Flag without tag :-(
Posted under General
Flag without tag :-(
ion288 said:
Flag without tag :-(
I think it is.
Fake animal ears are a big red flag for me, but the whole thing looks really weird and inconsistent. Another thing that stood out
Fairly sure this is AI, given the creator's history and comments on the image. Hands are wonk and the choker is equally sketch, then there's clothing elements blending together strangely.
I assumed this wasn't AI art when I posted it because the gun is drawn pretty nicely but now that I look at the fingers it does look kind of AI. Might be AI-assisted. Can someone double check for me?
Jemnite said:
I assumed this wasn't AI art when I posted it because the gun is drawn pretty nicely but now that I look at the fingers it does look kind of AI. Might be AI-assisted. Can someone double check for me?
Its a lot less about the hands imo, they dont look ai themselves they sure do stick out compared to other parts of the image, they are less polished and more sketchy than almost every element in the background, especially the characters, which is weird.
Hair and face, though, has 100% convinced me it's AI.
And then there's a weird nonsensical blur on the bottom left of the foreground girl, and then finally, the pouches and the detail differences between them.
Overall, looking at the image at full size, rendering detail and style is just very inconsistant, and with how the background characters look, i feel like this person generated the elements separately then pasted them together into one image.
Tbh i wouldn't even have fathomed this image to be AI without you pointing it out, on the first glance, the mere fact the entire scene is "complex" and has basic sense of scale and composition made me doubt possibilities of ai-gen, but i guess i didn't think about this possible process.
hdk5 said:
Looks completely genuine, the only drawing that has put me on guard for AI is the most recent, and even this one is all genuine brush strokes all around upon close inspection
I dunno if this artist is active outside of Pinterest, but I have a feeling they could be AI. But since I have a pretty hard time telling the difference sometimes, so I'd like someone else who can to double check before I try to upload from them.
Updated
Maiden_in_Orange said:
I dunno if this artist is active outside of Pinterest, but I have a feeling they could be AI. But since I have a pretty hard time telling the difference sometimes, so I'd like someone else who can to double check before I try to upload from them.
Pretty sure it is Ai generated, the images are too small for any text to be readable except the japanese and number on the bottom right staying the same between images, and the little i can decipher from the rest of the text is pure gibberish that doesn't loot like any alphabet i'm aware of, but there are also more conventional AI shenanigans like hands not being hands or the random stuff in the background being... well random and mostly nonsense but with lots of training data; and the artifacts don't help
Mayhem-Chan said:
Pretty sure it is Ai generated, the images are too small for any text to be readable except the japanese and number on the bottom right staying the same between images, and the little i can decipher from the rest of the text is pure gibberish that doesn't loot like any alphabet i'm aware of, but there are also more conventional AI shenanigans like hands not being hands or the random stuff in the background being... well random and mostly nonsense but with lots of training data; and the artifacts don't help
Yeah, I had a hunch it might be that. Looks like my instinct was well-founded there. Not to mention all the inconsistent art styles between pics. (Also, why would a professional artist advertise on Pinterest and Pinterest alone anyway?) This is why I stick to sourcing any Pikmin and more recently Kirby art I find that ends up on there, because Pinterest is a breeding ground for these kind of AI "artists". In this case, I was suckered in by the pretty dresses. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
Maiden_in_Orange said:
Yeah, I had a hunch it might be that. Looks like my instinct was well-founded there. Not to mention all the inconsistent art styles between pics. (Also, why would a professional artist advertise on Pinterest and Pinterest alone anyway?) This is why I stick to sourcing any Pikmin and more recently Kirby art I find that ends up on there, because Pinterest is a breeding ground for these kind of AI "artists". In this case, I was suckered in by the pretty dresses. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
To be honest i once saw one artist actually post on pinterest (assuming it really was them), but yeah, definitely suspicious if the ai-looking art is "posted by the artist" on pinterest, especially with very little linking to other places
Maiden_in_Orange said:
I dunno if this artist is active outside of Pinterest, but I have a feeling they could be AI. But since I have a pretty hard time telling the difference sometimes, so I'd like someone else who can to double check before I try to upload from them.
