This Isn’t Really Me, But It’s What AI Thinks I Should Be

What happens when a beauty editor stops directing the shoot and starts starring in it: thanks to the internet’s most viral AI beauty app? I trialled Glam AI to see what one of most powerful digital image generator could dream up. The results? A surreal scroll of high-glam digital avatars: me in diamonds, on yachts, wrapped in furs, and flanked by designer pets. The dopamine hit was instant. But so was the identity crisis.

In this honest exploration, I unpack the emotional rollercoaster of seeing yourself reimagined by artificial intelligence, from fantasy fulfilment to body image angst: and the bigger questions this technology raises for the beauty industry. We also invited our audience to weigh in, and their responses reveal just how divided (and deeply affected) we all are by AI’s growing role in beauty.

It’s a question that’s trending on Google right now: Q: Should I try AI-generated portraits?

The answer in a nutshell? A: They’re fun, fantastical and hyper-flattering , but they also reveal what tech really thinks beauty looks like. And that’s where things get complicated.

I fell down a rabbit hole. Not the kind involving late white rabbits or existential crises about time (although, sure, those too), but the kind paved with perfect skin, ballgowns, desert sunsets and very implausible poodles.

It started with a casual test of an image generator app that lets you upload a few photos and choose your fantasy shoot settings: think Vogue Arabia meets Upper East Side old money meets Disney-on-a-desert-safari. And honestly? I was hooked.

What is Glam AI and how does it work?

In a matter of minutes, I was suddenly starring in a luxury yacht editorial, posing in a fantastical ski resort, and swanning through desert dunes in couture, flanked by leopards and flamingos. Furs draped across shoulders, diamonds glitter under desert light, and wild animals posed—eerily still—as if they knew their mark. I was even tempted to see what I’d look like as a muscle-bound body builder (because it’s the closest I’ll ever come!) It was like being the protagonist of a highly aspirational fever dream. The kind of grand scale shoot we poured thousands into when I was working at Vogue, but never starred in ourselves.

There’s a rush to seeing yourself this way. As someone who’s worked on beauty shoots for decades, I’ve spent years behind the camera. Now, Glam AI (here’s a special code) was putting me in front of it: styled, polished and lit in ways that would normally cost tens of thousands and a team of ten. And yet… no crew, no effort, no makeup chair time. Just… me, in a fantasy land. But then came the gut punch.

Looking back at the images, once the initial dopamine hit wore off, I started to notice things. Arms, long and impossibly lean. A waist, cinched to fairytale proportions. Posture that could belong to a ballerina. None of it was me.

“And with that the glamour curdled. Because what AI thinks I should look like… isn’t me.”

When you see yourself represented in these heightened, idealised ways, it raises some uncomfortable questions. Why does AI default to a single aesthetic version of beauty? Where are the wrinkles? The freckles? The crooked smiles, the soft stomachs, the strong thighs? The human bits?

Is AI Beauty Reinforcing Unrealistic Standards?

It reminded me of Dove’s recent campaign, “Beauty in the AI Age” where they showed what AI thinks beauty is , and it’s terrifying. Samey, soulless, and surgically pristine. Not a gap-tooth or dimple in sight.

And as I kept scrolling through the many images the app had spat out, I began to feel the weight of something bigger. It reminded me of when we first started using photo editing apps. This is like that on steroids. What does this mean for beauty standards? For girls growing up in a world where their most-liked selfies are AI-generated? And beyond that , what does this mean for the people whose real job it is to create and translate “beauty”? I

Can AI Ever Replace Real Creatives?

Because here’s the thing. I’ve spent much of my career working with some of the most talented photographers, stylists, makeup artists and creatives in the industry. I’ve seen the hours it takes to get one perfect shot , the coffee-fuelled 6am call times, the makeup retouches, the light tweaks, the emotional coaxing to get that one true spark in someone’s eyes. I’ve watched hairstylists use leaf blowers to create that windswept look, I’ve cried happy tears over a freckled, beaming beauty looking like herself , but elevated. That magic doesn’t come from a text prompt.

"AI doesn’t see humanity. It sees templates."

And unless you very specifically tell it otherwise, it defaults to the same: chiseled jawlines, tiny waists, symmetrical faces, nothing “off”. But often, the magic is in the off. That’s where real beauty lives.

Is there an ethical way to use AI-generated beauty imagery?

There is a flip side. For small creators, solo founders, and brands with zero budget, AI offers possibility. The chance to visualise creative concepts, produce mockups, even play with aesthetic worlds they could never afford to shoot IRL. I see the appeal. I feel it myself. I’m tempted to use some of the images from my Glam AI experiment as a springboard for editorial stories , product-based content with a wink of fantasy.

