This has AI vibes, but artist's previous works seems to be not made by AI.
But if this one turned out to be the case, I'm fine if it being deleted. It's the risk I take when posting it.
Posted under General
This has AI vibes, but artist's previous works seems to be not made by AI.
But if this one turned out to be the case, I'm fine if it being deleted. It's the risk I take when posting it.
Jerrpanese said:
Some manual fixes noticeable, so AI-assisted.
Bunch of posts being uploaded from a non-web source, and have enough weird things to make me wonder:
post #5868595
post #5868608
post #5868622
post #5868630
I could be off the mark, but it never hurts to check.
Grahf said:
Bunch of posts being uploaded from a non-web source, and have enough weird things to make me wonder:
I’m placing my bets on all being AI-assisted. The last one is especially obvious because some parts are badly upscaled and other parts are very sharp.
https://www.pixiv.net/artworks/103305780
Might as well post here before uploading.
Hey yo guys. So when browsing DeviantArt, I came across a user that shared a handy tool website that can help check if an image is AI-generated.It's pretty damn useful too. Tested it out on various images, on both AI-generated and authentically drawn content, and the AI-generated stuff always returns high probability of being detected as such by the checker (having an 80-90% probability). I suppose it can also be fun to use this checker to roast AI-generated posters who pretend to be "artists" by showing them these results.
Edit: Oh, it seems like it isn't as useful as it made itself out as. I guess it's better to use our own human judgement.
Updated
Jerrpanese said:
Hey yo guys. So when browsing DeviantArt, I came across a user that shared a handy tool website that can help check if an image is AI-generated: https://www.illuminarty.ai/en/illuminate
It's pretty damn useful too. Tested it out on various images, on both AI-generated and authentically drawn content, and the AI-generated stuff always returns high probability of being detected as such by the checker (having an 80-90% probability). I suppose it can also be fun to use this checker to roast AI-generated posters who pretend to be "artists" by showing them these results.
Hmm, it seems to be usually pretty decent but I was able to upload some art that I know is AI (because I made them) and get really low probability around the level of non-generated artwork so I would take it with a grain of salt.
Jerrpanese said:
Hey yo guys. So when browsing DeviantArt, I came across a user that shared a handy tool website that can help check if an image is AI-generated: https://www.illuminarty.ai/en/illuminate
It's pretty damn useful too. Tested it out on various images, on both AI-generated and authentically drawn content, and the AI-generated stuff always returns high probability of being detected as such by the checker (having an 80-90% probability). I suppose it can also be fun to use this checker to roast AI-generated posters who pretend to be "artists" by showing them these results.
After playing with this for a bit I don't think it should be used to decide for or against uploading an image to Danbooru.
It seems to give big weight to realistic shading, giving high scores (often above 80%) to many photos or images that would fit in the Expert Shading pool while giving low scores to AI-generated images that don't use common AI artstyles.
Not only is this AI generated, as it is clearly tagged on Pixiv: https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/103003646 , but the twitter account presented as the source of this image stole that pic from the aformentionned pixiv account, look at the different upload dates for the pixiv post and the tweet.
This account also regurlarly steal other people's AI images and will post some shady website link under it like on this tweet for example: https://twitter.com/AIictures/status/1597156349179179009
Various people on Twitter have accused this work of being AI-generated, although the artist has shown a timelapse, possibly AI-assisted? Artist's Twitter profile and banner have been accused of being AI-generated as well.
9S said:
Various people on Twitter have accused this work of being AI-generated, although the artist has shown a timelapse, possibly AI-assisted? Artist's Twitter profile and banner have been accused of being AI-generated as well.
https://twitter.com/YUA_andI/status/1592298951595937792
It's obviously not ai-generated.
Updated
Another one by the same artist. Another artist (kiwwwwwi) points out some defects he believes to be AI-generated and drawn over:
https://twitter.com/kiwi2624/status/1590951275877007360
WIP 1: https://twitter.com/YUA_andI/status/1589930984186974208
WIP 2: https://twitter.com/YUA_andI/status/1590331647719018500
Updated
9S said:
Another one by the same artist. Another artist (kiwwwwwi) points out some defects he believes to be AI-generated and drawn over:
https://twitter.com/kiwi2624/status/1590951275877007360
WIP 1: https://twitter.com/YUA_andI/status/1589930984186974208
WIP 2: https://twitter.com/YUA_andI/status/1590331647719018500
They're trying very hard to deceive people but it is clearly drawn-over AI, most noticeable by comparing the final image with the second WIP they foolishly posted.
Their other image is likely also AI-assisted, the "full process" video has several inconsistencies and the WIP image shows the large amount (76) of ungrouped almost-empty layers I've seen other AI "artists" show as proof.
Their profile and banner images on Twitter are AI-generated.
post #5878795, post #5878799, and post #5878802
Very sussy res.
Actually, the third one is AI without a doubt.
Jerrpanese said:
Check those fingers.
nonamethanks said:
https://twitter.com/YUA_andI/status/1592298951595937792
It's obviously not ai-generated.
Looks like some heavy damage control, the WIP screenshot they posted of it doesn't even match any frame of the video. Definitely painted over an AI image like the Ina picture.