Should AI ever be used to create stamps?

I ask all the important questions here at Xanthe's Stamp Magazine. For example... Is Royal Mail too interested in the commercial side of things? Why are Polish stamps so good? What are the best ways for young collectors to get their stamps? And are some stamps just not worth the money? (If they're gold stamps with a cartoon picture of Garfield, then the answer is they're definitely not.) I have been looking at German stamps this week and one of them raises an even more important question: should AI be used to create stamps?

Take a look at this stamp (above). It is the Mariana Trench ("Marianengraben") stamp issued by Germany on June 11, 2026. It was the first part of the "Der Mensch als Entdecker" (Humans as Explorers) series.

The "Humans as Explorers" series will not be using humans as designers. All of these stamps are designed by AI - in this case DALL-E. Katrin Kania, a German textile archaeologist and blogger (who is not a stamp collector) wasn't too impressed when she ordered a large number of these stamps for business use. She wrote: "When the stamps arrived and I read the small print on them which goes something something interpreted by an AI, I was not amused. At all.

"Stamps were always something where some designer got to have a really nice exposure (and hopefully also a really nice wad of cash). They were a glimpse into current design trends, and into interpretations of history, or nice photography. They were a means to highlight activists, scientist, explorers, politicians, architects; of historical events larger and smaller, of places both built and natural.

"I am still rather livid about this. I am curating the stamps I use, and now it seems I also have to pay attention not to end up with AI slop. Gaaah."

I thought a lot about that second paragraph, and that if a business owner can be so angry about this then surely philatelists and stamp collectors should be?

Or should we all just accept this is the way stamp design will eventually and inevitably go?

And then I looked at the stamp again. It is clearly either an AI-generated image or one poorly created with design software. It doesn't look convincing and I'm not impressed. But that isn't really the important question - what actually matters are the questions Katrin asks about the importance of stamp design.

I had a look on various forums to see what the views of fellow collectors were and... nothing. I thought that was surprising.

This isn't the first time Germany has used AI to design its stamps and it certainly won't be the last. In 2024 Deutsche Post made an error with a crypto stamp (something I've never really understood the point of) of Cologne Cathedral.

What was wrong with it? Basically, it's not Cologne Cathedral. The AI has "added details that are either outdated or never existed". The Kölner Stadtanzeiger newspaper pointed out these errors, leaving Deutsche Post red-faced. Here is an accurate image of Cologne Cathedral:

Cologne Cathedral (Photo: Yellow Korner)

The most obvious incorrect detail is the round window above the central door - DALL-E has made it up! Yikes! Now, what is interesting is Deutche Post's response. A spokesperson for DHL Group (of which Deutsche Post is part) said: "We simply left the depiction of Cologne Cathedral to artificial intelligence and deliberately refrained from intervening in the design process afterward. The result also shows how artificial intelligence works, that not everything is always true to life". What??? Not "intervening in the process" is like asking someone to write an article and not proof-reading it. Or asking someone to paint your living room and not point out the spot they missed under the window. Why shouldn't AI be "intervened" with? In much the same way designers and artists work collaboratively, if AI is going to be used why shouldn't it be subject to the same review processes? This bothers me much more than the idea of using AI. AI should serve humans, not the other way round. If it is used then it is a tool, not something that has the freedom to do whatever it wants without anyone looking over the finished product.

It does feel more like an excuse than a reason, but I seriously have a problem with this idea that humans can't interfere with an AI design process. If AI makes mistakes, or it comes up with something that isn't quite what is asked for, why on earth shouldn't it try again? Or why can't humans tweak the images to make them more accurate? And then we have the final statement, which I found quite funny but probably shoudn't. "The result also shows how artificial intelligence works, that not everything is always true to life" - well, this is another excuse and not a reason. But let's just imagine this is serious. Was the point of the stamp really to show how AI works (or in this case didn't work)? And "not everything is true to life"... well, would you accept incorrect details from a human designer? If not, why should it be different for AI? Or is this just an excuse for laziness and a total lack of scrutiny? Call me a traditionalist (I'm not) but I think if you're going to ask any designer, whether human, AI or alien, to create an image of a famous real-life cathedral you want something that genuinely looks like that cathedral, not a different church that doesn't actually exist because "not everything is true to life". It seems the only human input into the process for the Cologne Cathedral stamp was to enter this prompt: "Create a colorful pixel artwork of the famous cologne cathedral. The sky should feature dramatic clouds in vibrant colors, highlighting the dreamy atmosphere of the artwork. The cathedral should be situated on a big square with groups of people taking in the sight. The square should be surrounded by smaller buildings, emphasizing the scale of the cathedral in comparison." * That's not a good prompt and it definitely isn't design. Even I would know to add a real photograph and emphasise key details. Ireland created its first AI-desgined stamp (again, a crypto stamp) in 2024 but this worked better because the theme was "Imagine Ireland" and so an odd-looking futuristic landscape didn't seem so inappropriate. That said, I'm not sure I really want to imagine an Ireland with tiny three-legged people (circled).

