@ the 800 million people commenting that my voice sounds weird and bad or my mic is broken or i used AI to voice this video: i’ve had pneumonia for a month and did my best to edit out raspiness, wheezing, and coughing. i still have it and am doing my best with this my next videos, but it would be cool if y’all didn’t immediately interpret everything in the worst faith possible, and maybe be a little more understanding rather than immediately critical and accusatory.
That's such a mean thing to say! I hope you know that for every person saying something weird like that there's a thousand who simply thought your video was great and moved on.
This is the Internet. People will, without fail, always assume the worst and if they can't find the worst, they will fabricate it just to attack it. It's a sad, sad reality of our klout-based online culture. That said, this video was great. Truly appreciate the insight from someone who seems to not only know one side, but the other as well. Please get well soon!
I remember when Ai became popular and was getting better. That was my biggest fear to happend, people mistaking real art whith Ai.... And looks like is gonna get worse :,)
Unfortunately some styles do get hit most with accusations, because those are exactly the styles that get produced by AI... just a f-ed up situation all around for artists.
@@tcg2717 and its even worse, because those styles the Ai stole are very hard to learn, so is like some kind of "more efort you put on make it realistic or hyper detailed, more false and contraproducent it would looks like" Just like TH-cam whith his Coopa laws and the Sonic animators situation, the effort is unfairly taken down
@@DeadnyMaster You are exactly right. The more realistically rendered your style, the more likely you will get accused of using AI. Because that's what 99% of the AI slop out there is going for. The situation really sucks.
A side effect of people passing off AI generated art as their own work is that it will become part of the training data for future AIs. This could create a weird feedback loop that actually makes the AI worse.
Eventually or pretty soon, they will have to develop A.I. that creates its own synthetic data to compensate for lack of human-made data. That's how it could become superhuman, as developers put it.
the worse side effect is drastically lowering common viewers' standard ,people will start ignoring obvious mistakes like fingers ,multiple hands because the "vibe" is good enough for them. Saw a spy family AI pic with more than 100k engagement/likes ,there're literally multiple hands but few people noticed.
That is to say that, while we could use it to get the best results in certain things we are not emotionally attached to, such as coding, driving or cleaning up waste, it's just unproductive and meaningless to try to make it generate the best art, novel or human voice, how to live...subjective things that can only exist in our context. Using A.I. for that purpose only creates more noise to be instantly consumed and forgotten... So, it's unethical to not make the distinction between what is made by humans and what is made by A.I. The biggest danger I see, when it comes to this kind of use, is that it could hinder our ability to have a connection with entities that WE KNOW FOR A FACT are conscious and human like we are. Moreover, we would be incapable of knowing when, how or why A.I. might turn against us.
some days i can do hands no problem and on other days hands make me want to jump off a bridge. but yeah, from what i've noticed, the most obvious ai hands are the ones where the ai gets confused and just decided to merge the fingers together. hands alone are not at all enough to accuse anyone of ai art.
It’s the kind of error that you want to look for. Clearly bad proportions, stiff or awkward drawing etc will indicate an inexperienced artist. Mashed potato fingers, mutated anatomy that is otherwise exceedingly accurate or well drawn, these tend to give away AI images. And a DC artist recently got busted using Midjourney, so don’t assume it’s just young artists taking short cuts, and always give the benefit of your doubt to other creators, especially if young. The more art you make, and look at, the more obvious the generally very small things AI gets wrong will become.
totally recommend spotting ai based on how frequently it was posted too! a lot of ai 'creators' tend to post at a frequency rate a normal artist cant achieve (fully rendered works every hour/every few hours), and determining if the styles match up. ai can struggle with folds, and you'll be able to see in their gallery if their art seems to have these patterns. don't auto-accuse someone based off one work, it takes a lot of different ones to determine this:)
to add to this be careful not to accuse actual artists who are just dumping a pre-prepared portfolio of art, to establish their precense on a site for example like many things, post frequency is also a matter of context
You really see this with artists who post mecha, especially intensely complex designs. That stuff takes days and weeks to plan out, render, color, polish, and so on. For an artist to post an insanely complex robot every day is just impossible.
@@seymourflux747 But even in that context, if someone drops a whole dump of AI images at once, you can look at them in context and realize that they all looks kind of samey.
This is why I recommend digital artists record part of the drawing process or keep around the original layer files. The quickest way to prove you drew something is to show the off process.
That'd be good advice, but you know DeviantART; you are either AI-extreme or No-AI. Or maybe I got cancelled for something else people keep bringing up in the background. Idk. Because I 'used' AI, even deleting the AI art on my DeviantART wasn't enough. Kind of toxic. I literally have to tell them that I won't use AI in commissions only for them to ask for 'murals' again. I never use AI to staple things together; only to find out how a work could go wrong. But no, as of today, I have to 'go sober'. I mean, look at the video; no neutral terms are used; the video maker even calls things to do with AI that I'm talking about 'Accusations'. It kind of isn't fair to those choosing to split the difference, so in order to be fair to myself, I automatically have to leave the AI scene. I'm not mad about it; I'd be happy to learn how to code and show my process like you said about art. But I guess AI by itself, made by someone other than the artist is lazy at the end of the day. It isn't that I care that it took me this long to 'repent'. I just don't like being bashed for building blocks. I have to use mental gymnastics because of the autopilot others create, and it isn't fair. I'll stop using AI (starting today, 4 13 2024), but that doesn't mean I care for trick AIs (and every single AI has some form of price, believe me), nor is it that I like people who can't trust me at first to see if I'm legit. I'll even give you my DA to show I'm not scared of you starting to bash as well. TintedHQ.
@@MicalMical111 Are you one of those people pretending to ask for art to use in Murals? Are you part of the problem? I hope not. Because as of the turn of the hour, I took away your ammunition for doing that. Now what?
@@Arikasy That is just AI users being jerks I think (Edit: That or corporations hiding their true intent.). I wouldn't think too much about it. I'm sure your art is completely fine.
Something to mention, if an artist draws only 3 fingers ( and one thumb) , it is most likely a stylistic choice. Like you said, hands are incredibly hard to draw and only adding 3 fingers is much easier and it looks better on simpler art styles. So, look for hands with more fingers/thumbs than less fingers.
24:32 TO BE FAIR sometimes real artists also forget to continue belts and straps and stuff like that after they are obscured or forget to add frills to the other half of the bow. It can be caused by lack of attention, being a beginner, being in a rush (which results in lack of attention), or just being very very very tired (which causes lack of attention). It happened to me quite a number of times 🤡 The solution to it is more for the artists to let the piece rest a bit before posting. Looking at it with fresh eyes make these mistakes easier to spot and fix. But too many times we are in a rush to upload our pieces or to send it before a deadline only to realize that oops they forgot to continue to pattern of that shirt below the arms, and then bemoan or joke about their own recklesness. Meanwhile, AI prompters wouldn't even notice that there is something wrong, and if someone points it out it is called nitpicking or gatekeeping, or go one about how these little flaws won't be a problema in the future and how great their art is and other bullshit like that.
Artists also mess up symmetry, mess up spacing between buttons or other objects, fill in space with semi-random textures which look good enough at a distance, etc.
@@stillbuyvhs yeah, its all a matter of how instead of what. AI generated pics have this melted aspect to its mistakes that only a computer seems to make, where with artists it has more intent and clarity, if that makes sense.
Once I drew a strap or something and it didn’t lead to anything, it was in class and I was very tired due to a bad sleep schedule. I noticed it and was like “damn Ai Kyubeyo”.
i once forgot to add a tail to a cat because I was too focused on other details and completely forgot about it lmao. but yeah, it's so important to be able to recognize what is AI and what might just be human error. humans aren't perfect either and sometimes mistakes slip through.
As a friend of an artist that got their accounts on sites like twitter and vgen attacked and reported from the "It just looks like AI" crowd or they use faulty websites that "tell if it's AI" . It's nice to see videos like this pop up that help both sides.
Happened to me, but only with my best work. It's why I just don't post it anymore. If I do anything realistic, spend weeks on it, it just gets called AI garbage. If I do a shitty napkin drawing it goes viral... I only share the doodles now, lol. The stuff I'm most proud of is just for me and people irl because y'know, they're standing there while I make it and it's kind of hard to hide it when they're watching you draw it in the same room, lol.
All the damn time. I had one piece that I was so stoked to finish because it took me over 60 hours to finish. Literally 3 minutes after posting I was accused of using AI. I wish there was an accurate site that would allow you to submit your art and get a "Certificate of human authenticity". I tried testing my art on some of the is it AI or not websites. I submitted a photo I took of a tattoo I had completed that day. Guess what, apparently it was 75% AI. Nothing seems to be reliable these days a d it sucks for those that have worked so damn hard to get to where they are. I can't wait for AI to eat it's own tail as it trains itself on itself.
Then you should ignore them. If those anti-AI idiots were going to be zealot enough to accuse everything people do as computer generated without looking carefully at your stuff, then you have no reason to take them seriously.
@@AghTheLight I just got kicked from a writer's server because they took my art, plugged it into an AI art detector, and it came back 85% AI. Meanwhile, my other art peices (which were even more elaborate) came back less than 2%. I did a little digging, and apparently, if you take a screenshot of the problematic picture, it comes back as no AI (which makes so sense). Also, if they subject is large and the only thing in the picture, it's more likely to get tagged as well. I'm pretty devastated, I spent close to 40 hours on this sketch, just to get labeled an AI user and muted. They didn't even give me a chance to show them my layers :(
@@toastedbabybuns1000 It's horrendous isn't it? I've had my art ripped off a wall and burnt in front of me and that wasn't as soul crushing as people instantly thinking my work is AI. The only medium I have left that can in no way be accused of being AI is my tattooing. Even paintings can be faked these days. I just hold hope for the day it eats it's own tail (I like to call it AI-roborus). It is now training itself on itself so it is bound to happen right? EDIT: Forgot to add. The lack of recourse is quite frankly, disgusting. We should have a right to defend ourselves and show our processes.
@@lilunette9319 Yes, what you are describing is "machines" or, more broadly fake stuff, passing the turing test (aka real humans confusing it as legit). The opposite process, humans failing the turing test, describes humans confusing other real humans for machines/ai/fake shit.
@21:54 There was apparently an episode of an old Filmation cartoon where they accidentally gave a character an extra arm for a few frames. When someone's working fast, they make mistakes you'd never expect a human to make.