100% AI. Also this is a reposter, most images seem to be from various Xiaohongshu accounts.
Updated
Nameless_Contributor said:
100% AI. Also this is a reposter, most images seem to be from various Xiaohongshu accounts.
Oh damn, this person is a reposter too? Okay, yeah, Pinterest, but having so many images in what appeared to be the same style threw me off at a first glance (not to mention Xiaohongshu is a site I never ever would've thought to check). And I suppose that's what the whole image for, even if it falls apart upon closer inspection, huh?
I feel like such an idiot for almost falling for this AI asshole now that it's spelled out for me. It was the pretty dresses. I'm a complete sucker for pretty dresses, I know it...Thanks again for confirming that I was 100% right to be suspicious (as further discussed above with Mayhem). I'm just gonna stick to sourcing things I like that I find from there.
tor (torkrub111)'s whole gallery
At first I was surprised by how similar their artstyle is compared to Lam, I thought it might be a single style imitation post and checked their previous works only to get a wall of Lam-like posts, but Lam wasn't mentioned anywhere. So I assumed that they might've been studying Lam or maaaby a complete coincident and decides to move on. It was then that I started to notice uncanny details. There isn't anything too obvious like the usual drippiness and melting hair (Lam is a good sample choice, her style is already melty so it's easier to get away with it), and the artist did have those Lam eyes before they adapted the Lam coloring and got good at anatomy, but there were unexplainable details here and there (e.g. post #6551675 the texture has a fake-looking awkwardness and the highlights are way too yellow). And looking more into it shows fingers on post #6671480 and the a missing nail on post #6411413. This artist needs checks.
Updated
magcolo said:
tor (torkrub111)'s whole gallery
At first I was surprised by how similar their artstyle is compared to Lam, I thought it might be a single style imitation post and checked their previous works only to get a wall of Lam-like posts, but Lam wasn't mentioned anywhere. So I assumed that they might've been studying Lam or maaaby a complete coincident and decides to move on. It was then that I started to notice uncanny details. There isn't anything too obvious like the usual drippiness and melting hair (Lam is a good sample choice, her style is already melty so it's easier to get away with it), and the artist did have those Lam eyes before they adapted the Lam coloring and got good at anatomy, but there were unexplainable details here and there (e.g. post #6551675 the texture has a fake-looking awkwardness and the highlights are way too yellow). And looking more into it shows fingers on post #6671480 and the a missing nail on post #6411413. This artist needs checks.
I'm no expert, but post #6551675 gives me an "AI vibe" from the thumbnail alone, though I have a hard time describing it. Looking closer, the way the ends of the hair blend together on the left side of the image -- not only melty, but at least one strand that starts from nowhere and a triangular bit of shading that almost looks pasted on -- is a pretty dead giveaway to me. I'm considering flagging that one right now 'cause I'm pretty sure.
(The girl's left shoulder and arm also appear to be missing or broken, considering the angle of her chest, but that could be a human mistake too.)
I don't get much of the thumbnail vibe from most of the other posts in the gallery, but looking closer, post #6548243 has me suspicious of the girl's right sidelock (left side of the image) especially where it intersects the strap on her top. Without context, you could convince me that was a human error, but after post #6551675 I'm not inclined to give the artist much benefit of the doubt...
I think you're onto something and AI use is probable. I could believe at least some of them are only ai-assisted, though. At least for my rather untrained eyes, some of even the most recent posts don't have giveaway faults that I can see.
I was about to use post #6693426 as an example... but the hands are a little weird. Hands are hard to draw, though. I'm on the fence whether those are AI or human error.