An Post, however, did make a better statement than DHL Group. Talking about how they intend to use AI, a spokesperson said "we have a longstanding practice of applying innovation to our business – in this case, digital innovation meets one of our most traditional products; stamps. This stamp issue allows for a creative reimagining of housing and transport, blending the familiar with the fantastical to suggest new ways of living in harmony with Ireland’s natural landscapes." AI artist / designer Kasia Ozmin said: “AI’s place in art should be as an aid, not a replacement for human creativity. It amplifies what we, as artists, can achieve, allowing us to explore new realms of imagination and expression that were previously inaccessible." I think this attitude to using AI is much better than the "leave AI to do everything and don't worry about the inevitable mistakes" approach Deutsche Post seems to prefer. However, I am not sure what "new realms of imagiantion and expression" were "previously inacsessible". Artists have always pushed boundaries on imagination and expression. I think AI makes things easier and definiely quicker, but is it really doing artistic things that were previously impossible? China's first AI-created stamps (issued in June this year) were actually about AI, so that made some kind of sense. Far more sense than using AI for a set about human exploration. The big difference between this quite interesting set and something like the Cologne Cathedral stamp is that the process was overseen by Wang Huming, a very skilled and experienced stamp artist who worked in conjunction with AI technology and had a team of engineers for technical tasks. The non-design side of things was run by editor Liu Jian, who "supervised the thematic structure [and checked for] historical factual accuracy." So no danger of not "intervening in the process" here.

As a result the finished article is pretty good and shows what happens when skilled designers work with AI.

What do I think? I think that we will see more AI used in stamp design simply because it's there, not because it is better. I think stamps will become less creative because of this. I also think that, unless there are humans involved in the process, you're going to see a lot of mistakes in stamp design.

I like Kasia Ozmin's attitude towards AI but, while I don't have any problem with artists using it as a tool, I can also imagine many postal adminsitrations will become like Deutsche Post and just have someone entering a prompt into DALL-E with no real artistic process. That would not be good for stamp design. AI will make designing stamps quicker and cheaper, but probably not improve actual design. Will it be the end for stamp design as we know it? It's too early to say, but I think we need to listen to what Katrin Kania says about how stamps are "a glimpse into current design trends, and into interpretations of history" - that simply won't happen with AI. My dad asked me "would you like stamps that are culturally shallow?" and I know what he means. AI can't give you the genius of David Gentleman. No-one wants stamps that are soulless.

Of course, there is also the concern a lot of people have about the future of creative industries. If you replace skilled artists with AI, you lose real expertise and designs will all look pretty much the same. As all posters for church events and sports club fun days already do... The most important question is one that no-one I have mentioned has asked - neither Katrin Kania nor Kasia Ozmin, nor anyone from Deutsche Post, An Post or China Post. It is this. Why do we need to use AI?

Before changing processes that work well, we should be clear about what, if anything, needs fixing. As far as I can see, AI has the potential to create a lot of problems without really solving any.

* I entered this exact prompt into ChatGPT (without a photo for reference) and this was the result:

The perspective is now more accurate and the people are now a reasonable size! The windows are now the correct type! It's even got the Hohenzollernbrücke (railway bridge) in there, which is an accurate feature although it would be a little further to the right. However, the buildings on the left are wrong and the museum on the right of the square has disappeared. Also, the West-facing front of the Cathedral has somehow been moved around to the South side, which should actually look like this:

Also, the sun does not set in the North! The fact is you're not going to get a good AI image of Cologne Cathedral - or anything else - unless a human does more than write a generalised prompt. If AI is going to be used more in stamp design - and I am sure it will - it is important that creative people work with it to ensure accuracy and hopefully maintain some level of artistic flair. (Thanks to my mum and dad for helping me with this article.)