---
title: 'Don''t Do This to Artists'
source: 'https://youtube.com/watch?v=HTHaCJuFVSs'
video_id: 'HTHaCJuFVSs'
date: 2026-08-14
duration_sec: 769
---

# Don't Do This to Artists

> Source: [Don't Do This to Artists](https://youtube.com/watch?v=HTHaCJuFVSs)

## Summary

This video breaks down several viral posts, all sharing the same theme: how artists and photographers are being mistreated online in the age of generative AI. From a rude client mocking a $30 commission to a wildlife photographer's real frog photo being outpaced by a stolen AI clone, the host digs into why this happens and who profits. It also highlights a common 'this looks too AI' refund scam and ends with a plea for creators to be appreciated — not just used.

### Key Points

- **Rude client DMs artist over $30 quote** [00:14] — A client named Milo is DMed for a headshot, but when Milo quotes $30, the client replies rudely: "$30? Be freaking for real. No wonder you only have 71 followers." Milo responds gracefully, showing how artists often deal with entitled, scolding comments.
- **The AI reference red flag** [01:21] — The speaker notes that the reference the client sent appears heavily AI-run — melted earrings, misaligned eyes, weird hair clip. AI-generated references are a big red flag for artists, since real anatomy and detail rules don't apply.
- **Real photography vs AI slop** [02:14] — Photographer Nick Vulp and wildlife artist Lucina spent nights in a the Bornean rainforest to photograph a Bornean horn frog. That real photo ended up with 570 likes, while an AI-generated copy of the same frog on another account got 35,500 likes. The host explains the difference in effort and the frustration of seeing your hard work overlooked.
- **Why AI accounts steal artists' images** [03:33] — The speaker explains that Instagram has a paid carousel-post bonus program that pays accounts based on how many impressions the slides generate. This creates a money incentive to farm engagement using stolen, AI-run images. 
- **Exposure vs money for creators** [04:37] — While fans argue exposure should matter, more eyes on a real artist's work actually path to hiring, commissions and real income. When someone else steals and filters your work into AI, those opportunities get rerouted to the thief.
- **Fans defend AI as if it were real** [05:01] — Commenters defend the AI-generated frog by pointing to the species is real, failing to realize that a real animal can still be depicted with fake AI photos. The conversation shows how hard it is to correct misinformation once AI content goes viral.
- **Wildlife photographers earn nothing** [06:01] — Nick, the photographer, admits that photographers in his field 'earn literally nothing'. Their goals are educational and conservation-focused, not monetization. The speaker notes that they deserve fair payment for expensive travel, equipment, and time.
- **Outraged community response** [07:20] — A commenter quote-reattrieved the situation saying that if they spen nights shooting a rare species and someone stole it, they would lose it entirely. Others reference photoportive bug projects (like a '3,000 bug species' series) and express frustration that talented photographers sustain their own expeditions.
- **Viral Joker & Princess trend stolen** [08:16] — The spotlight shifts to an artist named Caroline who created a viral 'Joker and black cat Princess' meme. The meme exploded online, but her bio explicitly says 'No AI use of my art or ideas' — yet countless clone accounts run the work through AI anyway, even making money by piggybacking on it.
- **Views still matter for artists** [10:19] — A commenter says the artist spends hours on a piece, genuinely gets 40 views, while a stolen image gets 50,000. The speaker argues this is heartbreaking because exposure and monetization are how they pay rent.
- **The 'this looks too AI' scam** [11:14] — A Twitter user (username WeaBomb) writes a design, client says it 'looks too AI'. The artist realized the client themselves had sent them AI-generated references, and a commenter warns this pattern is a common scam — the client gets a refund and uses the work for AI training instead of paying the artist. 
- **Wrap-up and real talk** [12:08] — The video closes by asking viewers what they've experienced. The creator also announces they are occasionally offline due to family health and points viewers to their Etsy and coffee servers.

### Conclusion

The video shows that while AI has made art easier to share, it is also making it easier to steal — artists lose credit, money, and fair exposure. Real respect means crediting who actually did the work, shadowing the viral AI clones.