Maybe post #6610797 is just lucky because it doesn't have hands, but it looks basically okay to me. Those big head spheres look a little strange, I guess, but it's not hard to find something that looks weird if you're looking for it...
post #6551687 has some weirdness with the scarf and hair, but I don't know if it's at a level I'm comfortable condemning it for...
One general observation comparing with lam (ramdayo)'s art is that Lam's hair seems way more precisely defined to me. The shading may be melty, but it's even and the shapes are coherent. In contrast, tor (torkrub111)'s hair does seem to have more random-looking shapes and shading patterns.
Super_Affection said:
...
One general observation comparing with lam (ramdayo)'s art is that Lam's hair seems way more precisely defined to me. The shading may be melty, but it's even and the shapes are coherent. In contrast, tor (torkrub111)'s hair does seem to have more random-looking shapes and shading patterns.
This is what makes me believe there's significant AI involved in these as well. post #6693426 is an overall example, but the sidelock in post #6579004 just doesn't make sense, and the weird coloring is almost precisely how AI generally messes things up (not to mention the weird blending at the ear).
post #6349332 also has the super weird melty hair, but also a very asymmetrical body, the unnervingly well-defined ribs, and whatever the hell her right hand is doing.
I'm looking for feedback about post #6699002. Some of the brushstrokes are clearly human on close inspection, but the lighting and blending give AI vibes. There's an anatomical mistake where the neck should join the shoulders; it goes too low (inside the collar). Some parts of the image look a lot worse than others, the ear for example is clearly fully re-drawn, and doesn't look comparable with the rest of the image. The background is very typically "AI". The image has no line-art. Around the edges of the character and particularly at the edges of the hair, you can see where the artist used a hard-edge eraser tool to trim the hair layer or tracksuit layer, respectively. Not to put too fine a point on it, but those eraser lines are wobbly, and just not consistent with the kind of skill/experience required to make this calibre of art. The mouth also looks very typical of a latent upscale with a low denoising value. So that's all what leads me to believe that it's AI.
On the other hand, there's a few things that also make me think I might be wrong. For example, the pink bounce lighting on the pillar has clearly been airbrushed in, at full resolution. The patterning on the zipper is also clearly human. The eyelashes appear to have been done with a pencil brush and at full resolution, which again, isn't consistent with latent upscale. Note the hair ornament cubes, in particular the blue one, which shows very "human looking" edge lighting and was drawn at full resolution; although, in partial redraws, distinguishing character features like this are the first things the artist will touch up. Still, these reasons give me pause and seem to indicate to me that the image was drawn at full resolution, which of course is impossible for the AI.
Right now my best guess is that this is an almost complete re-draw of an up-scaled AI image made with an aesthetic model and character embedding. It does look, though, like a lot of work went into redrawing this, so I reckon it should get the Ai-assisted tag. Of course, I'm not sure, which is why I'm bringing it here, because it could be that my neurons are playing tricks on me, and this isn't AI at all. A second or third opinion would be great!
The harsh shading on post #6699002 is somewhat similar to the typical NovelAI shading style, but it's too ambiguous of a connection to say it's definitely referenced from AI art. The rest of the points are fully explainable by human error, particularly given that the artist has a track record of making art before the popularity of AI art, and we should generally make sure human error is ruled out before tagging something as AI-assisted.
post #6701434
The way the damaged clothing, especially around her legs, is hanging seems to be off.
And her right-hand has a awkwardly-positioned pinky and the way her gloves stick the ring and middle-finger together also doesn't make a lot of sense.
FWP said:
post #6701434
The way the damaged clothing, especially around her legs, is hanging seems to be off.And her right-hand has a awkwardly-positioned pinky and the way her gloves stick the ring and middle-finger together also doesn't make a lot of sense.
Very little difference between this and confirmed hand-drawn posts like post #5221149. The damaged clothes around the legs have coherent sketch lines that AI would not be able to create properly, and the background remains coherent despite branches intersecting it.