My biggest way to judge AI art really is composition Just look at the picutre and think 'would an artist who wants to draw really want to do so in that pose, in taht framing, with those specific details in that specific scene?' human's context-based tought process is the real true separator from computers who'se tought process is data-based instead
One thing I’ve really noticed with AI generated images is the inconsistency between the lineart and the colors. In the image with the girls and the bird in the back, the shading is what most would consider expert level, but the mistakes were beginner. It’s hard to believe a human would have that lopsided of a skill level. Not saying it doesn’t happen, but it’s one of those things I always take into account.
Nah, honestly, it can happen. I'm really good with my sketch and line art... but terrible at traditional coloring because i hardly ever finish a piece to that point 🤡
personally, as a kid, coloring and shading came EXCEPTIONALLY easy to me to the point I was making realistic glow effects in 2nd grade with ms paint and a mousepad. meanwhile my anatomy looked like that of a mildly talented 3rd grader. growing up, that was always the case for the people that art just came easy to before they actually started studying, one aspect would always be professional level but the rest looked obviously childish
This is not going to work. Because these are still two difference skills. Drawing, Inking, coloring, painting, not all artists master all these. So no you cannot accuse based on this scenario.
If I didn't start my art journey a decade ago I would NEVER have the motivation to today.. from stuff like this, to increasing general hostility, no hope at all for a job in the industry, list goes on. We need to be the ones to step up and make this a better place and encourage new artists. I understand wanting to smite ai bros into the earth but one false accusation can kill someone's entire motivation and journey, especially starting out before you've really found your inspiration and love for art. It really is a shitty situation on all sides.. but just fact checking before you ruin someone is the least we can do
One way i can usually tell something is AI is in the finer details. Often it smears a lot of small things. Also it usually has this look as if its been waxed over and then polished. Its often shiny and plastic looking. Edit: lol should've waited until the end to comment
Tbh I feel like this whole thing is very indicative of a deeper problem in the art community, from before AI, that not being skilled or good at art is a bad thing, that you HAVE to be talented, or you HAVE to experienced. They treat skill as a requirement and not as a part of Learning. If you don’t meet those absurdly high expectations your work means nothing. That all those hours of work come crumbling down as soon as someone notices that one anatomical error, or that one style they don’t like. They demand quality work out of someone, regardless of skill level or human error. They treat mistakes as a failure and not a part of learning.
There's definitely a cliquishness to age and skill, but if we are going to get past this and get more interested in the human aspect of the artistic process, we need to be more idea-curious rather than just output-worshipping. If we can rebalance the two, then human art can still be appreciated regardless of super high skill.
Yeah art is probably the sector of society where elitism runs most rampant, and humans have been stereotyping artists as snobs for centuries so that elitism probably isn't a new thing.
Yep. This is why some of the people who use ai are unapologetic about it. I'm not a fan of AI art but there's a reason why it caught on. Some might even be willing to stop using AI and learn how to draw if the community had more empathy.
@@lynnaekenzington to be fair, there are several designs with limited numbers of buttons around the top, and there are also damaged shirts that exists. the difference is that you do it with intent, whereas something generated by AI almost never gains intent on its own.
wtf I’m so early lol… As an amateur artist , I actually have gotten accused of using AI, as I fuck up the hands pretty often, and people have also said I have a shading style similar to ai. LIKE WHAT. Ai doesn’t have a “specific” shading style. Tbh I’m not pro ai or anti ai but the whole drama about is so the problem about it.
Even as someone who’s pretty confident in my art skills, I struggle drawing hands. When I want to post a drawing of a humanoid character online, I either keep redrawing the hands until they’re perfect or just give up and hide the hands behind the character’s back or something. I never really worried about this before AI imagery started to become prevalent, I just cut my losses and put the art up anyway because it was fun. Now I’m always anxious that if I post something with flawed hands, I’ll get AI accusations. ;-;
Same here !. Like I am resorting to using my irl hands as refs… (😭) and tbh using ai as inspirationor ref I if you don’t try passing off the ai as also your own is kinda ok tbh. KINDA. Tho I’m not pro ai
early Ai use blur brush style a lot (and high saturation) ,I knew an artist using anime style with blur edges got accused by twitter viewers ,fkin unlucky for them
You are one of the main reasons why I always look forward to Saturday evenings and motivate myself to get through each week, a video from you is always a blessing and I get so happy every single time I get a notification from you. Thank you, dear Duchess. 🩵💙💛🧡
Rip to the people who draw Nico Robin fan art. Saw a post were the artist was screaming about it's not being AI, it's just she has the power to spawn copies of her limbs on anything, hence why she has a third arm popping out of her back to help carry bags.
@@yoruhimeyaya2184for me its cause for the fandoms i’m in, one of the fandoms congregate the most in twitter and practically nowhere else (the next closest is youtube but youtube isn’t really made for discussions or chatting like reddit or discord). The other main fandom that i’m use twitter for just has a majority women and queer ppl on the app compared to other spaces. Or at the very least that’s what it seems and what shows up on my tl. Bc of that it’s just a lot easier to find a community there than other social medias i use.
I also vouch for deleting tiktok. I got into a miserable pit of hatred on there and finally deleted the app. Still struggle sometimes, but it's not nearly as bad as it used to be
I had my own art claimed to be AI simply because someone asked what my prompt was and I thought they were referring to AI, and they took my response asking what they meant as evidence that I used AI. That and I posted a lot at the time, which had nothing to do with AI it was just because I didn't have a life and spent nearly 24 hours a day drawing- Worst part is when I provided evidence like my speedpaints that show my whole process, they didn't even bother to look at it because one specific type of speedpaint can be faked (ones that don't show sketches and are recorded in software) so therefore mine must also be fake :VVVV
"YOU ARE USING AI" "I- just asked for clarificatio-" "NAH LAD YOURE USING AI" *shows them the speedpaint" "NAH BECAUSE YOU CAN FAKE CERTAIN TYPES OF SPEEDPAINTS" want me to just have an external camera recording my entire drawing process including lunch breaks and whatever? 💀
Sudden and quick stylistic changes can just be the result of a beginner artist- not necessarily AI. I remember when I was starting out every piece looked completely different. This was due to mistakes and/or choosing to try something new. There's also the possibility the artist is doing a style overhaul - as in changing their art style completely. I tried this a few months ago myself, due to hating my previous style.
When it comes to speedpaints specifically I've seen some artist use "side quests" to prove its not ai. Like doing a math problem in the middle of their drawing process. I personally have no need to use side quests in my speedpaints as I struggle with drawing things long enough for it to show up on the speedpaints. Like drawing a hand 30 times because hands are hard.
I never assumed the side quests served as proof! As far as short form quick speedpaints go I always assumed it was for engagement+ just because they DID get distracted
First time I'm hearing of "side quests" in speedpaints! If AI really is the reason, that's sad, because this is an arms race. I dread to imagine the increasingly-elaborate tactics artists will have to resort to in the future.
I saw people doing that for a while on tiktok but know they're being accused of generating an ai image and then tracing it 😑These accusations are starting to get more ridiculous and annoying than actual ai art users...
@@BlandSpaghetti14 accusing someone of tracing ai is nearly impossible to even prove? it really feels like people are using Ai as an excuse to attack artists they personally dislike
As an art student...we can easily can tell between which one is real art create by people and Ai generated image. We will support the real art no matter what even for some one who just starting out in art🙌
Another good idea is to look at the artist other work. Just earlier this week I saw a fanart of PinkiePie, it felt alittle off because her cutiemark was weirdly shaped. The bottoms of the balloons were oddly wide and made them look more squarish. She was also in a laying pose, so the foreshorting on her body was hard to make out. But!! I went to the artist Twitter and found out that they draw her cutiemark like that EVERY time. It's off and squarish- but it's obviously like that as a choice because it's *always* squarish. The face and hair on the Pinkie also lined up with how they draw ponies face and hair on their other pieces. So I came to the conclusion that it wasn't AI. There was another case where I saw someone's fanart, it felt off, I checked their profile and sure enough every other piece they uploaded was entirely different and had even more tells for it being AI.
With the rise of AI art in mainstream media, this is so important to talk about so genuine, real artists don’t get witch hunted or falsely accused of this nonsense 😐 I once posted a finished commission piece in a Discord server that the client also happened to be part of; I also used this sever to advertise my commissions in their open commissions channel Almost immediately a Mod pinged me in the channel openly accusing it of being AI art, deleted the post, and dinged me with a warning, all with ZERO proof. I had to open a ticket to clear my name by giving the source file and they gave a half-hearted apology, but imagine if the client had seen that, or a potential future client saw that, and now their trust in my art was tarnished and I possibly lost their business/future business! It was stressful and humiliating and I’ve never wanted to punch someone through my computer monitor so badly than that smug Mod 😡
Something I've been kinda disappointed with is seeing artists using AI voices and voice actors using AI art... and both while complaining about the fact AI is taking away their opportunities and stealing their work.
You expected anything different? This is where AI was always going to end up - At its best, AI generation is basically a tool for letting artists who only have one skill create projects that require multiple types of art. And of course, at its worst, AI generation is a threat to artists who rely on corporate jobs for income. What you have here is cases where artists are using the good side of AI generators while at the same time fearful of the bad side, which should have been expected because at the end of the day artists are people who love making art - they were always going to start exploring AI at some point to expand the types of art they're able to create.
When there’s too much detail, but the details have no rhyme or reason that’s a great sign. If someone is gonna draw their art with a lot of detail in hair, clothes, weapons etc. they won’t just do random shapes with no pattern
The internet has finally reached the point I've been waiting on. Told my friend months ago "just wait. Soon Ai will be so rampant and the backlash will be so bad, that people will start accusing newer and learning artists that their work is AI because they tend to hyperfocus on one skill and not another specifically coloring and hands." My friend was like no ai art looks like Ai art and I was like my friend...spend more time looking at younger or learning artists.
This is affecting multiple forms of art too. A lot of knitters and crocheters who are aware of ai have noticed that this is going to ruin and invalidate a ton of real non ai projects. And with the time and skill dedication that comes with fiber arts, it really hurts these creators.
