AI-generated art check thread

Posted under General

WRS said:

I know that you're really playing into this AI witchhunting persona of yours so much so as to buy access to gain more information, and it is unfortunate to have that revealed (I'm surprised I didn't catch the mention of it), but I should remind you to be careful about how you present words. This would qualify as AI-assisted, which unlike AI-generated is not against the rules to upload. There are many artists who have active posts here who trace over or compliment a generated piece with fully their own skill; and "experimenting using AI for a bit" does not mean "most" of their works are generated/assisted per your (or whoever's) flag reason. We shouldn't discredit an artist's entire works over the years because of recent dabbling with having AI assist but not fully create works.

I do appreciate their transparency and your findings though. Not many artists are willing to admit unfortunately.

what's the difference between assisted and generated? most of the people abusing ai to scam people out of their money cannot draw to begin with. having ai do 95% of the work is extremely unfair if you're trying to label yourself as an artist and never disclose the use of ai to your customers. also, i didn't pay for this. i reached out to a more knowledgeable forum and someone there was able to retrieve this from a few months back. but i appreciate you talking down at me because im persistent.

no one should have a platform or audience if theyre using ai. i know this is going to be hard to understand if you cant make art yourself but this is pretty shitty for skilled artists to have to put up with.

ai-tracker said:

[...] (forum #359777)

You see why I say what I said? I only prodded the bear just a little bit and you revealed all on your own how disingenuous your self-righteous hunt for AI content is by equating talentless hacks who spam unedited slop onto their social media accounts with those who use it only as a reference point or to help them in their tasks, to which help was the initial intention of AI. One dabble and you attempt to discredit the artist's full career over it.

It's almost as if half the time the people who claim to be confident something is fully generated and take a moral high ground over it are full of crap and use a little bit of a silver lining to overreact over everything else, including the content that definitely could not possibly be involved with AI in even the smallest capacity.

I hate full AI generation as much as the other person, but the anti-AI crowd are becoming just as loud and annoying as the people who lie that they don't use it.

WRS said:

You see why I say what I said? I only prodded the bear just a little bit and you revealed all on your own how disingenuous your self-righteous hunt for AI content is by equating talentless hacks who spam unedited slop onto their social media accounts with those who use it only as a reference point or to help them in their tasks, to which help was the initial intention of AI. One dabble and you attempt to discredit the artist's full career over it.

It's almost as if half the time the people who claim to be confident something is fully generated and take a moral high ground over it are full of crap and use a little bit of a silver lining to overreact over everything else, including the content that definitely could not possibly be involved with AI in even the smallest capacity.

I hate full AI generation as much as the other person, but the anti-AI crowd are becoming just as loud and annoying as the people who lie that they don't use it.

It is interesting how people attack others' thoughts in a thread where they should focusing on discussing about whether an artwork is AI-generated or not.
I would recommend providing a list about what "evidence" is allowed to show an artwork is AI-generated in this thread so we could save us some time.

Updated by eromelon

InsomniacTwin said:

asset #26032522

AI or nah?

Straight AI. The white background isn't actually white(it alternates sporadically between a few close-in-value off-whites) and there's a lot of areas where the hatching is completely nonsensical. Also checking through their pixiv their signature is identical across anything that has it on it, it's just a single layer copy/pasted over top everything and at most rotated/resized. You can just overlay them on top of eachother in photoshop with transparency and they'll line right up.

eromelon said:

[...] (forum #359939)

To reiterate, I'm fine with their initial-yet-vague assessment that there is AI involvement - it came from the horse's mouth, so some posts are definitely at the very least AI-assisted no matter which way it's spun. Going off of the message logs, it seems to start from around post #8906882 but it could be earlier too so evidence would still be helpful on a per-piece basis before having the tag added.

Ultimately the part that "ai-tracker" conveniently refused to acknowledge was that the artist paints over the generation themselves or has AI fix their own sketch (as with the post linked earlier), ergo their own skill. The style looks consistent enough to me with all their works over the years to not suggest any full move to AI-generated works.

It is interesting how people attack others' thoughts in a thread where they should focusing on discussing about whether an artwork is AI-generated or not.

Agreed. This topic is for checking for AI-generated/AI-assisted works, getting them the proper tag and flagging if needed. This is the wrong place to soapbox in and will result in too much noise when these megathreads are for getting signal.

