Posted under General
123kid said:
post #7052492 post #7052490 (NSFW warning)
Is it?
Usually, you can tell just by looking at the eyes.
Some artifacts I was able to find, in case it's not convincing enough https://files.catbox.moe/s8ihfo.jpg
This one from their Twitter is also pretty obvious
https://twitter.com/abarada44/status/1740261852008103939/photo/1
post #6808591
Is AI really at play here? The artist has been consistent for years and they have long YT livestreams tracing real world locations for scenery art. I planned on posting more of their works, I see no problems with recent ones but I'm not good at discerning the use of AI.
post #7062533 and the artist's portfolio for a fair bit has that distinct AI artsyle. Anything older than a year or so has a noticeably different style and shading, as well as basic content, ie costumes and backgrounds.
Going from pixiv #106657914 to pixiv #107616686 to pixiv #107991341 (where it looks like they've begun to fully erase and redraw things like the eyes) is not impossible, but extremely unlikely. Especially given that they've changed from fairly inconsistent canvas sizes to a standardized smaller size (640x900).
Veraducks said:
post #7062533 and the artist's portfolio for a fair bit has that distinct AI artsyle. Anything older than a year or so has a noticeably different style and shading, as well as basic content, ie costumes and backgrounds.
Going from pixiv #106657914 to pixiv #107616686 to pixiv #107991341 (where it looks like they've begun to fully erase and redraw things like the eyes) is not impossible, but extremely unlikely. Especially given that they've changed from fairly inconsistent canvas sizes to a standardized smaller size (640x900).
Looks like blatant AI, a shexyo/cutesexyrobutts lora most likely. Every single one of their backgrounds is a jumbled mess with no object permanence since the artstyle 'update', with lots of broken continuity and artefacting on the characters themselves, see shoelaces + missing left suspender on post #6283976, vanishing pants in post #6666519, the laces on post #7002353, dislocated right arm and broken-up bra on post #6256805.
Veraducks said:
post #7062533 and the artist's portfolio for a fair bit has that distinct AI artsyle. Anything older than a year or so has a noticeably different style and shading, as well as basic content, ie costumes and backgrounds.
Going from pixiv #106657914 to pixiv #107616686 to pixiv #107991341 (where it looks like they've begun to fully erase and redraw things like the eyes) is not impossible, but extremely unlikely. Especially given that they've changed from fairly inconsistent canvas sizes to a standardized smaller size (640x900).
The first and last ones are clearly AI generated with (maybe) some edits.
Thoses images have the same kind of blur and wasted out colors, as an ai image generated with a NAI V1 derived model without a VAE.
post #7010619 along with most if not all of the artists other works may be AI generated/assisted.
Saw a twitter post accusing the artist of using AI (can't find the twitter post again) and looking at their art there's a lot of oddities. Very little consistency between artworks along with slightly wonky details here and there definitely points towards using AI.
semu_(zgom1251129) AI gen or assisted?
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/7067863 AI gen, apparently. See it's belly button.
This post is Ai-generated Truck-kunart admits to using AI in their pixiv bio to generate art.
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/7069915?q=genshin_impact+
https://www.pixiv.net/en/users/55649544
For future reference do I just tag posts as ai-generated if I have definitive proof or should I report any ai-generated art here every time?
Updated
Assi said:
This post is Ai-generated Truck-kunart admits to using AI in their pixiv bio to generate art.
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/7069915?q=genshin_impact+
https://www.pixiv.net/en/users/55649544
For future reference do I just tag it as ai-generated if I have definitive proof or should I report them here every time?
This is my fault I didn't look well enough at the user's background. I apologize for the inconvience.
Ai-generated tags everywhere. Is that indeed correct?
Update on forum #264223 above, I think the comment section isn't a good place for this.
GreyOmega4K said:
Will note that I would think the balloons would have also cast a shadow. Where is that shadow that crosses the street coming from also and what is the corner mirror reflecting, since nothing in the foreground matches creating that shadow? Is that a fence post or some sort of prop in the low trees, because if it's a fence it doesn't go anywhere and the tree is growing through it. Is that telephone pole at the end of the street have an arm for a light fixture around where it is over the house window or is that a weird branch jutting out of it? The position I would think light, but it is awfully small.
Here's the original photo and its original source. GreyOmega4K brought two good points that I missed, the mirror reflection is completely wrong and the lack of shadows for the balloons is weird since the artist made shadows for the characters. I don't have a good argument for why they didn't trace the mirror reflections correctly, but the characters were clearly pasted over the background and both situations could be indicative of human error. I don't think they started using AI, we know for a fact they can trace photos almost 1:1 and they're consistent since way before AI became a thing.
Maiden_in_Orange said:
Ai-generated tags everywhere. Is that indeed correct?
Looks like AI from a distance. But when I zoom in, the contour and shading brushstrokes look quite human.
I would want to wait for a third opinion.
We really need to think of a solution to the flagging without tagging problem. Flagging is suppose to be anonymous but anything that is deleted for being AI without getting tagged as such has a fair chance of being appealed later.
ion288 said:
We really need to think of a solution to the flagging without tagging problem. Flagging is suppose to be anonymous but anything that is deleted for being AI without getting tagged as such has a fair chance of being appealed later.
While I agree with you, this one is a self-flag.
The comments in post #6991789 (the last one especially) are indicating this artist is confirmed to use AI.
Maiden_in_Orange said:
The comments in post #6991789 (the last one especially) are indicating this artist is confirmed to use AI.
I'm not surprised, his art always gave me AI vibes. And he had a jump in art style at some point (none of his older pics are on danbooru, though they're low quality anyways).