## Transcript

where we're going to be covering some things that you should not be doing to artists because this is so frustrating to experience. So, let's delve right in. Our very first post is posted by a user called Milo writing, "Dear artists,
always ignore clients." In quotes like this, "Criticism is valid, but rudeness isn't. Do better." And so, these are some DMs. The potential client is messaging Milo being like, "Hey, I'm interested in some art." They send over
a headsh shot that looks to be AI generated and says, "I want a headshot generated and says, "I want a headshot like this. How much in USD?" And Milo says, "I offer head shot for $30." Milo sends over a link. Oh my god, their art
is so sick. And the potential client says, " $30? Be freaking for real. No wonder you only have 71 followers. I'll find a better artist." And Milo's like, "No worries. Hope you find them soon." Which got to say, Milo took this with
absolute grace, but the way this person talked to them was so rude. This happens boss that do this. Sometimes there's people who will like fake engagement legit thing that happens to artists where there will be people that will
reach out to you and just be so absolutely rude for no reason. Oh, I look at it, the reference looks like it's been run through AI." Which, yeah, I do agree. Like I said, the reference looks AI generated or run through AI.
The earrings are all melting. This is not a cartilage earring, but also eyes are pointing in two different directions. And this hair clip is also says, "Typical for somebody sending AI as a reference." And Milo says, "It
definitely is a big red flag. Sad face." Another person says, "It's honestly reason when they're the ones asking for something. I've had the displeasure of talking to a bunch of people like this, too." And Milo says, "So sorry to hear
don't get it. If you're not looking to pay more than $30, look for someone in your range. There's no reason to be rude as well." That is so frustrating. I just rude clients in general are just so annoying. I used to work at a restaurant
facing job where you have to interact with people. You'll be surprised at how rude some people can be. Our next one involves a photographer named Nick Vulp. And Nick writes, "AI slop versus real photo. When will the stealing be
regulated? Lucina Wild and I spent nights in the Borneian rainforest to find this incredible frog and share it with the world. Now somebody can AI generate it for easy likes and monetization. It's so frustrating and
not real. These are the two side by side. So the frog photo was posted to Lucina K. Wild's Instagram account. This is so cool. It's a photo of the Borne horn frog and wow, the photo looks absolutely stunning. And I want to add,
are like, "Oh, photography is not an art." Photography is absolutely an art and it takes a lot of time and effort, right? Like what Nick was saying, they had to literally camp out for nights in the rainforest to find the perfect
moment to take this picture. And it's not just one photo. You take a bajillion that looks the best and then you also post-process it by color grading it, background if you know there was like a fly that happened to fly right across
the screen or something like that to get the perfect photo. It is so much work shutter button. A lot of people like to downplay it, but here we have this other downplay it, but here we have this other AI account by somebody called Ali who
generated an image of some frogs. And this AI image of this frog, which also looks apparently be a Borneian horn frog, looks really similar to the photo taken by Lucina. And again, why do these accounts do it? Take other people's
images and then allegedly feed it through AI to generate another version of it. Well, Instagram has a bonus program and there is an Instagram carousel post bonus program where you get paid based on the amount of
impressions your photo slides generate. So, I got disqualified from this program enough views on my Instagram posts because I don't post carousel posts an alt account that I kind of post some stuff on which you should follow me
crafty and art stuff on my alt account. But anyways, that's why they do it money. Exactly what Nick said, off of other people's work because Ally didn't take this picture. It was Nick's photo. And the thing that okay, personally
original source, the original person who took the picture or did all the hard work didn't get the accolades that the other person got, right? Like look at the like difference. Lucina's post, you know, 570 likes, great amount of likes,
know, 570 likes, great amount of likes, but the AI person's 35.5,000 to be like, well, likes aren't everything. like, you know, it's not the day, artists are trying to get exposure and are trying to get paid. The
more eyes that are on your work, the more chances that one of the people who stumbled across your work is like, "Wow, I think this is so cool. I actually have a future project I want to hire this photographer for." Right? Like, eyes on
your work equals future opportunities that could lead to actual paid results. because somebody else fed your work through AI and now people can't find the original source image, it's frustrating and I don't think it's fair. A commenter
way of the world now. Sadly, AI desperately needs regulation to protect musicians. The majority of people still prefer the real thing to fake slob." And that got fooled by the AI would be furious to know they're interacting with
defend it being real by linking a Google search of the species and not understanding that the animal can be real, but the image itself is AI." And engagement account is probably botted. Or maybe there's a way to tell or gleam
off of them what is making them get engagement with AI and not the real one. community impressed by the coolness of the creature being created? You know, And Nick says, "No, he makes video collages of real species animals that
And it's fooling people to think they're real. I must admit, I fell for the first properly. It's weird that like some people in the comments are defending the somebody's making money from it instead of you." The question is, if you did
this all for clout and money, or did you do it just to share the beauty of the to steal. And Nick says, "About the money, do you realize us as wildlife photographers earn literally nothing?" And her main goal is just to educate the
