Posted under General
wavedash said:
Are post #7659636 and post #7534374 AI-assisted?
Agreed that about the odd things in post #7534374, especially the wood. I'm not certain enough to definitively say it's ai-assisted, but it wouldn't surprise me. I'm less certain about the other post.
123kid said:
Just wanted to make sure before approving some of the currently pending ones.
I don't see anything obvious; I lean towards human nevermind; see below
Updated by Placeholder1996
123kid said:
Just wanted to make sure before approving some of the currently pending ones.
AI with some parts drawn over. Plenty of machine-generated details left over, like the left strap blending with skin/clothing and the belt area in post #10078794, bra straps not following continuity under the hoodie in post #10078941. You can easily see where it's been drawn over by messing around with the gamma, images are full of diffusion noise except in select areas, example: https://imgur.com/a/R9m0ZJG
wavedash said:
Are post #7659636 and post #7534374 AI-assisted? Former seems to have some kind of weird tangerine/egg hybrid, latter has very strange wooden flooring and a suspicious background. Having a hard time finding other stand-out examples of weird background from their work though; they use a lot of blurring as depth of field and their recent art doesn't have backgrounds.
I saw someone accuse the making-of asset #33340499 for post #9183750 actually being a tracing (of AI art). I'm not knowledgeable enough about drawing to say for sure, but it definitely does NOT look like a normal making-of to me.
The making-of is 100% traced from a hidden layer and anyone who's ever drawn anything will tell you the same, the lineart spawns perfectly into existence at first try with no backtracking, ctrl+z, no corrections, not even the most skilled artists in the world work like that.
Viewing post #7659636 at full size reveals a jarring disconnect between the brushstrokes of an amateur and top-quality anatomy, composition, lighting etc, which is the hallmark of tracing. The background also looks AI generated and blurred to hide it (bad continuity of windowsill behind the character).
Updated by Diet Soda
Diet_Soda said:
AI with some parts drawn over. Plenty of machine-generated details left over, like the left strap blending with skin/clothing and the belt area in post #10078794, bra straps not following continuity under the hoodie in post #10078941. You can easily see where it's been drawn over by messing around with the gamma, images are full of diffusion noise except in select areas, example: https://imgur.com/a/R9m0ZJG
The belt part is the reason why I thought I‘d ask here first. I see. Thanks.
Question is now whether to allow it as ai-assisted with a warning on the bio to upload with caution.
Diet_Soda said:
Viewing post #7659636 at full size reveals a jarring disconnect between the brushstrokes of an amateur and top-quality anatomy, composition, lighting etc, which is the hallmark of tracing. The background also looks AI generated and blurred to hide it (bad continuity of windowsill behind the character).
Would you say the posts wavedash pointed out are ai-assisted or ai-generated? At least ai-assisted in my opinion.
Placeholder1996 said:
Would you say the posts wavedash pointed out are ai-assisted or ai-generated? At least ai-assisted in my opinion.
Quality concerns aside, the characters (not the backgrounds) have been completely drawn over by a human, so ai-assisted.
Just want to check, Possible post #10028491 AI-assisted, BG is probably full AI while the character's details (torso ornament is messed up, mismatched earrings, overall costume is different from the source material, and some melting hair on the face)
I can see some of the artworks from this artist showing such markings and their pixiv comments are turned off is kinda eh.
Shine looks normal to me. Unclear what's the problem with eyes. Bad flag?
ion288 said:
Shine looks normal to me. Unclear what's the problem with eyes. Bad flag?
I'm unsure. A seam on the bodysuit disappears and the right eyebrow looks a little suspicious. That may be nitpicky though.
ion288 said:
Shine looks normal to me. Unclear what's the problem with eyes. Bad flag?
I really, really don't think this one is AI at all.
ion288 said:
Shine looks normal to me. Unclear what's the problem with eyes. Bad flag?
The way the hair is drawn on top of her wing doesn't sit well with me.
ion288 said:
Shine looks normal to me. Unclear what's the problem with eyes. Bad flag?
I'll tag it with ai-assisted for now. Let me know if there is contrary evidence and I'll reapprove it.
post #10088349
An other flag without a tag. Please tag or refute.
ion288 said:
post #10088349
An other flag without a tag. Please tag or refute.
Possibly AI; the globe above her head does look a little suspicious and so does the pattern on her skirt
Can I get an AI check on https://x.com/sizue98 ? I can't tell if this person is using AI to do the WIPs or having an AI fill them in after giving it a rough drawing to start.
Someone tagged this ai-generated, though I admit it's kind of hard to tell.
Could someone prove I'm not going insane a.k.a. - an AI-generated or AI-assisted check for rethoven (artist #547315)
It's potentially an other account of timruya (artist #393431) (the border on post #8700533 might be a giveaway) who has previously been suspected of using AI and had their account here deleted for trying to get their stuff removed without a DMCA.
Style also looks similar to masoq (artist #334914) (see: post #9956458 with a similar border)
Edit: They follow this account, likely an alt: https://www.pixiv.net/en/users/94292131 on Pixiv which is tagged as AI-generated and is identical to their style (same border again)
Updated by Iskandar30
post #10088340
Someone is going after this artist. Is there validity to this?
