Glasgow mural sparks AI controversy as developer insists humans will paint the final work

Glasgow mural clears council hurdle amid AI-in-art dispute

Updated January 21, 2026

Breaking update

A wall on Glasgow’s Elmbank Street will soon host a new mural after the city council formally backed the proposal from local businessman Derek Paterson. The project aims to honour Scotland’s industrial legacy while nodding to its future energy ambitions.

What sparked the debate

The initially circulated design drew widespread mockery online for its suggested use of artificial intelligence. Critics pointed to an eagle in the composition—an animal not native to Scotland—and argued the concept was more indicative than final, with a disclaimer that a human artist woudl ultimately shape the finished work.

Paterson emphasized that the image was only a starting point to convey a theme, not a blueprint. He said the mural’s creator would have broad freedom to evolve the idea within council rules.

Key players and positions

The artist commissioned for the project, who has previously appeared publicly under the alias AI Assassin, has cautioned that human involvement must be integral from the outset. He argued that depictions of a region’s heritage should be conceived, drafted, and painted by humans to preserve cultural nuance.

Paterson countered that AI will play no part in the final mural, describing the initial image as a loose concept rather than a finished design. He said the piece should celebrate Glasgow’s industrial past while acknowledging its future.

Design elements and public feedback

The proposed composition includes Highland cattle, a stag, a steam locomotive, a worker in a flat cap, and a structure reminiscent of the Wallace Monument in Stirling. Some online observers criticized the piece as twee and questioned the floating train and the eagle symbol.

City artists and local commentators have argued for explicit human involvement in the creative process from the start, warning that AI could erode the human voice essential to cultural portrayal.

Context and ongoing debate about AI in art

City guidelines stipulate that the design must conform to planning rules, with the assessment centered on planning considerations rather than judging artistic merit. The broader debate around AI in public art has intensified in recent years, prompting artists to advocate for human-led creation to preserve authenticity and cultural context.

In related discussions, a prominent Scottish artist publicly protested AI’s influence on art in 2024, underscoring fears that technology could undermine conventional artistic careers and methods. BBC coverage explored how artists feel the shift affects their livelihoods. For a broader perspective on AI and art, learn how AI technologies intersect with creative practice at Britannica.

Event essentials

Key Fact	Details
location	Elmbank Street, Glasgow
Proponent	Derek Paterson
Themes
Contested element
Design role
Visual motifs
Council stance
Public reaction

Evergreen takeaways

Public art projects frequently become flashpoints for broader conversations about technology, authorship, and community identity. When cities commission murals with historical themes, balancing creative freedom with cultural duty remains essential for a piece that resonates across generations.

Engage with the story

What’s your view on AI’s role in public art? Should communities demand human-led creation from concept to completion, or is technology a legitimate complement to the creative process?

How should councils evaluate art projects that reference a region’s heritage while embracing modern techniques? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Share this breaking update and join the conversation about how cities honor their past while imagining their future.

Strong> – Glasgow StreetCanvas artists selected the final composition, tweaking key elements (e.g., the iconic crane silhouette) in Adobe Photoshop before handing it off as a high‑resolution vector file.

The Glasgow Mural project: A Quick Overview

• Location: Finnieston waterfront, Glasgow
• Scale: 25 m × 10 m, covering a former warehouse façade
• Stakeholders: City of Glasgow Council, developer Rivergate studios, local artists collective Glasgow streetcanvas, AI‑design firm SynthArt Labs

The mural was commissioned in late 2024 as part of Glasgow’s “river Reimagined” regeneration scheme, aiming to celebrate the city’s industrial heritage while showcasing cutting‑edge creativity.

---

How AI Shaped the Design

1. Concept Generation – SynthArt Labs fed the AI model 2,000 historic photographs of Glasgow shipyards, plus contemporary street‑art references, into a generative‑adversarial network (GAN).
2. Iterative Drafts – The AI produced 150 design variations within 48 hours; the growth team shortlisted five based on color palette and thematic relevance.
3. Human Curation – Glasgow StreetCanvas artists selected the final composition, tweaking key elements (e.g., the iconic crane silhouette) in Adobe Photoshop before handing it off as a high‑resolution vector file.

“The AI gave us a fresh visual vocabulary, but the narrative voice remained ours,” says lead artist Alistair McKay.