As a business woman, I can’t deny the time and money that’s saved from these resources. When I’m shooting myself for the site, we take at least 60 photos to get three half decent ones. The shoot takes a day. Culling the duds takes hours. To be able to generate a suite of inspirational, aspirational images to accompany any article I can dream up in minutes? It seems mad not to use this tech.

But if I do, I’ll be transparent. Whenever we use an AI image we’ll use a watermark as you see on these photos. We need to clearly label AI-generated content. We absolutely should be talking about it. And let’s resist the urge to pass these hyper-perfected versions off as real.

While there’s no official law (yet) requiring us to label AI images, initiatives like Adobe’s Content Credentials and the C2PA standard are a step in the right direction. And honestly, if I’m going to keep a few of these fantasy portraits in my feed , I’d rather be transparent about it. A watermark, a caption, even a cheeky disclaimer. Because if this technology is going to coexist with real, human beauty… we owe it to our audience to keep it real.

What my followers on social thought

I posted some of these images to social and asked our audience for their thoughts. A staggering 63% of respondees said they use AI every day already, while 37% don’t. As for AI image generation: 35% said it was a threat to real artists and 10% said it was a cool creative tool while the majority (37%) said it was a bit of both.

When I posted to the feed, most of the responses were positive with a lot of people wanting to know which app I used. Comedian and podcaster @tamara_linke_offical said “If used ethically it has th e potential to be great – otherwise it’s killing creativity, jobs and the ability to think for ourselves”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Beauty: It’s an Inside Job. (@sigourneycantelo)

But when I asked the questions on stories for more detailed responses it got more nuanced. I asked the creatives and makeup artist @pascalemakeup said “AI has the potential to ruin what is already an extremely tough industry to survive in” while my friend, fashion photographer @claire_wallman said she likes playing with creative AI for “subtle fun creative” but when it’s the “whole model and everything is fake it’s too much.”

Ultimately the responses were divided. We had a lot of comments saying that it still looks too fake and it’s a slippery slope. @maudiescott made the point that, “As the consumer, I don’t know what’s real anymore, ” but on the flipside, @clare_terry said she would use it “to visualise a creative concept and iterate – quickly.”

Should I Use AI Images on My Brand or Feed?

Well, in this case, these images already exist. I’ve generated them. They’re sitting in a folder. Ignoring them now feels wasteful, kind of like buying a vintage fur: the damage is done, but do you let it go unused? There’s even talk that every AI prompt has a real-world footprint, some researchers estimate that generating a single AI image can consume as much water as a small bottle being poured away. Multiply that by billions, and the impact becomes hard to ignore. So if I’m going to use them, I’ll do it consciously. I’ll leave out the tiny waists and spindly arms, and choose the shots that actually could be me, in an alternate universe.

And we need to support the creatives who make beauty with their hands, their eyes, their art, not just their code.

The Verdict — A Tool, Not a Truth

Maybe the answer isn’t black and white at all.

I believe we owe it to our creative community to evolve with it. That might mean retraining, reframing, or finding new roles for artists, editors, and stylists in an AI-augmented workflow. Maybe we use these hyperreal portraits alongside real shoots, not instead of them. Watermarking and labelling AI images clearly should be required and we need to advocate for platforms that prioritise realism, diversity and consent. The point is: we can be both cautious and curious. The future is coming either way — so let’s help shape it, rather than shy away from it.

Maybe it’s about embracing these tools for what they can do , while also fiercely protecting what they can’t.

The nuance. The emotion. The connection. The real.

What do you think? Would you use AI-generated images of yourself? Do you already? And how do you feel when you see others doing it?

Let’s keep the conversation going , because the tech is only getting better. But hopefully, so are we.

Everything You Wanted to Know About AI Portraits (But Didn’t Know Who to Ask)

Curious? Here’s what you’ve been DMing me—and what I’ve discovered along the way.

Q: How can I generate AI images of myself for free?

A: Upload a few selfies into an AI generator like Glam AI, pick a fantasy theme, and boom—you’re in your own editorial shoot.

Q: Is there a completely free AI image generator app?

A: Most apps like DALL·E and Glam AI offer freemium model,free trials but then they charge for high-res downloads or watermark removal. Truly free options are limited.

Q: What is the best AI image generator app?

A: It depends on what you want. Glam AI is great for hyper-feminine, editorial-style images. DALL·E and Midjourney are better for artistic experimentation.

Q: Are AI-generated beauty images harmful?

A: They can reinforce unrealistic standards and erase diversity , unless used transparently and with intention.

Q: Can AI-generated content be sustainable?

A: Generating AI images requires significant energy. Use sparingly and label clearly to minimise impact.

Written by Sigourney Cantelo and images generated by AI