Posted under General
Alabel said in forum #415960:
post #10374925 is it AI, or assisted? Most of it seems fine, but the hair, especially bottom left part... thorns, small cut-ins and a strand going the wrong way. I just can't picture a human making so many mistakes there.
Probably not AI, and if it is, then at worst it's assisted.
Someone thinks xing meow is AI but doesn't tag the posts. Are they?
VR-Man said in forum #416040:
Don't even need evidence when the uploader is a clear slopper for other posts.
I tried flagging post #10635574 due to the issues I mentioned in forum #414723, but also because the artist on their pixiv and twitter has a history of posting what looks like AI generated images that might have been modified.
137685671 eyes, background, ear.
136370394 eyes, thumb the wrong way.
post #10557984 her right hand: six extensions, five fingers; checkerboard pattern inconsistency, 4 toes(?).
Nitter 30 December 2025 eyes.
And I don't know why but in some works a horizontal distortion causes issues at the bottom.
Am I reading too much into this?
Alabel said in forum #416119:
And I don't know why but in some works a horizontal distortion causes issues at the bottom.
The error at the bottom of the image is just corrupted twitter file.
Artist deleted their twitter, apparently people said something was off about the ribbons? I don't see it though.
someone tagged post #10704931 without flagging.
I don't see it but maybe a better eye does?
B17Bomber said in forum #416172:
someone tagged post #10704931 without flagging.
I don't see it but maybe a better eye does?
It's not, tagger is hallucinating.
Thanks Shibi for tagging xing_meow
Next up is post #8951688.
Please tag or refute.
Having doubts. Noted daily uploads to Twitter.
post #10699734
Seems to be animated by AI. Or is it allowed because it's official?
BaiserLaVerite said in forum #416214:
post #10699734
Seems to be animated by AI. Or is it allowed because it's official?
It's not allowed even if it's official, but where do you see that it's AI-animated?
Thinking that phoenix_(lanzilong646) is a prompter. They already have a few deletions for AI.
They even admit that post #10145717 is ai generated in the pixiv tags despite it being active.
Their other post have commenters questioning things like post #9747961
Tied to forum #416119, I now noticed that at the same time post #10655921 got undeleted despite the many errors that could be attributed to AI in the image, like the ones mentioned in forum #414723. Can I get some explanation? asset #42748735 I marked the spots that gave me a lot of doubt.
Updated by Alabel
pixiv #140690860
Just want to check.
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts?tags=tongari
pixiv #124772015 - AI background? see chairs
post #10530819 - hands, missing/absurdly proportioned fingers
post #10113389 - deep-fried patterns on pantyhose, suspect background; window-gratings merging on the way down
post #10499877 - forgot to fix the ears?
post #10530791 | post #10530800 | post #8789856 | post #8789840 - googly unfocused eyes with asymmetrical iris-blobs and random highlights
my problem is that this guy does have plenty of art going back 4+ years, with rather similiarly poor hands/faces/everything. frankly, the thought "too inept to be AI" crossed my mind. what do you think?
MaskedAvenger said in forum #416502:
pixiv #140690860
Just want to check.
I don't think it's AI
MaskedAvenger said in forum #416210:
Having doubts. Noted daily uploads to Twitter.
@MaskedAvenger (ping because it's been a couple of days)
I think this is AI. I see clear AI artifacts on twitter #2012865443321499963.
torrenz said in forum #416547:
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts?tags=tongari
pixiv #124772015 - AI background? see chairs
ai-generated background is allowed as a subset of ai-assisted.
post #10530819 - hands, missing/absurdly proportioned fingers
I'm not sure there are fingers missing so much as they're hidden from view because of their position. See also: missing_finger artistic_error age:>5y and extra_digits age:>5y. bad hands are not necessarily proof of generation.
post #10113389 - deep-fried patterns on pantyhose, suspect background; window-gratings merging on the way down
While the patterning on the pantyhose is a little suspicious, I'm not sure it's enough for proof.
post #10530791 | post #10530800 | post #8789856 | post #8789840 - googly unfocused eyes with asymmetrical iris-blobs and random highlights
I was going to agree about the eyes; I see what might be artifacts in all of the examples you listed here. However, as I was looking through their other works, I found post #4009879 which also has suspicious eyes but it was posted in 2020 before AI was really a thing. This makes me think that may just be their style.
my problem is that this guy does have plenty of art going back 4+ years, with rather similiarly poor hands/faces/everything. frankly, the thought "too inept to be AI" crossed my mind. what do you think?
Because of the reasons I stated above, I don't think they're posting fully generated works. If they're using AI, I think it falls into ai-assisted rather than ai-generated.
