Posted under General
Death_Usagi said:
Someone just flagged the post as AI-generated but there was no AI tag on the pixiv, and artist doesn't specify it was AI generated.
Otherwise I have no idea
They mention using AI gen as reference for background and composition to improve efficiency and adding AI tags to artworks with few retouches in their profile, but IMO their works aren't ai-assisted if you disregard effects and borders.
Death_Usagi said:
Someone just flagged the post as AI-generated but there was no AI tag on the pixiv, and artist doesn't specify it was AI generated.
Otherwise I have no idea
Remember that nothing forces pixiv users to tag their posts as AI when it is, and some even voluntarily fill all tag slots so that other users can't add AI tags
All the previous posts by this "artist" are ai-generated, and this post, just like the others, has the exact same aspect ratio as the 512x700 resolution typical of ai, just slightly upscaled (by roughly 1.3x)
+ the still visible artifacts and some usual ai fuckups like the sidelock melting for example
Death_Usagi said:
Someone just flagged the post as AI-generated but there was no AI tag on the pixiv, and artist doesn't specify it was AI generated.
Otherwise I have no idea
This specific kind of dirty-looking grainy texture is an effect common among AI posts.
Look at the strands of hair. And her left upper arm is too short. Her skirt also does not hold up to a closer look.
Individual said:
They mention using AI gen as reference for background and composition to improve efficiency and adding AI tags to artworks with few retouches in their profile, but IMO their works aren't ai-assisted if you disregard effects and borders.
Mayhem-Chan said:
Remember that nothing forces pixiv users to tag their posts as AI when it is, and some even voluntarily fill all tag slots so that other users can't add AI tags
All the previous posts by this "artist" are ai-generated, and this post, just like the others, has the exact same aspect ratio as the 512x700 resolution typical of ai, just slightly upscaled (by roughly 1.3x)
+ the still visible artifacts and some usual ai fuckups like the sidelock melting for example
8253803 said:
This specific kind of dirty-looking grainy texture is an effect common among AI posts.
Look at the strands of hair. And her left upper arm is too short. Her skirt also does not hold up to a closer look.
Ok makes sense.
My bad for uploading it then. Was not aware.
Death_Usagi said:
Someone just flagged the post as AI-generated but there was no AI tag on the pixiv, and artist doesn't specify it was AI generated.
Otherwise I have no idea
Both his Twitter and Pixiv are on rapid fire uploading new pics everyday.
Updated
Double post, but this announcement from Pixiv seems to involve more punitive measures against A.I. Specifically impersonation of other Artists.
https://www.pixiv.net/info.php?id=9522
(note, I used a machine translation so someone else more fluent could make corrections)
This is the pixiv office.
pixiv and its related services are currently receiving a large number of inquiries about acts that significantly impede the interests of specific creators by exploiting image generation technology.
At pixiv, preparations were underway to revise the common service terms and guidelines within this month.
In light of the large number of inquiries we have received, we would like to inform our users of some of the revisions in advance.Detailed expressions are subject to change, but we plan to limit the use of the following malicious acts regardless of the production process.
・Acts that impersonate the operator, other users, or other third parties, or acts that the Company deems likely to be misidentified as
such Actions that we judge to be unfairly harmful to the interests of the creator if we continue to do so.
Distributing or selling tools that assist the publication of works that imitate the painting style or style of a specific creator.Actions that we judge to be unfairly harmful to the interests of creators
Based on legal restrictions and general sentiment, we will work to ensure that everyone can enjoy creations with peace of mind, so please wait for the announcement of revisions to the common service terms and guidelines.Thank you for your continued support of pixiv.
Marlor said:
Not AI, the artist has been drawing like this for years.
Something weird...
First of all, the way he's using gloss is quite different from his previous posts.
And I'm worried about part of the spaces under her hands. Was it a simple mistake?
Of course, this is just my suspicion with no evidence.
AkaringoP said:
Something weird...
First of all, the way he's using gloss is quite different from his previous posts.
And I'm worried about part of the spaces under her hands. Was it a simple mistake?Of course, this is just my suspicion with no evidence.
Nothing out of the ordinary. Don't overthink.
Marlor said:
I see no reason to think this is AI. Artist is a long-time professional with consistent style. Tags removed.