What pisses me off is I was accused on one of my drawings, and when I showed my procreate timelapse replay video they wouldn't apologize. They said it looked weird. It took me over 4 hours and created a brush to complete it. After that, I went into an art funk tha,t after a year, I am just barely getting out of.
people accusing people of using AI has just become an easy way to destroy other artist's credibility online. There are so many trolls that just leave 'AI' under art posts now
@@miami7272AI is the problem, if it weren't for people being dishonest and allowing AI slop to seep into every corner of the internet by passing them as legitimate human work we wouldn't be in this mess.
this is acctually such an important topic and if more then 423 people would have seen this, this would genuenly help the art community. really good video
I've done that before as well as placing the thumb on the wrong side of the hand. Many times. Half the time, I don't notice it until after it's saved and posted. :"D
@@ReesesBees It happened to me twice once with Gawr Gura art where i had her pointing a finger, while rest fingers were a fist and i instinctivly gave fist 4 fingers, despite thumb and pointing finger being out of it and other time i was drawing character, that holds her daggers with her pinkies sticking out. Some weird assasin codex shit, they hold daggers as if they were holding a cup of tea and greet each other with dagger to the back i guess.
a thing that's usually super obvious to me is characters' eyes. they very often look as if someone just slapped some shapes on top of each other with absolutely no understanding that those shapes are supposed to make an eye
Great checklist. In a different art, I saw a professor posting that they were getting a huge number of false positives for AI generated text. The AI program to detect AI work was faulty, It was picking up that students were using grammar checkers, and saying they'd generated the work. My response was to suggest that students be told to save all the versions of their work from first conception to final product. AI generates things in one shot, so having old versions which can track the development and change in the writing is proof that AI wasn't used to generate the work. I suspect that a similar thing could work for art. A progression of the image which shows the choices made by the artist, places where things have been erased etc would be proof that they created the art. I enjoy watching painting videos for that very reason, seeing the choices made by the artist, the changes in background, details etc. On a different note, with the advent of AI a lot more people are posting art mindlessly. I've made it a bit of a mission to track down a work of art's origin and give them credit. It has led me to some really fun artists.
AI was made to assist us. Or show us "what if" art, like if Van Gogh was still around it could show an example of what his art would look like. The issue is when dollar signs start popping up. No one can replicate someone elses artstyle perfectly, thats one of the best aspects of art.
and one of the best aspects about art is that it was strickly human... then computer tools came along and made digital art a thing.... we are just repeating history with a new tool. That said... thanks for realizing the useful ness of AI -- I think it would be really cool if image generators were only available to artists, that way people who have no art skill can't replace you.
@@BenjaminAlternate The issue is, digital art still needs you to know how to use a brush, tools, and understand how stuff works, its you doing all the work in the end. This is not the same. But yeah, I've been of the camp that AI art can be used for helping out generate ideas and concepts and try to get some brain ideas firing. But I draw the line at people trying to monetize it and act like they did all the work for throwing in some keywords
This, exactly. AI is best as an added tool in the toolbox, and just like any tool, it can be used and misused. This also reminds me a lot of how photography used to be viewed: people didn't consider it art because the camera (the tool) was doing all the "work" and just capturing an image of something already there. Now, it's an artform of its own. I don't think AI will follow quite the same trajectory, but it's still something to think about.
Given how much AI art improved on hands with designated AIs for generating Art, or the possibility to just remove the hints for AI in AI generated images manually and still be much quicker or better, has me concerned that it will just become more and more difficult in the future to tell if AI was used or not.
AI is definitely getting better and it is getting harder to tell sometimes. right now, at least for me, the realism/anime semi-realism art is very hard to tell human from AI, I can only assume it's because AI is incorporating IRL photos and images to help with accuracy. very stylized art is a bit more obvious because you can tell what is a conscious artist decision and an AI trying to fill in the blanks.
People already can't really tell. I think a better use of our time than trying to identify AI-generated works is figuring out how to tolerate a world where we can't be certain any image didn't use AI. I expect that's going to mean two things: first, appreciating art more for what they are and less for who made them; and second, artists becoming more than just creators or art, using an insight into their lifestyle to make people care more about what they make. Essentially, more artists becoming streamers.
One of the biggest tells for me isn't even in an image itself. Deviantart has been plagued by accounts only a few months old with thousands of fully rendered pieces on them. They'd have to be drawing at an absurd rate of like 33 pieces *a day.* They also tend to have little account info; no links to other websites and no "hey I'm new here and gonna post my entire decade old gallery to this website! ^^"
Yeah, dA runs their own implementation of Stable Diffusion with limited free prompts/week for everyone. But at least (if you submit straight from the results) the submission gets a hard metadata tag for "made using AI tools". I've used their tool myself, but I keep a hard line about only uploading "AI art" in the context of a broader discussion about how AI art works at all. For example, one piece recycles the same prompt but with different weighting on various keywords; in another, I deconstruct/describe the process by which I iterated through a prompt until I was satisfied with the result later. And so on. ...It also helps I'm a traditional media artist.
I think the weirdest abnormality I have encountered is how I can tell, from a look, when images are generated. And I wouldn't be alone in this. I won't even have to see anything specific from the get-go, the work could be almost entirely flawless but it will just give me this feeling. I haven't been wrong with the only time I was half-wrong being when someones art was stolen and put through a filter that tricked my brain. Theres just something so uncanney about ai-generated-works you don't see in man-made stuff. Its not even the artifacts, or the messed up hands its just... something. Even aburdism, photo-bashing, colleges or intentionally weird/unusual stylistic choices don't raise red flags like ai does.
The art community is more toxic than most people want to admit. Calling artists' work AI has become the new popular form of bullying disguised as a public service. It's just jealousy. I have a hard time sharing my hand-drawn work online anymore because of these clowns.
you know, i just now realized the specific colour of your character border being pink, I really like how because it's right between warm and cool colours, it works really well as an outline for both your avatar's pale yellow clothing & scarlet ribbon + belt AND the aqua and azure hair! good vid thx
Also there’s small details that are really weird. Some that I’ve seen are floating lampposts, random doors high up on a wall with no way to get up to them, and tables that don’t seem to have any legs. Even when the hands, eyes, and face look normal, there’s usually something else in the picture that doesn’t make sense.
I've been studying how to draw the human head, learning different methods, and of course practice. Something that I noticed that could be a video topic for a different day and something for other artist to look out for is the amount of ai photographs. Search engines are loaded with them. I'll look up portraits for practice and easily 20% of them will be ai sometimes more. They have similar issues mentioned here where, at first glance, they seem okay, but on closer inspection, things will feel off. Sometimes, it's obvious that someone's neck being abnormally long, or looking like a slug but sometimes, they can be extremely subtle.
Ahh, The Crucible… an interesting experience. In my class (I think it was 11th grade), we read it as a proper play script. Sort of. Half the class read their lines with, like, 0 motivation. That’s just the high school experience, I guess.
Same here, I've never seen the ai art accusations but people taking this so seriously and saying one can ruin someone's career/make them lose a following is INTENSE. I also learned about McCarthyism in history this year which is in the same vein of things.
Lmao, required reading. my teacher spent so long on that play. fun fact, it was written because of the Red Scare (against those who people randomly accused of being communists) and McCarthyism.
I could have told you that 2 years ago. the fact that artists, one of the most liberal groups on the planet, are so extremist in their fight against technological and cultural change is a clear sign that they are dying out. Fear of death is the only logical explanation for such hyper-emotional, irrational reactions as the idea of fighting AI art.
This is so helpful! I have always been extremely cautious not to accuse anyone without knowing for sure. Because I don't want to give my fellow artists a bad time. But it is getting difficult for me to tell if something is AI or not, sometimes it just feels off but I can't really know why. More and more authors use AI to generate character art or their covers. So often I find myself being suspicious but don't know for sure. This leads to me not buying/supporting when in doubt, which is sad. But with writers, you can usually ask them who the artist is. I just want to support fellow authors, but it is getting harder sadly
@@canyongoat2096 What do you mean what if? I still would not want to support it. There is a reason cover artists have to buy the material they make their covers with, even if they heavily edit them.
@@Lufleee How is that related to what I said? Artists can just you know create the art themselves. Or get free cc0 photos or take photos themselves so Idk what you mean they must buy stuff? Or they can create 3D art and render it as cover? Also why would an artist/writer want to spend ages to find a probably not accurate stock photo and buy it (if they chose to not go cc0 route) when they can generate ai stuff that is more in line with what they need. They can also create base art then render it with AI or use img2img or controlnet to get the exact pose they want so at that point AI is just a tool for them like anything else. So then would you not "support" what the artist/writer wants for their own book cover? Lmao
@@canyongoat2096 Exactly. If a writer used AI for their book cover/character art/writing I will not support them. I don't really care if you call it a tool. I find it unethical so I will not give you money for doing it.
It's very easy to detect an AI artist: Are they too good? Then it's AI. (Also if they have mistakes.) But seriously this is the ONLY accurate, specific, well-informed AI-detecting video I have seen so far! Truly well done.
As someone who legitimately struggles with anatomy and hands, and has been having a bit of a art glow up (due to watching tons of TH-cam tutorials practicing a ton), this entire AI witch hunt on the internet scares me.... (and ngl it is a witch hunt at this point...)
Thanks for that. I think we could all use this. I've tried dabbling in art, and produced one beginner's comic in an art class, but I still found myself not noticing most AI errors until someone pointed them out. So, I appreciate the video. One flag I often rely on when looking at a whole gallery rather than just one piece, is the upload dates. AI art tends to be very elaborate, often looking like something that would take all day to produce if not longer. So, if someone has a gallery with a bunch of these, all submitted on the same day, it can mean one of two things: Either they just uploaded a bunch of old work from some other site, or it's AI. Or, it could be lifted straight from the portfolio of another artist, but that's even more worthy of scorn. So, that's often one of the first things I turn to if I start to feel suspicious.
2:38 That’s the problem: people aren’t doing that. They are taking brief looks and making accusations without proper consideration. People don’t actually recognize ai art as well as they think they do, nor take the time to analyze other details that also come in ai art: hair blending in with background, eye shading lacking proper detail and just being smudged, no textures, etc etc. It feels like people are just joining groups not because they care or understand them, but to feel included or to not be harassed if they don’t. You have so many people screaming about how outrageous everything is but when you press, they can only repeat the few things they kept hearing being repeated. It’s tiring.
