ion288 said:
Weird reasoning in the flag. Please tag or refute.
The reasoning doesn't make sense. It's not AI. Hope an approver re-approves it.
Posted under General
ion288 said:
Weird reasoning in the flag. Please tag or refute.
The reasoning doesn't make sense. It's not AI. Hope an approver re-approves it.
Smellydung said:
Thoughts on nyanyaqwi? Significant style change over a 13 day gap that happens to resemble mashiro_www. The original twitter account has a long history so it's unclear to me if that person actually has the skill to mimic the style or if the person changed to ai-assistance. Details in the eyelashes and eyelash count are however more detailed and symmetrical.
nyanyaqwi's post #9481685 is also different style but I can't remember where I've seen that style before.
The new posts have a lot more glitter but it doesn't necessarily mean a big style shift. I'd say just keep an eye on them for now.
ion288 said:
Weird reasoning in the flag. Please tag or refute.
not my flag but look at his twitter - AI account.
Just watched two of his speedpaints, both start from redrawing clean lineart - referencing AI is defenitely a stupid thing to do, even if it's not AI account as he claims it looks like AI without a doubt
Updated by Marlor
Marlor said:
not my flag but look at his twitter - AI account.
Just watched two of his speedpaints, both start from redrawing clean lineart - referencing AI is defenitely a stupid thing to do, even if it's not AI account as he claims it looks like AI without a doubt
Link to the speedpaint you think is suspicious, the most recent one I see on his twitter is from a year ago and I can't find what account he's upping his newest WIPs to. I also don't think the image looks AI at all. The line art and coloring both look human, and you can see clear artistic progression on the account.
Marlor said:
not my flag but look at his twitter - AI account.
Just watched two of his speedpaints, both start from redrawing clean lineart - referencing AI is defenitely a stupid thing to do, even if it's not AI account as he claims it looks like AI without a doubt
zetsubousensei said:
Link to the speedpaint you think is suspicious, the most recent one I see on his twitter is from a year ago and I can't find what account he's upping his newest WIPs to. I also don't think the image looks AI at all. The line art and coloring both look human, and you can see clear artistic progression on the account.
These two are the most recent timelapses by this artist. But I feel whether these are genuine don't say much about post #9638506: this artist's shading style is quite inconsistent over the past half of a year. Some of those drawings give stronger AI feel than others, and even within the AI-looking images there are different styles. This artist is possibly painting over AI for a big portion of their work. Whether that's an acceptable or wise thing to do is beyond the scope of this thread so we should just discuss the post in question for what it is. I still think post #9638506 does not look like AI, but given the artist's history, it might be ai-assisted with a lot of human input on top.
8253803 said:
These two are the most recent timelapses by this artist. But I feel whether these are genuine don't say much about post #9638506: this artist's shading style is quite inconsistent over the past half of a year. Some of those drawings give stronger AI feel than others, and even within the AI-looking images there are different styles. This artist is possibly painting over AI for a big portion of their work. Whether that's an acceptable or wise thing to do is beyond the scope of this thread so we should just discuss the post in question for what it is. I still think post #9638506 does not look like AI, but given the artist's history, it might be ai-assisted with a lot of human input on top.
Well don't I feel blind? Not sure how I missed those in the media tab, thank you!
That being said I'm more inclined to believe tracing than full Gen since I think even with inconsistent shading none of the drawing produced actually look like base AI output. Even the ones that have an AI looking thumbnail are "flat" in a way that I don't think a fully generated piece would be.
8253803 said:
These two are the most recent timelapses by this artist. But I feel whether these are genuine don't say much about post #9638506: this artist's shading style is quite inconsistent over the past half of a year. Some of those drawings give stronger AI feel than others, and even within the AI-looking images there are different styles. This artist is possibly painting over AI for a big portion of their work. Whether that's an acceptable or wise thing to do is beyond the scope of this thread so we should just discuss the post in question for what it is. I still think post #9638506 does not look like AI, but given the artist's history, it might be ai-assisted with a lot of human input on top.
Looks like the artist is just tracing the base model from AI prompts, while rendering the rest as usual which is still allowed.
Apply the same method multiple times and merge it into a single image will get you post #9638506.
Is redjet using ai? Looking at the images individually, you might not see it, but when you look at the thumbnails under his tag, everything looks like ai. There's just something *off* about the backgrounds and how smooth the colors transition. It looks like it was created by a computer.
ai-tracker said:
Touch grass and fuck off. I ask a lot because I'm moderating forums where hundreds of new posts are coming every day. I want to stay on top of who is and isn't using ai and many artists have switched over to using ai.
Ok mister moderator but you know you could contribute to this website too, right? Like occasionally upload or tag an image?
post #9767040 somebody is asking if this is ai in the comments; I don’t think it is, but I’m not certain.
They're sincerely just talking out of their ass. A disproportionate number of AI accusations are full of shit and take artistic errors, oversights or just common mistakes in art as signs of AI generation instead as well as pure vibes instead of pointing out real artifacts and more than one indicator of potential generation. I'll never get why people have to antagonise artists like this.
I've been pondering if this is ai-generated for awhile now.
For starters, the drool is melting with the penis/skin, and her sweat makes her look like a melting wax doll in this picture.
Y'all should consider renaming yourselves to "vibe-checker1", "vibe-checker2", because your sloppy effort in attempting to find what is artificially-generated in artists (whether its an established artist or an obscure artist) is starting to get out of hand. Go put some more effort in determining ai-generation or find a new hobby, seriously.
I'm honestly wondering at this point if it wouldn't hurt to force people to bring more evidence to the table when bringing up established artists here. That way, we don't end up wasting time over witch hunts and can focus more on actual legit AI posts slipping under the radar (or just getting them checked before upload).
eromelon said:
I asked for a list about what "evidence" is allowed to show an artwork is AI-generated in this thread two months ago but nobody gave me any answer. The "hey I am not gonna tell you what is not allowed but what you are doing is not allowed" game is still going on huh.
Calling out an established artist in particular for ai requires way more than just "a vibe" tbh. Checking for available good time lapses and psd's should be the bare minimum. Also not conflating common artist mistakes as ai on its own.
For a lot of these artists, its their livelihood. A false ai accusation can literally be devastating for them so bringing forth strong evidence should be the standard. It reflects badly on the site to be wrong about things like this imo.