Elijah Timmins-Scanlon, Red Eleven model. Photo / Stephen Tilley
The model says after seeing more images that he suspected were AI-generated, he felt more confident in his position.
Timmins-Scanlon left a comment on the photo he suspected was AI-generated, writing, “Yo that ai model actually goes hard.”
“Which I truly believe,” Timmins-Scanlon says. “I was actually like, ‘wow, they’re getting good at this’.”
He says his Instagram account was blocked by the Huffer page.
“That was the final straw,” he tells the Herald. “I find that super disrespectful.”
Following this, Timmins-Scanlon uploaded his video to Instagram.
Huffer managing director Kate Berry denies that the image, highlighted by Timmins-Scanlon, was generated using the model’s likeness.
“No faces of our models have been changed other than in normal computer-assisted design.
“No one is using models that have been paid by us and changing them.”
When asked if the person in the image was a real human, Berry replied: “I am not commenting on specific images.”
On whether Huffer is generating imagery of new models using AI programs for any of their content, Berry said, “Computer design support has been used in our industry for 30 years.”
Berry confirms Elijah Timmins-Scanlon was blocked from the Instagram page. She says it was for breaking Huffer’s community standards.
Earl Gray, intellectual property barrister at Sangro Chambers, says the basis for examining the legality of reproducing someone’s likeness falls under the Fair Trading Act.
If a person could be mistaken for being in or consenting to an image that depicts their likeness, that image could be classified as misleading. This would be in breach of the Fair Trading Act.
“You’d need to analyse the particular starting point – how well known the talent is and in what way and how close the context of the subsequent publication. Which, of course, doesn’t make it very easy for talent.”
Red Eleven owner Mandy Jacobsen says she expects the communication for the use of AI for images depicting models to be clear.
“We do understand things are changing, but they’ve got to have a conversation with us,” she says.
Jacobsen says the model agency has been attempting to front-foot conversations about image manipulation.
“We’ve also put on our invoices, and a few other things, that you cannot manipulate the image without permission from us.”
Timmins-Scanlon also says he feels it should always be clear whether a label is using AI to reproduce a model’s likeness, or generating new images of AI models.
“From a business perspective, I get it, trying to cut costs. I think for me it’s the transparency,” Timmins-Scanlon says.
Last year, Guess featured an AI-generated model in a two-page advertisement for Vogue magazine. A small disclaimer was printed in the corner of the image explaining that the images were AI-generated.
Similarly, in February, Gucci was criticised for releasing marked AI-generated imagery on X ahead of their Milan Fashion Week show.