"4 fingers and a thumb," Uhm... I drew a hand with six fingers once that all looked like octopus's tentacles. :D And that was years before AI art was a thing. It was in my art class in middle school. And everyone laughed at me for it. :(
I think as a general rule of thumb you shouldn't accuse somebody of trying to pass AI art off as handmade unless you're really damn sure. For me the first thing that tips me off is super generic conventionally attractive looking front facing character and a strange mix of photorealism and/or multiple types of rendering in the same image. Then if I decide to investigate, I'll look for 1. Extremely frequent uploads, like several a day 2. Most images have exactly the same vibe and pose but with wildly different types of characters. 3. Within the images, things flow into each other where they shouldn't, like hair turns into clothes, fingers are coming from the wrong direction, etc. And for God's sake, it's so easy to spot natural mistakes with proportion, sketchiness, stuff like that. AI art's imperfections aren't those kinds of imperfections.
id like to add one thing to this list: if youre on a site that typically does not do much or any image compression, look for compression artifacts. sometimes maybe an artist would accidentally compress their own work when retrieving in from a site that does use image compression, but if an image is just posted and claiming to be a recent artwork that the account is claiming is theirs and its horribly compressed to hell in a way an artist with any self respect could never possibly let happen, look a little deeper and see if anything else in the image also suggests the use of ai.
Hmm… why? Is this because of the assumption that the generated work is small… and so will show artifacts…? Or that any person who uses AI art generators… doesn’t care about art? Just wondering how wide a brush stroke that is…
@@WingWong honestly it can be due to both. ive been in servers where ive had to study art posted to make sure it wasnt ai, and the compression is always the first thing that tips me off. ai art isnt made by placing brush strokes with predictable pixel patterns, im sure the ai is even consuming already compressed art. ai doesnt really know how an actual brush would interact with different canvas sizes. the generators might compress the images automatically i think, or its just a natural consequence of trying to shove a bunch of artwork of different resolutions into one canvas thats causes it. could also be through some means of keeping the technology cheap
I generated a lot of anime girls with weapons (sword, bows, spear, guns, etc.) and the AI's completely inept at drawing them. You almost always end up with people holding a sword by its blade, has two hand guards, missing parts, look completely wrong, or the character's holding the weirdest looking stuff that no human would ever imagine or draw. So that's one way to detect.
Hi Duchess! This is a very timely video. I appreciate it for its thought-provoking message, and for trying to calm a growing witch hunt. The distinction between technical and logical errors is a good point. I do however remember one instance of a human-made logical error. It was in a manga, in a panel showing a couple lying in bed. Amusingly, one of them had an extra, third arm. Since this would have been sketched first and then inked, I can only imagine the poor mangaka was too overworked to notice. This was before AI art burst onto the scene. Man, I miss those days more and more... On another note, I feel I should bring up something you mentioned. A couple of times or so, you said AI art generators refer to a huge number of images, whenever they need to generate a new image. I get that simplified explanations are useful. However, I think this description can be misleading for viewers who are just finding out about AI art. I'm not saying this to be antagonistic; the reason I'm saying this is because I've seen Pro-AI commenters deride similar descriptions as being ignorant of how AI actually works. We shouldn't give them ammunition they can attack us with, I think. (For anyone who's curious, what Duchess Celestia said isn't exactly wrong; rather, it's a description that collapses several steps into one. During the training of an AI art model, Millions of images are used. That's one step. After this, the AI art model that's ready for use doesn't contain any of the images... instead, it retains an "understanding" of the patterns it got during training. I'm writing the word "understanding" in quotes, because, as Celestia points out in the video, the AI art model doesn't really comprehend what these images mean in real-world terms.)
+1 on pointing this out. It will get attacked if used as part of one’s argument. But I’m not really sure there is a definition or description which will satisfy both sides without incensing one side or the other.
Another note about repeated textures: people can use digital brushes with no variation in the shapes used, leading to repetitive plants and other background elements.
I don't fully agree cause I've seen humans making logical mistakes. Extra fingers in manga, my bestie once swaped right and left feet, I sometimes sketch hands with the same thing, but all of that has one same reason: these were all quick drawings. Manga in question was old and even made traditionally, so author probably was way too overworked to notice, or did not have time to redraw that panel. My bestie just wanned to draw something quick and she, as well as I, does have adhd, so just did not notice that. I always draw my first sketch how it feels and later check to fix anatomy + I have a rule to NEVER finish and post art piece in the same day. So, for the artists: even if you can draw quickly, you have to take breaks. Do the sketch and continue the next day, you'll see your mistakes and it won't be too late to fix them. Or too hard. About AI: as people mentioned down there, there are usually artifacts, things blending and fusing in a weird way and overall logic. For example, yes, people and AI both have broken anatomy, but there is a difference. You can google creepy AI art to trait yourself. Also, if the art is really complex and detailed, like a professional drew it, but there are these logical mistakes, that might be a red flag, especially if a person is posting a lot, when that type of picture would take way more time to create But it can be easy to prove for the artist, that art is real. Traditionally we can take a few photos with some backgrounds in your house or outside, cause that is not possible for AI + it makes a lot worse mistakes with rooms and stuff. Digitally we have our canvas and can show the layers. Yeah, you should be working on different layers if possible + it's beneficial in 99% of cases to do so for your art
8:40 speaking of intentionality when it comes to hands, there is a mutation known as polydactyly that affects limbs which gives people extra toes, thumbs, pinkies, etc. One of the most well-known characters with this condition is stanford pines from gravity falls. But thats because it was intentional! Similarly, certain art styles only allow for three fingers and a thumb, or species such as elves from The Dragon Prince. The key difference however is that A.I doesnt have any intention. Its physically incapable of it. And while an artist will be consistent with these choices, an A.I wont. Because it doesnt make choices. It spits out what it calculates you want, and then waits for the next input. (Side note: chopped fingies also count as intention)
AHEM Ai hands include(but are not limited to) Improper finger size (Mainly too long.) Too many, or too little, or even halves of fingers. Improper finger placement. Oddly shaped hands in general. May I remind you that AI generated images are built off of other people's real art. So, just remember that when someone's artstyle looks like AI, that could mean it was stolen to create AI image "models" (I do too much research on this type of stuff.)
I'm really glad this video mentioned that the technology is advancing so fast that all these red-flags may be entirely invalid in a year or two... or maybe even in a month or two. Seriously, I frequent a few sights where both AI generated images and actual human created art can be posted so long as everything is properly tagged. I used to be pretty consistent at predicting what those tags would be based on just the thumbnail preview, but it's been getting harder and harder, and seems more and more likely each passing day that it will eventually become impossible. Which is equal parts terrifying, but also kind of exciting. I mean, I do feel so bad for all the human artists who have put so much effort in to training a skill... but at the same time the potential for anyone to easily create a visual representation of whatever they imagine is not entirely without value... already I've seen things like D&D groups that use AI to quickly generate scenery references. Of the big old elephant in the room isn't really how individual people might use AI image generation, it's how corporations will use it to cut costs and phase out an ever-increasing number of jobs.
Correct. Real artists will zoom out on their art and see if there's any errors, like missing sections, parts that might've been merged wrong, or parts that weren't coloured.
Heyo! I was the one who wrote the reddit post in the description. I wrote that post about a year ago, and since then, I have learned a bit about how ai models and training models work, so I've edited the post lmao. But that aside, The big concept about how to identify ai generated images are correct though. The incorrect information is as follows: generative ai models are a bunch of parameters that imitate brain neurons, and with how many of them the average stable diffusion model has, it's about as smart as a magpie. WIth that said though, digital neurons are stupider than fleshy ones, so stable diffusion probably *isn't* as smart as a magpie. Also, image generation is just a denoising algorithm. To train the model, you just do the process of generating an image in reverse. You give Stable diffusion a picture with a description, and ask it to re-noise it. Cheers!
Stuff like this is why in a story I’m writing about a military AI, that is able to access the internet, gains sentience, and just wants to live, and not hurt anyone because it sees humanity as beautiful, due to their creativity and doesn’t understand why’d they want to war with each other, is unsure if it itself could create any art that is truly meaningful, because it doesn’t know whether or not the thing it creates is something it generated from a prompt and what it knows from the data under the word art, or if it’s actually something it created from having genuine emotions with experiences, and it knows that if it did make something meaningful to it, humanity would just toss it aside under the rightful assumption it means nothing because an AI made it. The AIs whole arc is figuring out if it is in fact truly alive or not, finding out what it means to be alive, and learning what it means to truly love and care for someone. With the AI also using it’s optimism towards humanity to help it’s human friend learn to grow into himself and be confident with who is, as the human acts as the AIs northstar, the AIs guiding light to how kind humanity can be. My story is supposed to be introspective, and optimistic, while also talking about the prominence of people using AIs as shortcuts in today’s day and age, if an AI did become sentient how could it prove it is alive, and to provide another perspective on what would happen if an AI became sentient.
Honestly, I just found out how good ai art has became a few days ago, like DAMN. I was just using it to differentiate between my bots on character ai (they are private). I really hate the fact this stuff is being misused. This could be a GREAT way to help us artists figure out character designs as inspiration and more, but these companies and others just keep pushing for advances in ai art. It's honestly disheartening that they seem to want to push us artists out of the picture so badly
No one actually wants to push artists out of the industry, that's just a potential consequence of people pursuing AI art for their own reasons. Those reasons most commonly being: for the companies making these tools, making money; and for the people using these tools, creating images specific to their tastes or needs that they wouldn't have been able to acquire otherwise.
@@yurisei6732 well how do ai art generators make money if they're not replacing human artists? Their business model is built on it so ofc it will happen
@@anny8720 Three places: 1. Corporate imagery and stock footage, where there are already no artists. 2. Selling to the tech bros who try to turn everything into a bubble, who were never going to hire artists because their projects specifically depend on the flare in the word "AI". 3. Use by private civilians who need a lot of tailored assets, eg people running D&D games, who were never going to hire artists because commissions are too expensive to be used like this.
As a self taught artist of more than a decade plus 6 years, the way I can spot AI art is how it has a sheen to it and also looks "Perfect". I can tell a artwork from an actual human being compared to an art made by a person who typed in a prompt in an algorithm software that uses scraped (stolen artwork) saved into a database. DeviantRhal (A veteran artist of the industry) made a video critiquing Shadversity defending his lazy usage of AI and the reason why AI art is just wrong and takes away from skilled artists.
ask the computer scientists, we WANT it to do everything it can. if you don't want to use AI then stop using Adobe PS or Clip studio or Procreate so many of your "digital" art features have technically been AI for a very long time.
@@BenjaminAlternate AI is artificial intelligence. Lots of stuff that is called AI isn’t AI, people just need to learn the difference between technology and artificial intelligence.
