Why Thoughtful Designers Aren’t Afraid of AI

Using AI in a thoughtful way

I took time away from day to day work to reset. Not just my portfolio, but how I think about my career, what kind of designer I want to be, and what kinds of roles I am no longer willing to take on. I looked back at the projects that genuinely made me happy, the environments that drained me, and where I actually do my best work. It was a reset professionally and personally.

At the same time, I deliberately used that space to explore AI. Not in a hype driven way, but practically. How does it actually work inside real workflows. What are the outputs like. How much time still needs to be spent thinking, editing, synthesising, and making decisions. What does it mean for design, production, documentation, art direction, UX, and UI.

While doing this, I consumed a lot of commentary. Articles, LinkedIn takes, Medium essays, Twitter threads. Most of it fell into two extremes. Either AI is coming for our jobs and design is over, or AI is the magic solution that replaces entire teams. I have also had conversations with industry leaders who questioned why I was not using more AI, others who questioned whether I was using too much. Some asked whether it felt unethical. Some questioned whether the work was still mine.

So I stepped back and asked a simpler question. What does this moment actually feel like.

We have been here before

This is not the first time our industry has gone through this kind of shift.

In the 90s, when Macs became widely available, we moved from paste up to pixels almost overnight. The reaction was chaos. Computers were accused of doing the work for designers. “Real design” was supposedly hand done. And, for a while, the industry produced a lot of bad work simply because it could. Typography took a real hit. Stretching, squeezing, warping type just because the tools allowed it.

Eventually, the noise settled. Designers remembered that tools do not replace understanding. The computer did not make someone a designer any more than a paintbrush makes someone a painter. Skill, taste, judgment, and restraint still mattered.

We saw a smaller version of this again when Sketch, InVision, and later Figma arrived. I have personally been in rooms where leadership believed that because a design system lived in Figma, a six month schedule could suddenly be reduced to a few weeks. That thinking failed fast. Figma does not remove stakeholder approvals, regulatory reviews, engineering constraints, or alignment work. It helps productivity, it does not eliminate complexity.

AI feels bigger, but the pattern is familiar.

AI is a tool, not a replacement

Right now, we are hearing the same claims again. AI is doing all the work. AI will replace designers. RIP junior designers. RIP UX. RIP UI. It is the same misunderstanding wrapped in newer technology.

AI is another tool. A powerful one, but still a tool. Just like computers did not eliminate the need for designers, AI does not eliminate the need for human judgment, taste, empathy, and decision making. It accelerates parts of the process. It does not own the process.

How I am actually using AI

When I started this reset, I wrote down what I wanted to achieve. Rebuild my portfolio. Update and refine case studies. Create a website that reflects both my past work and where I am heading. Start writing more, not marketing fluff but real thinking about the industry.

The list was long, so I started with productivity. I used AI to help set up a scheduling and planning system using Notion AI, Reclaim, Gmail, and Zapier. The goal was not automation for its own sake, but reducing friction. I still manage my time. I still make decisions. AI helps keep things connected and updated so I spend less time doing admin work.

For art direction, nothing fundamentally changed in how I think. I still sketch, define tone, decide on mood, lighting, composition, and narrative. The difference is execution speed. Instead of commissioning photography at early exploration stages, I use AI to generate visual directions quickly. It does not decide for me. It gives me faster iterations. It does not remove weeks from the process, but it absolutely speeds up early exploration.

I approach UX, UI, and design systems the same way I always have. I start with the problem, the user, the constraints, and the business goals, then work through flows, states, edge cases, accessibility, and how the system needs to scale over time. The thinking and judgment are still the work. Where AI helps is in speed and reduction of friction. I use it to explore variations faster, pressure test ideas, accelerate documentation, and reduce the manual overhead that slows teams down. It does not define the system for me or replace decision making, and it does not remove the need for alignment with product, engineering, or stakeholders. It simply allows earlier exploration to move faster so more time is spent refining quality, consistency, and usability rather than grinding through busywork.

I also use it outside of work. We are renovating a house in France, and AI has become a communication tool. I photograph a room, define changes, describe camera angles, reference furniture, and generate visual mockups. These are not final outputs. They are alignment tools. They help me articulate intent clearly when working with real photographers, videographers, and contractors later.

Again, AI did not do the thinking. It helped me express it more clearly and faster.

Learning and execution still matter

AI has also helped me learn. I used ChatGPT extensively while rebuilding my site in Framer. Instead of hunting through tutorials for hours, I could ask direct questions and get focused guidance. It did not build the site for me. I still designed it, structured it, and shipped it. It simply reduced friction in learning.

It still took nearly six months to rebuild my book properly. AI did not shortcut that work. It supported it.

We still need designers, arguably more than ever

The current panic about roles disappearing misses the point.

If anything, we need experienced designers more than ever. People who understand systems, nuance, context, and trade offs. AI needs skilled humans to guide it, critique it, and apply it responsibly. It does not replace that expertise.

Junior designers are not obsolete either. They need to learn alongside seniors. Seniors need to teach juniors how to think, not just how to prompt. If you remove juniors, you eventually remove seniors. If you remove designers entirely and expect AI to fill the gap, you lose the human understanding that makes products usable and meaningful in the first place.

Businesses need to understand that the investment is not just in AI software. It is in people who know how to use it well.

Key Takeaway AI is not the end of design. It is another shift in tools. Designers who embrace it thoughtfully, understand its limitations, and apply it with intent will be stronger, not weaker. We do not need fewer designers. We need better supported ones who are willing to learn, adapt, and share knowledge as the tools evolve.