AI portrait of King Frederik divides opinion on art

An AI-generated version of a portrait of King Frederik has reignited debate over the role of artificial intelligence in art, DR reports. Some people say the computer-generated image looks more like the king, while others argue that the comparison misses the purpose of art.

The portrait, painted by Danish artist Cathrine Raben Davidsen, was unveiled at Frederiksborg Castle in Hillerød on September 25. IT engineer Andrew Prasana Rajendram created an AI version after seeing the painting and thinking, “That’s not him.”

Rajendram, who teaches businesses how to use AI, shared the image on LinkedIn and asked people to choose between the two portraits. He also posted it in the comments under a post by the television programme Go’ Morgen Danmark, where it received more than 5,000 likes, DR reported.

Kristina May, director and owner of communications and branding agency AM Copenhagen, said people could consider the original portrait unattractive or unlike the king. But she argued that art is about intention, interpretation, choices and craftsmanship, not whether AI can produce a more recognisable likeness.

May said sharing the AI image shifted the discussion towards whether a machine could do better than a person, taking attention away from a work created by a human artist. She warned that AI could damage a world valued for its imperfections and friction.

Psychology professor, author and radio host Svend Brinkmann also criticised the AI version. On Facebook, he called it a disrespectful response to an established artist who had spent two years on the portrait and made several preparatory studies.

Rajendram said he would prefer a hand-painted portrait and did not believe AI should replace artists. He said he used the tool to visualise his own criticism and idea, adding that he did not consider the image disrespectful to the king, but thought the situation was unfortunate.

He also said that paintings help tell history, and that people wanted a portrait in which they could recognise their king. Rajendram acknowledged that he was not qualified to judge the quality of the original painting, describing his view as a personal opinion.