Another piece of supporting evidence I think is worth bringing up is inconsistent character design if an artist is claiming to be drawing the same character, if the design is always slightly off I think that's a bit sus because while an artist can sometimes forget details/change, add or remove accessories to a character design, it might be a bit odd if they seem to not be able to draw consistently most objects on the same character
Agreed, artistic AI cannot reliably reproduce what I like to call "fingerprint" details -- mostly superficial details but which we humans intuitively use to tell different (but similar) individuals apart. For example, I tried prompting an AI (for several hours) to draw Renamon (the popular Digimon) and part of this character's design are magatama markings on their upper legs. The AI simply _could not_ reliably reproduce these markings, and even minor changes to otherwise the same prompt (even within the same RNG seed) resulted in slightly but noticeably different patterns.
@@Stratelier do you mean stuff like facial features? Cause if that’s the case the fingerprint features are what i suck at the most lol all of my characters look entirely different whenever I try to make them look on model
@@selenite3890 No, not exactly -- and it would be "supporting evidence" to include alongside a stronger argument, not an argument on its own. Every time you design a character there will be certain key details you make sure to get right every time you draw them (but it's okay if they're not precisely identical each time; precision is hard). An AI, however, has no consistency on basically anything.
really useful guide. I've been looking mostly for elements of intentional design - essentially the first point - but will now be paying attention to lineart. Makes perfect sense that an AI wouldn't be able to replicate a line outside of very specific styles, considering it doesn't know what a line is! Anyway all that being said, I can't help but remember that time when a family member was entertaining child-me and drew a hexapod bird because she couldn't remember how many legs birds have lol
I made a few drawings to start off with, took a lot of time and effort, posted it to my Facebook and the first comment was "Nice AI work" that caused an echo chamber of "of yeah this is totally AI"
I love when people are like _"I think your art is AI, guess you'll have to show us more of your art 🥺😔🤩"_ type of stuff! I think it's so cute when people are joking around and genuinely want to see more of someone's art 😭
How i spot AI art: -Crippled Hands or fingers -Shiny glossy textures if its a digital painting -clothes melting into the skin -deformed legs and feet (Sometimes they'll have more than two pairs of legs) -items such as jewelry, flags or logo's would be badly misshapen and placed in random areas or floating. someone found out an artist was using Ai by pointing out the zipper on the jacket -Microsoft copilot puts a watermark on AI images
I get frustrated with the way artificial images are filling up social media and art sites (and even being promoted by them), but we can't go around attacking eachother abou it. A friend of mine got that accusation despite the fact she'd been posting work-in-progress posts, and the person saying it was pretty rude about it and gave her a list of "mistakes" that were... really just choices she'd made in constructing the scene, but, even so, they wrote it out like "no human could be that bad at art"... like, geeeeez.
The one phrase that terrifies me through out this video: "as it continues to improve". We MUST establish laws that require people who use AI to generate art or help with the creation process to disclose that AI has been used in the process.
Free tools to protect your art from AI (both developed and offered by the University of Chicago): - Glaze makes your style not recognisable by the AI, therefore it cannot imitate it - Nightshade makes the subject of the image easy to recognise as a different subject by the AI, so that any AI that takes that image into its database won't be able to classify it correctly, therefore spoiling the database of information about that subject and producing uncorrect images based on that spoiled database Read all the explanations and indications on the internet pages dedicated to these tools in order to use them effectively!
The glaze and venom tools are pretty amazing. Though.. I do wonder what the long term impact of doing this will be. Ie, I see this corrupting non-image systems down the line as people use these images to train things like dictionaries or vision-to-text systems. Or vision comprehension systems.
I suspect that what lie at the heart of these accusations are not only a lack of information on how an AI art program thinks and function but a fear of being replaced and of the loss of authenticity. The internet needs more videos like this! Thank you so much Duchess Celestia for helping to combat the spread of misinformation!
This is both a useful checklist for sussing out AI art, but it's also a super good checklist of art mistakes to practice/avoid, as someone just starting out!
There should be a law where you have to put a watermark saying "THIS IS AI!" on the bottom left or smthing. Even though this can be easily avoided by just coloring it in, cropping the photo, etc., it would still do an effect to stop a bit of AI art frauds.
This was so helpful. Not because i call artist out for using AI but because I dont want to end up accidently supporting somone who only uses AI art. I legitimately can not tell the difference sometimes 😭
I hope you keep trying despite that. Everyone is bad at drawing at some point and it's always a climb to improve. You have the exact same starting point as Vermeer, Da'Vinci and Rockwell, etc.
Im not sure if its lack of sleep, your mic, or the topic making my brain pick up on things not there. But your voice has a slight robotic effect to it at certain tones/frequencies and parts in the video. Im not complaining or trying to nitpick, but i find it really funny in a vidro about ai art. Anyway, love your videos, you have a very jice voice to listen to and your points and opinions, and your art is just soothing to look at. Thank you for posting
Always keep psd files (or whatever program format you use) I was shocked to get the accusation myself once, cause as weird as it sounds, I did not think my art was actually good enough to be accused of Ai! It’s one thing I have a problem with these accusations, cause as much I may not like Ai, Ai is REALLY fucking good at rendering! And I have often concerned the discouragement some younger artists might get hearing that. Like “if this looks bad to people then my art must be horrendous!” Like it’s one thing to get on the soulless nature of Ai, and some of the glaringly obviousness mistakes, but most the time Ai still makes detailed outputs, and acting like humans don’t make mistakes in their own work is just insane and toxic.
if theres one thing r-34 taught me is spotting ai images, and seeing how "lack of emotion" they are, when you realize it, they're really not interesting just "pretty" and I look for actually artist drawn pieces for observing and their "style"
Thank you for making this. I am so glad it came up in my Browse because this topic comes up in my comments as a question quite often in classes I teach or occasionally here on YT. (I'm a machine learning engineer). I will save your video and direct people to watch it!
@ the 800 million people commenting that my voice sounds weird and bad or my mic is broken or i used AI to voice this video: i’ve had pneumonia for a month and did my best to edit out raspiness, wheezing, and coughing. i still have it and am doing my best with this my next videos, but it would be cool if y’all didn’t immediately interpret everything in the worst faith possible, and maybe be a little more understanding rather than immediately critical and accusatory.
Get better soon!
That's such a mean thing to say! I hope you know that for every person saying something weird like that there's a thousand who simply thought your video was great and moved on.
This is the Internet. People will, without fail, always assume the worst and if they can't find the worst, they will fabricate it just to attack it. It's a sad, sad reality of our klout-based online culture.
That said, this video was great. Truly appreciate the insight from someone who seems to not only know one side, but the other as well. Please get well soon!
Hope you get better soon! I’m sorry people have been being jerks.
what in the world... your voice sounds fine!! get well soon.
I see so many people accuse of AI on tiktok especially for specific artstyles and it's INSANE
I remember when Ai became popular and was getting better. That was my biggest fear to happend, people mistaking real art whith Ai....
And looks like is gonna get worse :,)
I've seen people accuse some Vtubers of using AI for their MODELS' MOVEMENT.
Unfortunately some styles do get hit most with accusations, because those are exactly the styles that get produced by AI... just a f-ed up situation all around for artists.
@@tcg2717 and its even worse, because those styles the Ai stole are very hard to learn, so is like some kind of "more efort you put on make it realistic or hyper detailed, more false and contraproducent it would looks like"
Just like TH-cam whith his Coopa laws and the Sonic animators situation, the effort is unfairly taken down
@@DeadnyMaster You are exactly right. The more realistically rendered your style, the more likely you will get accused of using AI. Because that's what 99% of the AI slop out there is going for. The situation really sucks.
A side effect of people passing off AI generated art as their own work is that it will become part of the training data for future AIs. This could create a weird feedback loop that actually makes the AI worse.
Eventually or pretty soon, they will have to develop A.I. that creates its own synthetic data to compensate for lack of human-made data. That's how it could become superhuman, as developers put it.
An ouroboros, a snake eating its own tail, is how I've heard it described.
Wait, that would be awesome cause them ai generated images would look like crap
the worse side effect is drastically lowering common viewers' standard ,people will start ignoring obvious mistakes like fingers ,multiple hands because the "vibe" is good enough for them.
Saw a spy family AI pic with more than 100k engagement/likes ,there're literally multiple hands but few people noticed.
That is to say that, while we could use it to get the best results in certain things we are not emotionally attached to, such as coding, driving or cleaning up waste, it's just unproductive and meaningless to try to make it generate the best art, novel or human voice, how to live...subjective things that can only exist in our context. Using A.I. for that purpose only creates more noise to be instantly consumed and forgotten... So, it's unethical to not make the distinction between what is made by humans and what is made by A.I.
The biggest danger I see, when it comes to this kind of use, is that it could hinder our ability to have a connection with entities that WE KNOW FOR A FACT are conscious and human like we are.
Moreover, we would be incapable of knowing when, how or why A.I. might turn against us.
ai may be notorious for messing up hands, but artists are notorious for talking about how awful hands are to draw and how easy they are to mess up.
Which is strange hands are one of the parts i don't find intimidating to draw, maybe because alll the time i've spend in my life looking at mine... 😂
@@chiari4833 different people have different strengths and weaknesses, this may be why you’re good at hands while others are not!
some days i can do hands no problem and on other days hands make me want to jump off a bridge. but yeah, from what i've noticed, the most obvious ai hands are the ones where the ai gets confused and just decided to merge the fingers together. hands alone are not at all enough to accuse anyone of ai art.
Ik, how did everyone (including me, a (kinda) artist) forget this?!
It’s the kind of error that you want to look for. Clearly bad proportions, stiff or awkward drawing etc will indicate an inexperienced artist. Mashed potato fingers, mutated anatomy that is otherwise exceedingly accurate or well drawn, these tend to give away AI images. And a DC artist recently got busted using Midjourney, so don’t assume it’s just young artists taking short cuts, and always give the benefit of your doubt to other creators, especially if young. The more art you make, and look at, the more obvious the generally very small things AI gets wrong will become.
totally recommend spotting ai based on how frequently it was posted too! a lot of ai 'creators' tend to post at a frequency rate a normal artist cant achieve (fully rendered works every hour/every few hours), and determining if the styles match up. ai can struggle with folds, and you'll be able to see in their gallery if their art seems to have these patterns. don't auto-accuse someone based off one work, it takes a lot of different ones to determine this:)
to add to this
be careful not to accuse actual artists who are just dumping a pre-prepared portfolio of art, to establish their precense on a site for example
like many things, post frequency is also a matter of context
@@seymourflux747 FOR SURE!! i meant consistently:)
You really see this with artists who post mecha, especially intensely complex designs. That stuff takes days and weeks to plan out, render, color, polish, and so on. For an artist to post an insanely complex robot every day is just impossible.
