training at all.
Around nine in ten respondents also expressed a lack of confidence in current UK legal protections against unauthorised AI training, copying or style imitation.
What happens next?
These findings strengthen the case for better protections for illustrators, as well as clearer standards for the use of generative AI in commissioning.
Building on our work with other creator organisations through Brave New World? Justice for creators in the age of GenAI, the AOI will continue campaigning for consent, transparency, fair licensing and stronger protection of creators’ rights.
We will also continue developing practical guidance for illustrators and commissioners, helping to ensure that the research, ideas, judgement and creative development behind illustration are recognised and fairly valued.
Get involved
AI and the Future of Illustration explores these findings in greater depth, including the financial impact of generative AI, differences across 18 areas of illustration, and first-hand experiences from working illustrators.
We encourage illustrators, commissioners, publishers, creative agencies, policymakers and everyone working across the creative industries to read and share the findings.
The evidence is growing. Now we need action to ensure that illustrators’ work, rights and creative contributions are respected and fairly valued.