Danbooru

AI-generated art check thread

Posted under General

zwo

Samsara_Kama said:

post #7417591
I left the message.

They mention Stable Diffusion and NovelAI in their bio.

what about "setsupatreon" (also on twitter), im talking about his some recent post on twitter starting from 13 march 2024.

also his recent pixiv post is not mentioning ai generated tag

Reply
Samsara Kama

zwo said:

what about "setsupatreon" (also on twitter), im talking about his some recent post on twitter starting from 13 march 2024.

also his recent pixiv post is not mentioning ai generated tag

Their arttag is setsuaiart, they have a history of using AI, and not marking that a post is AI generated on Pixiv isn't a guarantee that it isn't. For me, their recent works were still generated first and weren't retouched enough, I saw a bit of continuity issues in parts of the body and clothing, artifacted eyes and hair, though know that I also use this thread because I consider myself bad at detecting the degree of usage of AI.

Reply
Grahf

This seems like the best place to post this, but I'm not quite sure whether any of it is actionable. Recently an artist on twitter going by Ayoung accused three other artists of using AI generation without disclosing it to people.

https://twitter.com/lhy505919187/status/1776672251058020422

The artist's named are 95---, soybean_(hisoybean), and ame929.

The artist is claiming that works from all three artists are being denoted as AI when put through an AI generation detector, which they provide a link to. Further to that 95 apparently blocked them when they called 95 out on using it. Now, this could be a block because "this person is falsely accusing me of using AI gen" or it could be a block because "I don't want to engage with a person who figured out I'm using AI gen".

The question is, does any of this seem worthy of action on our end? I did want to bring it up, but I myself have concerns because the tool that they're using is also saying that some images from these creators aren't AI generated, so I can't really say whether or not the tool itself is accurate.

To specifically point out the posts of 95--- that the tool is saying are AI generated there's

post #6291169
post #6315634
post #7383672

Reply
nonamethanks

Given that all of those artists have been drawing for years in a consistent artstyle I'm just going to assume the accuser is talking out of their ass. In any case, AI generator detectors are completely unreliable, you should never trust them. It's snake oil for paranoid people. They are as reliable as a coin flip.

Reply
kittey

Grahf said:

This seems like the best place to post this, but I'm not quite sure whether any of it is actionable. Recently an artist on twitter going by Ayoung accused three other artists of using AI generation without disclosing it to people.

[…]

post #6291169
post #6315634
post #7383672

I can’t see anything even remotely close to any AI artifacts in those posts. On the contrary, I noticed several artifacts of manual drawing all over instead. They’re also too high-res and too detailed to be AI art. The first one obviously has the background pasted in, but not even that looks like AI.

As nnt said, AI detectors are garbage. You can take images that artists have drawn live on stream and sometimes get high scores, and you can also generate some images yourself and sometimes get low scores. Completely useless.

Reply
Grahf

I somewhat suspected that to be the case, but figured it was worth bringing up to have people weigh in. Unless something a lot more definitive is found there's no point in further entertaining these claims then.

Reply
MysteriousLounger

post #7437328 in particular had weird vibes for me, but really everything by nu1lpointer
Twitter bio says this person posts AI generated works. post #7437328 has noticeable artifacts that hasn't been fixed, yet it's labelled ai-assisted.
Things I noticed....
--Most noticeable, hair triangle is weird, it flares out in places and is skinny in others, and the lines aren't straight. it should be a simple geometric shape
--line-work is inconsistent, thighs don't appear to have outlines while the rest of the body does
--fingers on the left hand are long and thin and the thumb is bent weird
--outfit is generic instead of character-specific because it's hard to get the AI to produce the correct outfit
So I think this should count as ai-generated instead
This one I'm confident on and I'm going to tag it as such, but I'd like some help and guidance with the other works. All claim to be ai-assisted but they are also mostly in generic outfits and either lack distinguishing features like the triangle hair ornaments or those are again distorted as in post #7386573. If there's no strong evidence of human involvement, shouldn't these just be taken down? like, I know that the new models are really good at producing things that have very few artifacts, but I think there should be at least some evidence of a human having contributed to the image for something to be tagged ai-assisted, right?
EDIT: I'm also pretty sure about post #7403569. the halo is inside out (or rather, the blue line that should only be inside, is both inside and outside the halo). if it is assisted, artist should have caught off-model error like that one, which indicates that they didn't edit it.
EDIT 2: I'm now convinced that post #7437445 was also not meaningfully edited, or even looked at very carefully after being generated. Not only do the legs look... bad... but the hair is in the twintails with triangle ornaments, despite the fact that she's clearly supposed to be wearing her track uniform, which is supposed to have a single ponytail. Again, this is an obvious off-model mistake that should have been caught if the work was indeed carefully edited and enhanced by a human.

Updated

Reply
1 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84