When Your Face Isn’t Fully Yours Anymore

Living Through the Rise of AI Models and Deepfake Identity

Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about what it means to “own” your face — not in a poetic way, but in the very real sense that your face can be recorded, recreated, and circulated without you ever touching the project. In the modeling world, your face is a job, a brand, and a piece of yourself you share with the public. And with the rise of AI-generated images and deepfakes, that boundary has started to blur in ways none of us were prepared for.

Tom Graham’s TED Talk about the creativity and danger of deepfakes made something click for me. I’ve seen the exciting side of AI — the part that feels like the future. I’ve also seen the part that feels like a warning. And the strange part is that both exist at the same time.

Before I talk about the risks…

I’ve worked with an AI-modeling company under a proper contract. They captured my movements, expressions, and angles to build an AI version of me. Everything was transparent. My privacy was protected. And every use of my AI likeness comes with compensation. It was safe, respectful, even empowering. I felt like I was participating in the evolution of my own industry.

But the more I learned about what happens outside controlled environments like that, the more I realized:

My safe experience is not what most models get.

There is a whole world where AI is being used without asking the person whose face is being replicated. And some of those people will never know.

If your appearance has ever been part of your work, you start seeing the cracks in the system immediately. The law is far behind the technology. Portrait rights and publicity rights were built for real photographs — not for digital clones created from scraped images or training data collected without consent.

Right now, depending on the country, someone could build an AI version of your face, give it a body, put it in an advertisement, and profit from it — and you might not have a clear legal right to stop them. Some law firms have already warned that the legal framework is not ready for deepfakes. Industry reports are saying the same thing for fashion models. None of us have a clean answer to the simple question:

“What happens when your face is copied by AI without your permission?”

And that uncertainty is the problem.

Because without clear rules, everything becomes a grey zone — which is the perfect place for exploitation.

The only thing protecting you right now is whether the company using your likeness chooses to behave ethically. And I don’t think that should depend on luck.

I’m in this strange position where I’ve experienced the best and worst possibilities of AI at the same time. On one side, AI modeling — done correctly — is genuinely exciting. It creates new opportunities, reduces the pressure of constant physical shoots, and opens doors models never had before. It can even protect our health and reduce industry waste. There’s a future where AI helps models work smarter, not harder, and I honestly want to believe in that future.

But on the other side, there’s this feeling I can’t shake — the fear of losing control over the one thing that defines my career: my face. What if a synthetic version of me shows up somewhere I never agreed to be? What if “I” appear in a campaign wearing something I would never wear, saying something I would never stand for? What if the digital me behaves in ways the real me wouldn’t?

And what scares me even more is this thought:

If unauthorized AI models become normal, then even the legitimate AI work I did could lose its value.

People might not trust any AI likenesses anymore. Everything becomes suspicious. The line between “approved” and “stolen” disappears.

For models, that line isn’t just professional — it’s deeply personal. It’s about identity, agency, income, dignity, and the right to choose where and how our faces exist. AI isn’t just a tool; it’s a mirror that can be manipulated indefinitely. And once your digital reflection escapes your control, it’s almost impossible to pull it back.

So yes — AI can be dangerous.

And yes — AI can also be safe.

I’ve lived both sides. And the difference between them is one thing: consent.

Not vague approval. Not assumptions.

Real, explicit, written consent with clear boundaries and legal protection.

If the fashion world doesn’t draw that line soon, we may end up in a future where models aren’t asked anymore — only copied.

Graham, T. (2023, May 19). The incredible creativity of deepfakes — and the worrying future of AI [Video]. TED Talks. https://www.ted.com/talks/tom_graham_the_incredible_creativity_of_deepfakes_and_the_worrying_future_of_ai

British fashion models and the threat of AI. (n.d.). https://brc.org.uk/news-and-events/news/legal/2025/ungated/british-fashion-models-and-the-threat-of-ai/

Carruthers Law | Deepfakes and English Law | AI misrepresentation explained. (2025, October 21). Carruthers Law. https://www.carruthers-law.co.uk/articles/deepfake-law-uk-ai-misrepresentation/

Mayne, K. (2025, October 16). Could the UK follow Denmark’s proposal to regulate AI-generated deepfakes through copyright law? Appleyard Lees. https://www.appleyardlees.com/deepfake-proposal-to-regulate-deepfakes/