AkaringoP said:
Something weird...
First of all, the way he's using gloss is quite different from his previous posts.
And I'm worried about part of the spaces under her hands. Was it a simple mistake?
8253803 said:
Nothing out of the ordinary. Don't overthink.
I know you like defending artists from AI suspicions, but you shouldn’t underthink(?) either.
post #6285392 is pretty obviously AI with some shoddy edits, namely hands, sleeve ends and blue part of the jacket.
Marlor said:
8253803 said:
I see no reason to think this is AI. Artist is a long-time professional with consistent style. Tags removed.
Tag re-added. You can see the edits on the feet, which are shaded quite differently from the rest of the character, with a few brush strokes visible, while the rest of the character doesn’t have any visible brush strokes at all. Also those armpit vaginas that AI likes to add for some reason are cranked up to max.
kittey said:
Tag re-added. You can see the edits on the feet, which are shaded quite differently from the rest of the character, with a few brush strokes visible, while the rest of the character doesn’t have any visible brush strokes at all. Also those armpit vaginas that AI likes to add for some reason are cranked up to max.
does it really count as ai-assisted if only the feet are made by a human?
post #6286914 and post #6286915
I uploaded this by mistake and is wondering if this is ai-assisted or ai-generated. It is similar to the artist style, so I was wondering if it is ai-assisted?
Tag re-added. You can see the edits on the feet, which are shaded quite differently from the rest of the character, with a few brush strokes visible, while the rest of the character doesn’t have any visible brush strokes at all. Also those armpit vaginas that AI likes to add for some reason are cranked up to max.
Mayhem-Chan said:
does it really count as ai-assisted if only the feet are made by a human?
A few things are consistent with his style if you look at his other arts but the amount of detailing or shading is little bit out of his usual. The face is the same as he does on other arts but the body itself is oddly much more detailed on the lighting/shading/etc. His other art shows a bit of a darker body outline and this one does show some of it so I'm inclined to think that he at least drew the body's base.
Face/hair/feet don't really seem AI to me, it matches with his other art. The rest of the body could have had some AI shading and texturing done in my opinion.
redsling said:
post #6286914 and post #6286915
I uploaded this by mistake and is wondering if this is ai-assisted or ai-generated. It is similar to the artist style, so I was wondering if it is ai-assisted?
I’m guessing AI-assisted. The artist commentary mentions AI but the content isn’t something I’d expect AI to generate by itself. Especially the first one seems to complex for AI (yet) and all the human/item interactions make sense. The background has some blurry areas with an entirely different art style, so either the scene base or at least the background was AI-generated.
post #6286997
Parts of the hair and the underwear look odd to me
kittey said:
I know you like defending artists
Danbooru is a pretty big site that a lot of people use and they might attribute some level of authority to Danbooru's tagging. Tagging an artist's work "ai-assisted" or "ai-generated" is quite a serious accusation because it's just calling them liars (unless they declared using AI). One can never get too careful about it.
post #6285392 is pretty obviously AI
Could you elaborate? It's not obvious to everyone. I know the skin and bunny suit are suddenly much smoother than the artist's last work, but I'm looking for something more definitive.
Tag re-added. You can see the edits on the feet, which are shaded quite differently from the rest of the character, with a few brush strokes visible, while the rest of the character doesn’t have any visible brush strokes at all. Also those armpit vaginas that AI likes to add for some reason are cranked up to max.
Fair.
8253803 said:
Could you elaborate? It's not obvious to everyone. I know the skin and bunny suit are suddenly much smoother than the artist's last work, but I'm looking for something more definitive.
Regardless of what the artist’s previous works look like, I’m basing this on the fact that the areas I mentioned look badly edited in. If the artist had drawn the whole image, they wouldn’t look out of place like that. The hands immediately look off, but they’re also much sharper than the rest of the image and so are the cuffs. The blue part of the jacket looks pretty sloppy and if you lower the image’s gamma, you’ll see pretty strong color bleed around the edges, which is a tell-tale sign of editing shenanigans going on. For good measure, there are also some AI peculiarities around, such as some incomplete sweatdrops (low contrast trail with missing actual drop at the end) and asymmetry between left and right eyelashes.
