Can I use AI to make my headshots?

The honest answer

Honestly, it depends. AI-generated headshots exist on a spectrum.

Some are obviously fake, some are indistinguishable from professional photography. Where yours falls on that spectrum determines whether it helps or hurts you.

When AI headshots can work

AI headshots can be acceptable when they look completely realistic, actually indistinguishable from a well-lit photo taken by a competent photographer.

They also need to accurately represent how you look. The number one complaint about AI headshots is that they make people look like idealized versions of themselves. If your AI headshot looks better than you do in person, it will hurt you. Casting directors remember when someone walks in looking different from their photo.

They work when you use them for the right purposes. Exploratory submissions, self-tapes where you need a quick update, testing a new look before committing to a full photo session. For smaller auditions or background work, standards are lower.

And they work better when the role doesn't require high-end submissions. Major theatrical agents and top-tier casting offices have higher standards. Independent projects, student films, and local commercials are more forgiving.

When AI headshots don't work

AI headshots cause problems when they have artifacts. Strange textures in skin or hair. Asymmetrical features that look off. Backgrounds that blur in unnatural ways. Jewelry or clothing with odd distortions. Eyes that are technically correct but feel "dead" or uncanny.

The biggest issue is when they don't look like you. AI tends to smooth skin, symmetrize features, and create a "perfected" version. If your headshot looks 25 and you're 35, you've created a problem. Casting directors talk about actors who don't match their photos. It's not a good reputation to have.

There's also the problem of looking like every other AI headshot. There's a specific "AI headshot" aesthetic emerging: overly smooth, slightly plastic, generically attractive. Experienced casting directors are starting to recognize it. Standing out means looking real, and AI often pushes toward a homogenized look.

And if you're submitting for high-level representation or major roles, top agents and managers expect professional photography. Submitting AI-generated headshots to a major talent agency signals that you're not serious about your career. Fair or not, that's the current reality.

What "realistic enough" actually means

Here's a practical test: show your AI headshot to five people who don't know it's AI. Ask them if anything looks off. If even one person notices something strange, the photo fails the test.

Professional casting directors look at thousands of photos. They're unconsciously trained to notice when something is wrong, even if they can't articulate what. A photo that creates even slight visual discomfort will work against you.

"Realistic enough" means no artifacts whatsoever. Natural skin texture, including imperfections. Eyes that feel alive and present. Hair that behaves like real hair. Lighting that makes sense physically. An expression that feels genuine, not composed.

If all of that is true, you might have a usable AI headshot!

The comparison problem

Here's something AI headshot companies don't advertise: your AI headshot is competing against professional headshots taken by photographers who specialize in actors.

Those photographers know how to light faces. They know how to direct expressions. They know what reads on camera and what doesn't. They've spent years learning how to make actors look their best while still looking like themselves.

AI is getting better, but "better" is relative. The real question is whether an AI headshot can compete with what professional photography offers.

For most actors, the answer is still: not quite.

When AI makes sense

There are legitimate uses for AI headshots.

Quick updates between sessions. If you've changed your hair or lost weight and need something to submit while you book a real session, AI can bridge the gap.

Exploring looks. Trying to figure out if you should go theatrical or commercial? AI can generate options quickly to help you decide what to bring to a real shoot.

Budget constraints. A professional headshot session costs money. If you genuinely cannot afford one, a well-done AI headshot is better than an iPhone selfie. But it's a stopgap, not a long-term solution.

Supplementary shots. Some actors use AI for additional looks beyond their main headshots. A different wardrobe, a different energy. This can work if the quality is high.

The disclosure question

Should you tell people your headshot is AI-generated?

There's no industry consensus. But consider this: if you're worried about being found out, that's a sign the headshot isn't good enough. A truly realistic AI headshot wouldn't raise the question.

If someone asks directly, honesty is usually the right policy. Casting directors are more likely to respect transparency than to catch you in a deception.

A practical suggestion

For most actors, the best approach is to get professional headshots first. That remains the gold standard. Use AI for exploration and quick updates, not for primary submissions. Be ruthlessly honest about quality. If there's any doubt, the photo isn't ready. And stay informed, because AI is improving rapidly. What doesn't work today might work in six months.

Your headshot is often the first (and only) thing standing between you and an audition. It's worth investing in getting it right. AI can be a tool in that process, but it's not yet a replacement for the real thing.

The bottom line

AI headshots are accepted when they're virtually indistinguishable from professional photography and accurately represent how you look. Your run of the mill "ChatGPT, update my headshot" prompt probably is not going to cut it there.

Be honest with yourself about whether your AI headshot clears that bar. If it does, use it. If it doesn't, invest in the real thing. Your career depends on showing up authentically, and that starts with your headshot.