that are going extinct. I'm angry because this isn't a real animal and is deceiving people. Have some respect. I always think like the moral police when when they're like, "Well, who cares if it's stolen? You should just do it for
the good of the world." Dude, making money is important in this world. Okay. For people like Nick, other wildlife photographers to continue doing what they do. Do you think it happens for free? They have to fly to the country.
have to purchase food for themselves, purchase maintenance for their equipment equipment is also really expensive. Maybe you need some more batteries. and then to sit there. They deserve to be paid for the work they're doing. I don't
think that's an absurd concept. And yes, like wildlife photographers make very little money. They should make more. And if there's a situation where somebody original source, wouldn't you want the original source to be actually receiving
I don't think that's a a difficult concept to grasp, but honestly, it's probably just somebody just rage baiting on the internet. So, that absolutely sucks. But a user had quote retweeted this whole situation saying, "If I spent
rare species only for somebody to steal versions of them, I think I would actually become the Joker." And they insanely hardworking and talented and fund their own expeditions for
scientific research. It's absolutely brutal that people steal their work and get more interaction. Deeply evil." And I completely agree. At least like on project where they're photographing bugs on white backgrounds and they just hit
3,000 bug species photographed on a white background, which that is absolutely so cool and such a good resource for just biologists in general. doing. Like, Lucinda has some sick photos. Like, look at this. This is so
down below. Please check them out and show them all the love they deserve. And well cuz their art is also so freaking sick. So next up we have oh my god posts is posted on threads by a user called
version of this trend getting almost 50,000 likes when real artists struggle to get this type of engagement. Also this comment triggered me. What the f it's okay to shove it through AI. And it's this this is involving the Joker
and princess trend which I am so in love with. And if you haven't seen it, oh my god, it is made by this artist Caroline and it has gone wildly viral where there is this kind of like black cat princess that's very hard to impress and a hot
Joker that you know they got maybe some tension going on etc. I am in love with it and I need like more materials about this at Webtune something ASAP, but it has been absolutely trending all over the internet. And this artist in their
bio says, "No AI use of my art or ideas." And it seems like literally nobody cares because I've seen so many posts running their work through AI, which is so annoying, especially when the artist explicitly said they're not
okay with that. But on top of that, we have comments like this that OP circled. original. Oh my god, that always pisses me off, man. Okay, like one already having your art stolen by somebody else, it's always so annoying. But when people
say the AI generated version is better than the original, like what the hell? original is so cool and has so much beauty in it. I literally rewatched that I don't even want to say how many. The original is the goat. It's so
comments like that and like people say whatever they want on the internet at the end of the day, right? But like some respect for the original creator, you know what I'm saying? Makes me so mad. And the artist in the comment says,
little meme. And people are defending the artist being like, "The original is many people are putting it through AI. The disrespect." And another person says, "I've been seeing so many people profiting from that artist using AI
generated images to promo their AI music accounts generating the art with thousands of followers. It's gross." Another person said, "Pro, what? the art I spend hours working on barely gets 40 views. And that's also frustrating.
why do you care so much about the views at the end of the day?" That that is how a following with more followers and a bigger audience. You can maybe monetize You're going to get more opportunities because more eyes across your work means
work can be a door for a future opportunity that can propel your art creator, you deserve all of that. So, it's always frustrating when it's a situation where the credit to the original creator gets lost or diluted
I'll have the original creator link down below because I am obsessed with their already seen this Joker Princess trend, but if you haven't cuz it's been going It's got me in a chokeold. And this was the final one that I saw. It got 1.5
million views on Twitter and it's posted by a user called Wea Bomb. They write, "Make design for client. Client doesn't like it. Show us what they want using discourse about AI generated references but they continue I design it according
to their AI generated image gets hit with this this looks too AI bro what did you send AI generated references and your artist chooses to work with that and interpret it in their own lens can't be mad it looks like your reference
comment got 12,000 likes and I thought it was really funny it's a subway sandwich meme that's like dudes be like this looks too AI my brother in Christ you gave the designer an AI reference. Another comment says, "Too much
macaroni, more cheese, less macaroni, less cheese." And a user says, "This is a common scam. They always say it looks AI and want a refund. Then they use your art to feed it to AI and claim it as their own. Please report them." And I
agree. If they're sending you AI generated references, cause because they're not an artist. Maybe they're not educated. Maybe they're a scammer. But that is so frustrating and annoying. So yeah, at
thoughts on all of these situations? Have you experienced any of these as an thoughts and experience in the comment section down below. And with that, if it if you like and subscribe. It really helps this channel out. I have an Etsy
check me out there and a coffee with free resources. I'm also cooking up some merch, but my grandma's pretty ill, so uh I'm have to delay it a little bit because I'm trying to go see her. So, I might have some scuffed videos from my
see. Everything is kind of up in the air right now, but keep her in your prayers. So, with that, I hope to catch you guys in one of my streams. I do stream on Twitch three days a week or in another one of my videos. Peace.