AI doesn't replace the thinking — it collapses the setup. I use it to protect design time, shorten brief cycles, and keep the team moving toward a decision instead of still having one.
In retail and education, you either move fast or lose ground. The problem is that design cycles often stall before real work even begins — everyone's still arguing about layout direction, or waiting on references that haven't been made yet.
AI changed that for me. Not as a replacement for the thinking — that part still has to be human — but as a way to collapse the briefing phase. I can put rough visual references in front of a team in an hour instead of a week, test color logic before committing to it, and keep the actual design work where it belongs: solving the communication problem, not setting it up.
Built custom AI agents (like the "Ask Shiv's AI" widget on this portfolio) that can handle customer queries, answer design questions, and pull from a knowledge base — things that used to eat up time I should have spent creating.
Took the AI tools off the mood board and put them into actual production pipelines. Automated parts of the code generation, testing, and layout process — which sounds less exciting than it is, but it's what separates a working system from a prototype.
Used AI for voice work, video editing, and early concept generation. The biggest win was using generative tools to build rough visual references and packaging mocks before opening Illustrator — it cut briefing time from days to a few hours, and it meant the team was aligning on a direction, not still debating one.
Back in college when generative AI was just becoming something people could actually use, I was already running workshops — showing other students what these tools could do for art and design work. It was early, a bit experimental, but that's how I got comfortable with the space.