Posted under General
That's just confusing to me, given how much ai generated art is on this site. I don't see the big deal, as long as it's made clear that it's ai. It still artwork of the anime characters people want to see in ways they want to see them. I've tried to upload 5 times and all 5 have been rejected, yet my "favorites" gallery is full of ai generated artwork.
You don't have anything in your gallery tagged ai-generated. If you think it is ask in this thread if it needs the tag. forum #224072
This is a site for real art by real artists, if you want to see AI go to AIbooru don't post it here.
Our current policy is to only permanently delete content that is illegal or otherwise too risky to keep. And there's always a chance of false positives, so it's easier to keep the art and remove the tag instead of hunting the art down again.
AI art was prohibited precisely because it was expected that users would flood the site with it and drown out legitimate art. We stem the tide by manually deleting intentional AI uploads, which penalizes the uploader by filling up five upload slots per manual deletion and prevents them from uploading more. If the uploader continues, they usually get banned to stop them from uploading entirely.
We do allow content that is AI-assisted, meaning there was significant artistic effort such as repainting or that the AI is limited to more minor parts of the image like background elements. But they're still considered borderline content and are less likely to be approved if there was a significant amount of AI contribution. The more work done by the artist, the better.
What about a workflow like InvokeAI, which allows you to create an image with 100% AI-generated pixels, but with a human directing it to repeatedly add more detail? Apparently, copyright was granted on an image generated using InvokeAI.
Would such an image be considered AI-assisted, even if not a single pixel was directly edited by the author?
Not sure how you'd _prove_ that, mind you, short of a video demonstrating the image being created.
dien_rann said:
What about a workflow like InvokeAI, which allows you to create an image with 100% AI-generated pixels, but with a human directing it to repeatedly add more detail? Apparently, copyright was granted on an image generated using InvokeAI.
Would such an image be considered AI-assisted, even if not a single pixel was directly edited by the author?
Not sure how you'd _prove_ that, mind you, short of a video demonstrating the image being created.
That sounds like prompting with extra steps, so it would count as AI-generated in my opinion.
dien_rann said:
What about a workflow like InvokeAI, which allows you to create an image with 100% AI-generated pixels, but with a human directing it to repeatedly add more detail? Apparently, copyright was granted on an image generated using InvokeAI.
Would such an image be considered AI-assisted, even if not a single pixel was directly edited by the author?
Not sure how you'd _prove_ that, mind you, short of a video demonstrating the image being created.
how to tell if an image is ai
1) does it look like ai? then it's probably ai
2) does the artist have 9999 billion posts and their pixiv was created 6 hours ago? then it's probably ai
3) if you ask the artist "hey is this ai?" and he answers "yeah totally bro i used HentaiPornCockVaginaXL_v6.9 for my gens" then it's probably ai
there are also other methods