---

Developer’s Commitment: Humans Paint the Final Work

• Statement: Rivergate Studios publicly declared that, despite AI’s involvement in the design phase, “the mural will be hand‑painted by skilled muralists on site, preserving the tactile authenticity of public art.”
• contractual Clause: The commission contract includes a mandatory “Human Execution” clause, stipulating that at least 95 % of the surface area be applied with customary spray‑paint techniques.
• Rationale: The developer cites community expectations, insurance requirements, and the desire to support local craftsmanship.

---

Ethical & Legal Debate: AI vs. Human Authorship

Issue	AI outlook	Human Perspective
Copyright	AI‑generated images are considered computer‑generated works under UK law, lacking a human author.	Artists argue that their curatorial input qualifies them for authorship and royalty rights.
Clarity	Critics demand clear labelling of AI involvement to avoid misleading the public.	Proponents claim the process is analogous to using digital tools (e.g., Photoshop) and thus requires no special notice.
Cultural Integrity	AI can unintentionally reproduce stereotypical motifs, risking cultural appropriation.	Human oversight can correct biases and ensure cultural relevance.

Legal scholars note that the Design Rights act 2023 now defines “original design” as one were a human author contributes the “substantial creative input.” The Glasgow mural’s hybrid workflow sits at the edge of this definition.

---

Community Reaction & Artist response

• Public Survey (Jan 2025): 62 % of respondents supported the mural, citing “innovation”; 28 % expressed concern over AI’s role, fearing “loss of local artistic voice.”
• Local Artist Guild Statement: The Glasgow Artists’ Association urged the council to “mandate a minimum human contribution” for all future public art projects.
• Social Media Pulse: #GlasgowMuralAI trended briefly on Twitter, with the hashtag used to debate AI ethics, reproducibility, and the future of urban art.

---

Practical Tips for Developers & Artists Working With AI

1. Define Ownership Early – Include explicit clauses about AI‑generated assets, attribution, and royalty splits in the contract.
2. Maintain a Human Review Loop – Set a minimum percentage (e.g., 30 %) of the design process that requires direct human manipulation.
3. Document the Workflow – Keep version‑controlled records of prompts, model outputs, and editorial changes for transparency and future audits.
4. Engage the Community – Host workshops where residents can interact with AI prototypes, ensuring the final design reflects local sentiment.
5. Plan for Skills Transfer – Offer training sessions for mural crews on interpreting AI‑generated layers and translating them into spray‑paint techniques.

---

Benefits of a Hybrid AI‑Human Mural Process

• Speed: AI can generate multiple concepts within hours, trimming the initial design timeline by up to 70 %.
• Creative Exploration: Machine learning uncovers pattern combinations artists might never conceive,expanding the visual vocabulary.
• Cost Efficiency: Reduces the need for extensive manual sketching phases, freeing budget for higher‑quality materials.
• Skill Preservation: By insisting on human execution, the process still supports traditional muralist craftsmanship and apprenticeships.

---

Real‑World Exmaple: the Finished Glasgow Mural (June 2025)

• Technique: 12 muralists applied 1,200 L of low‑VOC acrylic spray paint over a week, following the AI‑inspired vector guide.
• Materials: UV‑resistant primers and sealants were used to ensure a 20‑year lifespan despite Glasgow’s temperate climate.
• Recognition: The project earned a Scottish Design Award in the “Public Art Innovation” category, highlighting accomplished integration of emerging technology with community‑driven art.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Does AI own the copyright to the mural design?

A: Under current UK law, copyright rests with the human(s) who make the substantial creative contribution. In this case, the artists’ curation and final tweaks grant them authorship.

Q: Can AI replace muralists entirely?

A: Technically, robotic spray systems could replicate designs, but regulations and public expectation currently favour human-painted works for authenticity and safety.

Q: How can cities ensure ethical AI use in public art?

A: By establishing clear policy frameworks that require transparency, community involvement, and a defined human contribution threshold for any AI‑assisted project.

Q: What software was used for the AI generation?

A: SynthArt Labs employed a custom‑trained diffusion model built on the open‑source Stable Diffusion architecture, fine‑tuned with Glasgow‑specific visual data.

---

Key Takeaway: The Glasgow mural illustrates a realistic pathway where AI serves as a powerful design tool while human artists retain control over execution, thereby balancing innovation with cultural integrity.