@eromelon I'm not dealing with your esoteric replies like this. This topic is already annoying to read. If you start another pointless argument with another user on this topic again for any reason or post another snide remark I'm going to ban you for 3 months. This topic is meant to be a resource for helping spot AI-generated content. If you want to disagree with someone then write a proper post explaining why, not all this argument-bait bullshit you've been up to for however long it's been.
is considered a good reply here. I am a good guy, so I will post good reply like this from now on. And this is what exactly I did in my last reply here.
As what you said, if you want to disagree with me, write a proper post explaining why.
Just normal art by an amateur. You can check the blue flowers on the left and right—they're the same repeated pattern. The fingers also have three phalanges, and the hemline of the skirt is intact.
post #11657843 (explicit) Image uploaded with no artist or source. Someone off-site called it out as AI, although the only suspicious detail I can find are Diana's wands around her waist.
Not sure why it still hasn't been removed from the site. Confetto asked about AI artifacts, and this entire image is basically an encyclopedia of them. There isn't a single line in the image that was drawn by a human, literally.
Also, there is no true white anywhere in the image because it was destroyed by a crappy upscaler; it's just blue noise.
kenfox_s said in forum #451794: Not sure why it still hasn't been removed from the site. Confetto asked about AI artifacts, and this entire image is basically an encyclopedia of them. There isn't a single line in the image that was drawn by a human, literally.
Also, there is no true white anywhere in the image because it was destroyed by a crappy upscaler; it's just blue noise.
Asking for a second look on post #11169470 + post #11169469 (and other posts by the same artist). The artstyle is similar to popular AI models and the eyelashes in particular look melty and asymmetrical in a way that reads as AI to me, but there's such a heavy grain filter imposed on the artist's posts that it makes it hard to look for other artifacts. The artstyles in the artist's posts are also rather inconsistent (not automatically an indicator of AI but something to keep in mind).
According to my DM with the uploader, these works from Skeb had the sample watermark cleaned with AI by them. post #11637736 (sensitive) post #11637843 (sensitive)
According to my DM with the uploader, these works from Skeb had the sample watermark cleaned with AI by them. post #11637736 (sensitive) post #11637843 (sensitive)
Asking for a second look on post #11169470 + post #11169469 (and other posts by the same artist). The artstyle is similar to popular AI models and the eyelashes in particular look melty and asymmetrical in a way that reads as AI to me, but there's such a heavy grain filter imposed on the artist's posts that it makes it hard to look for other artifacts. The artstyles in the artist's posts are also rather inconsistent (not automatically an indicator of AI but something to keep in mind).
He's on the site (self-upload), so someone could ask him to provide the files for his latest works. user #1535671 I'd also ask why he doesn't know the character's design — these images have two completely different tails.
1. These are two different tails: different colors, different fluffiness. 2. He can't seem to decide whether the bell is in front of or behind the hair (both images). 3. The left hand is rendered properly, while the right was clumsily outlined. 4. He started tracing the staff, then quickly gave up. 5. These lines were added at the final stage (and done incorrectly). Either he noticed that the skirt had turned into an unreadable mess and tried to give it some structure, or he deliberately added them to leave signs of human involvement (he knows this site checks for AI). 6. Don't like these edges. They're unnecessary extra work, especially for a character whose canonical design has a perfectly normal skirt. 7. A dumb use of noise by someone who doesn't understand what they're doing. Both images are practically destroyed.
IMO, his actual drawing style pixiv #141191927. After that, img2img to smooth out the rough edges. That would explain the jagged dress edges. And then he drops an atomic bomb of blur and noise to wipe out any remaining detail.
pixiv #146193697 text artifacts on the tattoo; pixiv #146262922 text artifacts on the girl on the right; pixiv #144894044 nonsensical background details; pixiv #144307599 inconsistent clothing designs and different logos. In the first image, Hermione's leg disappears. The bench (the last image) also has different edges.
Honestly, I don't suspect it, but I think I have a bad eye for this stuff and a few of my uploads have been flagged. Also, technically off topic, but is it preferred to source images from pixiv if they're available from there? I use the auto-post shortcut when browsing twitter, but it's easy enough to change if this is dis-preferred.