@@seymourflux747 But even in that context, if someone drops a whole dump of AI images at once, you can look at them in context and realize that they all looks kind of samey.
@@seymourflux747 This is why I check the artist's history, not just their frequent posting. These aren't the only factors but just an example.
This is why I recommend digital artists record part of the drawing process or keep around the original layer files. The quickest way to prove you drew something is to show the off process.
That'd be good advice, but you know DeviantART; you are either AI-extreme or No-AI. Or maybe I got cancelled for something else people keep bringing up in the background. Idk. Because I 'used' AI, even deleting the AI art on my DeviantART wasn't enough. Kind of toxic. I literally have to tell them that I won't use AI in commissions only for them to ask for 'murals' again. I never use AI to staple things together; only to find out how a work could go wrong. But no, as of today, I have to 'go sober'. I mean, look at the video; no neutral terms are used; the video maker even calls things to do with AI that I'm talking about 'Accusations'. It kind of isn't fair to those choosing to split the difference, so in order to be fair to myself, I automatically have to leave the AI scene. I'm not mad about it; I'd be happy to learn how to code and show my process like you said about art. But I guess AI by itself, made by someone other than the artist is lazy at the end of the day. It isn't that I care that it took me this long to 'repent'. I just don't like being bashed for building blocks. I have to use mental gymnastics because of the autopilot others create, and it isn't fair. I'll stop using AI (starting today, 4 13 2024), but that doesn't mean I care for trick AIs (and every single AI has some form of price, believe me), nor is it that I like people who can't trust me at first to see if I'm legit. I'll even give you my DA to show I'm not scared of you starting to bash as well. TintedHQ.
@@hqTheToaster This reply seems like it's supposed to be a comment on it's own.
I've had people say my art looks like AI, while there is a time lapse right next to it.
@@MicalMical111 Are you one of those people pretending to ask for art to use in Murals? Are you part of the problem? I hope not. Because as of the turn of the hour, I took away your ammunition for doing that. Now what?
@@Arikasy That is just AI users being jerks I think (Edit: That or corporations hiding their true intent.). I wouldn't think too much about it. I'm sure your art is completely fine.
Something to mention, if an artist draws only 3 fingers ( and one thumb) , it is most likely a stylistic choice. Like you said, hands are incredibly hard to draw and only adding 3 fingers is much easier and it looks better on simpler art styles. So, look for hands with more fingers/thumbs than less fingers.
Four fingered hands (including thumb) is a pretty classic style for cartoons. I'm surprised it's being used to label art ai.
@@wayIess Yeah, I am just saying this so people don't go around seeing artists with a cartoony style and saying their art is ai generated.
@@Mickie_Draws_StuffAh, gotcha 😁
I’m loving 4 fingers ngl
It’s a western cartoon art style trope
24:32 TO BE FAIR sometimes real artists also forget to continue belts and straps and stuff like that after they are obscured or forget to add frills to the other half of the bow. It can be caused by lack of attention, being a beginner, being in a rush (which results in lack of attention), or just being very very very tired (which causes lack of attention). It happened to me quite a number of times 🤡
The solution to it is more for the artists to let the piece rest a bit before posting. Looking at it with fresh eyes make these mistakes easier to spot and fix. But too many times we are in a rush to upload our pieces or to send it before a deadline only to realize that oops they forgot to continue to pattern of that shirt below the arms, and then bemoan or joke about their own recklesness.
Meanwhile, AI prompters wouldn't even notice that there is something wrong, and if someone points it out it is called nitpicking or gatekeeping, or go one about how these little flaws won't be a problema in the future and how great their art is and other bullshit like that.
Artists also mess up symmetry, mess up spacing between buttons or other objects, fill in space with semi-random textures which look good enough at a distance, etc.
@@stillbuyvhs yeah, its all a matter of how instead of what. AI generated pics have this melted aspect to its mistakes that only a computer seems to make, where with artists it has more intent and clarity, if that makes sense.
Sometimes I hate rush culture....(edit: actually when did ANYONE like rush culture??)
Once I drew a strap or something and it didn’t lead to anything, it was in class and I was very tired due to a bad sleep schedule. I noticed it and was like “damn Ai Kyubeyo”.
i once forgot to add a tail to a cat because I was too focused on other details and completely forgot about it lmao.
but yeah, it's so important to be able to recognize what is AI and what might just be human error. humans aren't perfect either and sometimes mistakes slip through.
As a friend of an artist that got their accounts on sites like twitter and vgen attacked and reported from the "It just looks like AI" crowd or they use faulty websites that "tell if it's AI" . It's nice to see videos like this pop up that help both sides.
Imagine spending hours, days, even weeks drawing, messing up, and rendering an art piece; only for some randos to accuse you of using AI
Happened to me, but only with my best work. It's why I just don't post it anymore. If I do anything realistic, spend weeks on it, it just gets called AI garbage. If I do a shitty napkin drawing it goes viral... I only share the doodles now, lol. The stuff I'm most proud of is just for me and people irl because y'know, they're standing there while I make it and it's kind of hard to hide it when they're watching you draw it in the same room, lol.
All the damn time. I had one piece that I was so stoked to finish because it took me over 60 hours to finish. Literally 3 minutes after posting I was accused of using AI. I wish there was an accurate site that would allow you to submit your art and get a "Certificate of human authenticity". I tried testing my art on some of the is it AI or not websites. I submitted a photo I took of a tattoo I had completed that day. Guess what, apparently it was 75% AI. Nothing seems to be reliable these days a d it sucks for those that have worked so damn hard to get to where they are. I can't wait for AI to eat it's own tail as it trains itself on itself.
Then you should ignore them. If those anti-AI idiots were going to be zealot enough to accuse everything people do as computer generated without looking carefully at your stuff, then you have no reason to take them seriously.
@@AghTheLight I just got kicked from a writer's server because they took my art, plugged it into an AI art detector, and it came back 85% AI. Meanwhile, my other art peices (which were even more elaborate) came back less than 2%. I did a little digging, and apparently, if you take a screenshot of the problematic picture, it comes back as no AI (which makes so sense). Also, if they subject is large and the only thing in the picture, it's more likely to get tagged as well. I'm pretty devastated, I spent close to 40 hours on this sketch, just to get labeled an AI user and muted. They didn't even give me a chance to show them my layers :(
@@toastedbabybuns1000 It's horrendous isn't it? I've had my art ripped off a wall and burnt in front of me and that wasn't as soul crushing as people instantly thinking my work is AI. The only medium I have left that can in no way be accused of being AI is my tattooing. Even paintings can be faked these days. I just hold hope for the day it eats it's own tail (I like to call it AI-roborus). It is now training itself on itself so it is bound to happen right?
EDIT: Forgot to add. The lack of recourse is quite frankly, disgusting. We should have a right to defend ourselves and show our processes.
"I was ready for machines to start passing the turing test, I wasn't ready for humans to start failing it" -Lily Alexandre
@@lilunette9319 Yes, what you are describing is "machines" or, more broadly fake stuff, passing the turing test (aka real humans confusing it as legit). The opposite process, humans failing the turing test, describes humans confusing other real humans for machines/ai/fake shit.
@21:54 There was apparently an episode of an old Filmation cartoon where they accidentally gave a character an extra arm for a few frames. When someone's working fast, they make mistakes you'd never expect a human to make.
Those are intentional and are called smears
Could be with cel animation, they left a cel in the frame that wasn't supposed to be there. Not a drawing thing
thats smears of animation
Sounds like smear framing, which is a way to mimic the idea of motion blur in 2d animation.
My biggest way to judge AI art really is composition
Just look at the picutre and think 'would an artist who wants to draw really want to do so in that pose, in taht framing, with those specific details in that specific scene?' human's context-based tought process is the real true separator from computers who'se tought process is data-based instead
One thing I’ve really noticed with AI generated images is the inconsistency between the lineart and the colors. In the image with the girls and the bird in the back, the shading is what most would consider expert level, but the mistakes were beginner. It’s hard to believe a human would have that lopsided of a skill level. Not saying it doesn’t happen, but it’s one of those things I always take into account.
I follow someone with amazing rendering skills but their actual style is barely above beginndr anatomy wise and it kinda kills me-
@@arkangel44 A lot of the times it could be stylization. But! Stylization vs obvious, stupid mistakes in anatomy are obvious.
Nah, honestly, it can happen. I'm really good with my sketch and line art... but terrible at traditional coloring because i hardly ever finish a piece to that point 🤡
personally, as a kid, coloring and shading came EXCEPTIONALLY easy to me to the point I was making realistic glow effects in 2nd grade with ms paint and a mousepad. meanwhile my anatomy looked like that of a mildly talented 3rd grader. growing up, that was always the case for the people that art just came easy to before they actually started studying, one aspect would always be professional level but the rest looked obviously childish
This is not going to work. Because these are still two difference skills. Drawing, Inking, coloring, painting, not all artists master all these. So no you cannot accuse based on this scenario.
If I didn't start my art journey a decade ago I would NEVER have the motivation to today.. from stuff like this, to increasing general hostility, no hope at all for a job in the industry, list goes on. We need to be the ones to step up and make this a better place and encourage new artists. I understand wanting to smite ai bros into the earth but one false accusation can kill someone's entire motivation and journey, especially starting out before you've really found your inspiration and love for art. It really is a shitty situation on all sides.. but just fact checking before you ruin someone is the least we can do
Right, I don't want to know how many young artists have given up due to ai.
One way i can usually tell something is AI is in the finer details. Often it smears a lot of small things. Also it usually has this look as if its been waxed over and then polished. Its often shiny and plastic looking.
Edit: lol should've waited until the end to comment
Tbh I feel like this whole thing is very indicative of a deeper problem in the art community, from before AI, that not being skilled or good at art is a bad thing, that you HAVE to be talented, or you HAVE to experienced. They treat skill as a requirement and not as a part of Learning. If you don’t meet those absurdly high expectations your work means nothing. That all those hours of work come crumbling down as soon as someone notices that one anatomical error, or that one style they don’t like. They demand quality work out of someone, regardless of skill level or human error. They treat mistakes as a failure and not a part of learning.