I ended up talking to the intial flagger and tagger for Nekonui over DMs (as it turned out to not be a case of vandalism but someone who made an account in an effort to warn people and had no idea how we do things here, resulting in the misunderstanding). And upon closer examination, I am much more inclined to agree that they're AI-generated, given their history.

What's weird to me is that the current Nekonui account has all the uploads of a notable art style...But then you compare it to things like https://x.com/holoindie/status/1664393755473104896?t=3Ek905S_Z4mc3D4HGkoDVA which are very blatantly AI-generated. But I've been trying to actively avoid a shoot first and ask questions later mentality in regards to these, as the last thing we need is even more AI witch hunts, but I definitely think this artist should be more closely examined. That's my two cents at least. I'm not the greatest at spotting this kind of thing (though I do like to think I've been getting better at it).

I added the tags for now on this one (as this artist has deleted uploads for this thing). But I think further discussion by people better at spotting this thing would be much appreciated.

Knowledge_Seeker said:

I ended up talking to the intial flagger and tagger for Nekonui over DMs (as it turned out to not be a case of vandalism but someone who made an account in an effort to warn people and had no idea how we do things here, resulting in the misunderstanding). And upon closer examination, I am much more inclined to agree that they're AI-generated, given their history.

What's weird to me is that the current Nekonui account has all the uploads of a notable art style...But then you compare it to things like https://x.com/holoindie/status/1664393755473104896?t=3Ek905S_Z4mc3D4HGkoDVA which are very blatantly AI-generated. But I've been trying to actively avoid a shoot first and ask questions later mentality in regards to these, as the last thing we need is even more AI witch hunts, but I definitely think this artist should be more closely examined. That's my two cents at least. I'm not the greatest at spotting this kind of thing (though I do like to think I've been getting better at it).

I added the tags for now on this one (as this artist has deleted uploads for this thing). But I think further discussion by people better at spotting this thing would be much appreciated.

So now you are saying posting https://x.com/holoindie/status/1664393755473104896 for Nekonui would be "AI witchhunting" but you are allowed to say their latest artworks seem to be AI-generated with the only reason being your "closer examination". Interesting.
I hope the answer to the question "what 'evidence' is allowed to show an artwork is AI-generated" would not be your "closer examination". In that case we would need to ask for your agreement everytime and it will take up too much of your time.

eromelon said:

So now you are saying posting https://x.com/holoindie/status/1664393755473104896 for Nekonui would be "AI witchhunting" but you are allowed to say their latest artworks seem to be AI-generated with the only reason being your "closer examination". Interesting.
I hope the answer to the question "what 'evidence' is allowed to show an artwork is AI-generated" would not be your "closer examination". In that case we would need to ask for your agreement everytime and it will take up too much of your time.

How did you pull that from what I fucking said? Also, people can change their mind. I'm not asking for people to agree with me, I'm just asking for people to talk about it on the offchance I am wrong. As it stands, this sort of thing is completely unproductive, and we already got enough fingerpointing as is. Unless you have something actually of value to say that actually serves the purpose of this thread, I'd appreciate refraining from these takes and focusing more on determining the scope of AI usage.

Knowledge_Seeker said:

How did you pull that from what I fucking said? Also, people can change their mind. I'm not asking for people to agree with me, I'm just asking for people to talk about it on the offchance I am wrong. As it stands, this sort of thing is completely unproductive, and we already got enough fingerpointing as is. Unless you have something actually of value to say that actually serves the purpose of this thread, I'd appreciate refraining from these takes and focusing more on determining the scope of AI usage.

My apologies. I should have made it explicit.

You say you don't want more AI witch hunts but you just said you agreed that Nekonui's artworks are AI-generated, and the only reason you gave was your "closer examination" without revealing any details. So I just made fun of you because if you hate AI witch hunts so much then your "closer examination" must be something so reliable that we don't need more details to come to the AI-generated conclusion.

Or, if you would like to add some details about your "closer examination" now, it is still not too late and I would be glad to hear them. As what you said, we should focus more on determining the scope of AI usage. I guess it would be a great example for people determining an artist use AI or not without falling into AI witch hunts.

I want to ask and check whether post #9407937 and the rest of the artist works in their pixiv page i uploaded is AI-generated or not, because at first i thought artist looks legit until i checked the time gap between their posts, and the short gap smells like a red flag, and i accidentally uploaded it before consulting it here.