This is very true, not to mention the ageism in the community as a whole.
There's definitely a cliquishness to age and skill, but if we are going to get past this and get more interested in the human aspect of the artistic process, we need to be more idea-curious rather than just output-worshipping. If we can rebalance the two, then human art can still be appreciated regardless of super high skill.
Yeah art is probably the sector of society where elitism runs most rampant, and humans have been stereotyping artists as snobs for centuries so that elitism probably isn't a new thing.
Yep. This is why some of the people who use ai are unapologetic about it. I'm not a fan of AI art but there's a reason why it caught on.
Some might even be willing to stop using AI and learn how to draw if the community had more empathy.
@@LMaruchanha, don't kid yourself. Ai bros will never change.
"Shirt folds and buttons" - Aka, I as an artist fail FANTASTICALLY at these and did not even know about the button thing 😓
Wait, you didn’t know buttons on shirts are evenly spaced?
Nope. I thought they got farther apart at the bottom. I swear I had an old vintage shirt that was like that.
@@lynnaekenzington to be fair, there are several designs with limited numbers of buttons around the top, and there are also damaged shirts that exists. the difference is that you do it with intent, whereas something generated by AI almost never gains intent on its own.
wtf I’m so early lol…
As an amateur artist , I actually have gotten accused of using AI, as I fuck up the hands pretty often, and people have also said I have a shading style similar to ai. LIKE WHAT. Ai doesn’t have a “specific” shading style. Tbh I’m not pro ai or anti ai but the whole drama about is so the problem about it.
This is one of the many reasons I'm scared to post any art I make on youtube (Also I'm not very good lol)
YES. (Not younger me resorting to post my art on Picsart or other small ass apps. Tho the communities in those smaller spaces go hard tbh)
Even as someone who’s pretty confident in my art skills, I struggle drawing hands. When I want to post a drawing of a humanoid character online, I either keep redrawing the hands until they’re perfect or just give up and hide the hands behind the character’s back or something. I never really worried about this before AI imagery started to become prevalent, I just cut my losses and put the art up anyway because it was fun. Now I’m always anxious that if I post something with flawed hands, I’ll get AI accusations. ;-;
Same here !.
Like I am resorting to using my irl hands as refs… (😭) and tbh using ai as inspirationor ref I if you don’t try passing off the ai as also your own is kinda ok tbh. KINDA. Tho I’m not pro ai
early Ai use blur brush style a lot (and high saturation) ,I knew an artist using anime style with blur edges got accused by twitter viewers ,fkin unlucky for them
You are one of the main reasons why I always look forward to Saturday evenings and motivate myself to get through each week, a video from you is always a blessing and I get so happy every single time I get a notification from you. Thank you, dear Duchess. 🩵💙💛🧡
Rip to the people who draw Nico Robin fan art. Saw a post were the artist was screaming about it's not being AI, it's just she has the power to spawn copies of her limbs on anything, hence why she has a third arm popping out of her back to help carry bags.
instant click!!!! omg i'm so glad you made this video. not everything is AI and it's sad people will shout "AI!!!!" at everything nowadays
“AI!!!!-” *gets shot*
Some use AI Detectors for that.🤦♀️
rename this video to "delete twitter" and honestly everything works out. Just delete twitter. You don't need it... escape.
Better yet, don’t step foot onto the platform in the first place, if you can avoid it.
I honestly want to,but I'm part of a very small fandom and the only other artist in same fandom is in twitter
@@yoruhimeyaya2184for me its cause for the fandoms i’m in, one of the fandoms congregate the most in twitter and practically nowhere else (the next closest is youtube but youtube isn’t really made for discussions or chatting like reddit or discord). The other main fandom that i’m use twitter for just has a majority women and queer ppl on the app compared to other spaces. Or at the very least that’s what it seems and what shows up on my tl. Bc of that it’s just a lot easier to find a community there than other social medias i use.
I also vouch for deleting tiktok. I got into a miserable pit of hatred on there and finally deleted the app. Still struggle sometimes, but it's not nearly as bad as it used to be
i struggle because i dont know where else i can go for growing online, twitter is the most familiar to me
I had my own art claimed to be AI simply because someone asked what my prompt was and I thought they were referring to AI, and they took my response asking what they meant as evidence that I used AI.
That and I posted a lot at the time, which had nothing to do with AI it was just because I didn't have a life and spent nearly 24 hours a day drawing-
Worst part is when I provided evidence like my speedpaints that show my whole process, they didn't even bother to look at it because one specific type of speedpaint can be faked (ones that don't show sketches and are recorded in software) so therefore mine must also be fake :VVVV
"YOU ARE USING AI"
"I- just asked for clarificatio-"
"NAH LAD YOURE USING AI"
*shows them the speedpaint"
"NAH BECAUSE YOU CAN FAKE CERTAIN TYPES OF SPEEDPAINTS"
want me to just have an external camera recording my entire drawing process including lunch breaks and whatever? 💀
@@LunaWithTheStrat FOR REAL THOOO
@@LunaWithTheStratOMG SO TRUE. LIKE YOU SHOWED THE SPEEDPAINT, THAT’S THE ONLY TYPE OF EVIDENCE YOU CAN SHOW, WHAT MORE DO THEY WANT FROM YOU???
To everyone who has accidentally drawn a character with to right hands: I see you, and you are still a real artist
Sudden and quick stylistic changes can just be the result of a beginner artist- not necessarily AI. I remember when I was starting out every piece looked completely different. This was due to mistakes and/or choosing to try something new. There's also the possibility the artist is doing a style overhaul - as in changing their art style completely. I tried this a few months ago myself, due to hating my previous style.
... Which is why Celeste only called it "supportive evidence" aka without any of the hard evidence that point doesn't hold any merit on its own.
@@helion_ut I was only elaborating a bit more in that. Celeste didn't say much about this point- so I was adding a bit of context.
When it comes to speedpaints specifically I've seen some artist use "side quests" to prove its not ai. Like doing a math problem in the middle of their drawing process. I personally have no need to use side quests in my speedpaints as I struggle with drawing things long enough for it to show up on the speedpaints. Like drawing a hand 30 times because hands are hard.
I never assumed the side quests served as proof! As far as short form quick speedpaints go I always assumed it was for engagement+ just because they DID get distracted
First time I'm hearing of "side quests" in speedpaints! If AI really is the reason, that's sad, because this is an arms race. I dread to imagine the increasingly-elaborate tactics artists will have to resort to in the future.
I saw people doing that for a while on tiktok but know they're being accused of generating an ai image and then tracing it 😑These accusations are starting to get more ridiculous and annoying than actual ai art users...
@@BlandSpaghetti14 accusing someone of tracing ai is nearly impossible to even prove? it really feels like people are using Ai as an excuse to attack artists they personally dislike
Gotta love how we have to answer captchas in our timelapses now
As an art student...we can easily can tell between which one is real art create by people and Ai generated image. We will support the real art no matter what even for some one who just starting out in art🙌
Another good idea is to look at the artist other work.
Just earlier this week I saw a fanart of PinkiePie, it felt alittle off because her cutiemark was weirdly shaped. The bottoms of the balloons were oddly wide and made them look more squarish.
She was also in a laying pose, so the foreshorting on her body was hard to make out.
But!! I went to the artist Twitter and found out that they draw her cutiemark like that EVERY time. It's off and squarish- but it's obviously like that as a choice because it's *always* squarish.
The face and hair on the Pinkie also lined up with how they draw ponies face and hair on their other pieces. So I came to the conclusion that it wasn't AI.
There was another case where I saw someone's fanart, it felt off, I checked their profile and sure enough every other piece they uploaded was entirely different and had even more tells for it being AI.
With the rise of AI art in mainstream media, this is so important to talk about so genuine, real artists don’t get witch hunted or falsely accused of this nonsense 😐
I once posted a finished commission piece in a Discord server that the client also happened to be part of; I also used this sever to advertise my commissions in their open commissions channel
Almost immediately a Mod pinged me in the channel openly accusing it of being AI art, deleted the post, and dinged me with a warning, all with ZERO proof.
I had to open a ticket to clear my name by giving the source file and they gave a half-hearted apology, but imagine if the client had seen that, or a potential future client saw that, and now their trust in my art was tarnished and I possibly lost their business/future business!
It was stressful and humiliating and I’ve never wanted to punch someone through my computer monitor so badly than that smug Mod 😡
Gosh im so sorry!
Something I've been kinda disappointed with is seeing artists using AI voices and voice actors using AI art... and both while complaining about the fact AI is taking away their opportunities and stealing their work.
You expected anything different? This is where AI was always going to end up - At its best, AI generation is basically a tool for letting artists who only have one skill create projects that require multiple types of art. And of course, at its worst, AI generation is a threat to artists who rely on corporate jobs for income. What you have here is cases where artists are using the good side of AI generators while at the same time fearful of the bad side, which should have been expected because at the end of the day artists are people who love making art - they were always going to start exploring AI at some point to expand the types of art they're able to create.
@@yurisei6732it's just disappointing.
Voices is ok, i mean if your voice is from lot of anime character or game character then obv people will use them
@@LumineScara-tp9sw
Sorry but you are part of the problem.
@@yurisei6732 Nah, people are just hypocrites.
When there’s too much detail, but the details have no rhyme or reason that’s a great sign. If someone is gonna draw their art with a lot of detail in hair, clothes, weapons etc. they won’t just do random shapes with no pattern
The internet has finally reached the point I've been waiting on. Told my friend months ago "just wait. Soon Ai will be so rampant and the backlash will be so bad, that people will start accusing newer and learning artists that their work is AI because they tend to hyperfocus on one skill and not another specifically coloring and hands." My friend was like no ai art looks like Ai art and I was like my friend...spend more time looking at younger or learning artists.
This is affecting multiple forms of art too. A lot of knitters and crocheters who are aware of ai have noticed that this is going to ruin and invalidate a ton of real non ai projects. And with the time and skill dedication that comes with fiber arts, it really hurts these creators.
Not to mention the hell that is false images advertising as patterns that litter searches nowadays
What pisses me off is I was accused on one of my drawings, and when I showed my procreate timelapse replay video they wouldn't apologize. They said it looked weird. It took me over 4 hours and created a brush to complete it. After that, I went into an art funk tha,t after a year, I am just barely getting out of.
people accusing people of using AI has just become an easy way to destroy other artist's credibility online. There are so many trolls that just leave 'AI' under art posts now
@@miami7272AI is the problem, if it weren't for people being dishonest and allowing AI slop to seep into every corner of the internet by passing them as legitimate human work we wouldn't be in this mess.
this is acctually such an important topic and if more then 423 people would have seen this, this would genuenly help the art community. really good video
"There is no artist that would give their character 6 fingers"
Yeah, about that... Some of my fast done sketches want to say otherwise lmao
I accidentally gave a character 6 fingers once
Nobody said it was ai tho :>
I've done that before as well as placing the thumb on the wrong side of the hand.
Many times. Half the time, I don't notice it until after it's saved and posted. :"D
@@ReesesBees It happened to me twice once with Gawr Gura art where i had her pointing a finger, while rest fingers were a fist and i instinctivly gave fist 4 fingers, despite thumb and pointing finger being out of it and other time i was drawing character, that holds her daggers with her pinkies sticking out. Some weird assasin codex shit, they hold daggers as if they were holding a cup of tea and greet each other with dagger to the back i guess.
Every animator on Gravity Falls:
i gave a character 10 fingers per limb
a thing that's usually super obvious to me is characters' eyes. they very often look as if someone just slapped some shapes on top of each other with absolutely no understanding that those shapes are supposed to make an eye
I feel like the best way to tell if ai "art" is well ai is inconsistenties or things that make no sense. It doesn't always work but it does help.
Great checklist. In a different art, I saw a professor posting that they were getting a huge number of false positives for AI generated text. The AI program to detect AI work was faulty, It was picking up that students were using grammar checkers, and saying they'd generated the work. My response was to suggest that students be told to save all the versions of their work from first conception to final product. AI generates things in one shot, so having old versions which can track the development and change in the writing is proof that AI wasn't used to generate the work. I suspect that a similar thing could work for art. A progression of the image which shows the choices made by the artist, places where things have been erased etc would be proof that they created the art. I enjoy watching painting videos for that very reason, seeing the choices made by the artist, the changes in background, details etc.
On a different note, with the advent of AI a lot more people are posting art mindlessly. I've made it a bit of a mission to track down a work of art's origin and give them credit. It has led me to some really fun artists.
AI was made to assist us. Or show us "what if" art, like if Van Gogh was still around it could show an example of what his art would look like. The issue is when dollar signs start popping up. No one can replicate someone elses artstyle perfectly, thats one of the best aspects of art.
and one of the best aspects about art is that it was strickly human... then computer tools came along and made digital art a thing.... we are just repeating history with a new tool.
That said... thanks for realizing the useful ness of AI -- I think it would be really cool if image generators were only available to artists, that way people who have no art skill can't replace you.
@@BenjaminAlternate The issue is, digital art still needs you to know how to use a brush, tools, and understand how stuff works, its you doing all the work in the end. This is not the same.
But yeah, I've been of the camp that AI art can be used for helping out generate ideas and concepts and try to get some brain ideas firing. But I draw the line at people trying to monetize it and act like they did all the work for throwing in some keywords
@@BenjaminAlternate*strictly
This, exactly. AI is best as an added tool in the toolbox, and just like any tool, it can be used and misused. This also reminds me a lot of how photography used to be viewed: people didn't consider it art because the camera (the tool) was doing all the "work" and just capturing an image of something already there. Now, it's an artform of its own. I don't think AI will follow quite the same trajectory, but it's still something to think about.
Given how much AI art improved on hands with designated AIs for generating Art, or the possibility to just remove the hints for AI in AI generated images manually and still be much quicker or better, has me concerned that it will just become more and more difficult in the future to tell if AI was used or not.
True. That tell-tale signs of ai are what programmers want to hide.
AI is definitely getting better and it is getting harder to tell sometimes. right now, at least for me, the realism/anime semi-realism art is very hard to tell human from AI, I can only assume it's because AI is incorporating IRL photos and images to help with accuracy. very stylized art is a bit more obvious because you can tell what is a conscious artist decision and an AI trying to fill in the blanks.
People already can't really tell. I think a better use of our time than trying to identify AI-generated works is figuring out how to tolerate a world where we can't be certain any image didn't use AI. I expect that's going to mean two things: first, appreciating art more for what they are and less for who made them; and second, artists becoming more than just creators or art, using an insight into their lifestyle to make people care more about what they make. Essentially, more artists becoming streamers.
@@wayIesslol tell me you know nothing with just a simple blanket statement 😂
One of the biggest tells for me isn't even in an image itself. Deviantart has been plagued by accounts only a few months old with thousands of fully rendered pieces on them. They'd have to be drawing at an absurd rate of like 33 pieces *a day.* They also tend to have little account info; no links to other websites and no "hey I'm new here and gonna post my entire decade old gallery to this website! ^^"
Yeah, dA runs their own implementation of Stable Diffusion with limited free prompts/week for everyone. But at least (if you submit straight from the results) the submission gets a hard metadata tag for "made using AI tools".
I've used their tool myself, but I keep a hard line about only uploading "AI art" in the context of a broader discussion about how AI art works at all. For example, one piece recycles the same prompt but with different weighting on various keywords; in another, I deconstruct/describe the process by which I iterated through a prompt until I was satisfied with the result later. And so on.
...It also helps I'm a traditional media artist.
AI art logical mistakes are TERRIFYING I once saw an AI art where the *SLEEVE WAS SPROUTING LIKE 5 FACES*
dear god
😨
I think the weirdest abnormality I have encountered is how I can tell, from a look, when images are generated. And I wouldn't be alone in this.
I won't even have to see anything specific from the get-go, the work could be almost entirely flawless but it will just give me this feeling. I haven't been wrong with the only time I was half-wrong being when someones art was stolen and put through a filter that tricked my brain.
Theres just something so uncanney about ai-generated-works you don't see in man-made stuff. Its not even the artifacts, or the messed up hands its just... something. Even aburdism, photo-bashing, colleges or intentionally weird/unusual stylistic choices don't raise red flags like ai does.
Yeah ai has a weird sort of vibe that I can just instantly tell is ai, then check it again to make sure it is ai and I’m usually right
AI art literally feels soulless.
The art community is more toxic than most people want to admit. Calling artists' work AI has become the new popular form of bullying disguised as a public service. It's just jealousy. I have a hard time sharing my hand-drawn work online anymore because of these clowns.
you know, i just now realized the specific colour of your character border being pink, I really like how because it's right between warm and cool colours, it works really well as an outline for both your avatar's pale yellow clothing & scarlet ribbon + belt AND the aqua and azure hair!
good vid thx
ai skeletons are also pretty horrific. like get away from me with your 63 swirling ribs!
😂😂 this cracked me up too early in the morning
Basically any countable fine details. Hands are the obvious major offender, but in my experiments it's actually worse trying to reproduce text.
Yea, it's literal gibberish.
Also there’s small details that are really weird. Some that I’ve seen are floating lampposts, random doors high up on a wall with no way to get up to them, and tables that don’t seem to have any legs. Even when the hands, eyes, and face look normal, there’s usually something else in the picture that doesn’t make sense.
I've been studying how to draw the human head, learning different methods, and of course practice.
Something that I noticed that could be a video topic for a different day and something for other artist to look out for is the amount of ai photographs.
Search engines are loaded with them.
I'll look up portraits for practice and easily 20% of them will be ai sometimes more.
They have similar issues mentioned here where, at first glance, they seem okay, but on closer inspection, things will feel off.
Sometimes, it's obvious that someone's neck being abnormally long, or looking like a slug but sometimes, they can be extremely subtle.
It may be the fact that I had recently covered this book in English class, but this reminds me of the witch trials from The Crucible.
Ahh, The Crucible… an interesting experience. In my class (I think it was 11th grade), we read it as a proper play script. Sort of. Half the class read their lines with, like, 0 motivation. That’s just the high school experience, I guess.
Same here, I've never seen the ai art accusations but people taking this so seriously and saying one can ruin someone's career/make them lose a following is INTENSE. I also learned about McCarthyism in history this year which is in the same vein of things.
Lmao, required reading. my teacher spent so long on that play. fun fact, it was written because of the Red Scare (against those who people randomly accused of being communists) and McCarthyism.
It’s sad ai has made us paranoid about each other using ai
Artists accusing each other of a.i. makes me feel like we as artists are 3/4 of the way into losing the battle with a.i. art
I could have told you that 2 years ago.
the fact that artists, one of the most liberal groups on the planet, are so extremist in their fight against technological and cultural change is a clear sign that they are dying out.
Fear of death is the only logical explanation for such hyper-emotional, irrational reactions as the idea of fighting AI art.
This is so helpful!
I have always been extremely cautious not to accuse anyone without knowing for sure. Because I don't want to give my fellow artists a bad time. But it is getting difficult for me to tell if something is AI or not, sometimes it just feels off but I can't really know why.
More and more authors use AI to generate character art or their covers. So often I find myself being suspicious but don't know for sure. This leads to me not buying/supporting when in doubt, which is sad. But with writers, you can usually ask them who the artist is.
I just want to support fellow authors, but it is getting harder sadly
Andd what if you are an artist and a book writer at the same time but you still wanna use AI for your book cover? (at least as a heavily edited base?)
@@canyongoat2096 What do you mean what if? I still would not want to support it. There is a reason cover artists have to buy the material they make their covers with, even if they heavily edit them.
@@Lufleee How is that related to what I said? Artists can just you know create the art themselves. Or get free cc0 photos or take photos themselves so Idk what you mean they must buy stuff? Or they can create 3D art and render it as cover? Also why would an artist/writer want to spend ages to find a probably not accurate stock photo and buy it (if they chose to not go cc0 route) when they can generate ai stuff that is more in line with what they need. They can also create base art then render it with AI or use img2img or controlnet to get the exact pose they want so at that point AI is just a tool for them like anything else. So then would you not "support" what the artist/writer wants for their own book cover? Lmao
@@canyongoat2096 Exactly. If a writer used AI for their book cover/character art/writing I will not support them. I don't really care if you call it a tool. I find it unethical so I will not give you money for doing it.
@@Lufleee How is that even unethical my mind is blown. It's just art and self expression.
It's very easy to detect an AI artist: Are they too good? Then it's AI. (Also if they have mistakes.)
But seriously this is the ONLY accurate, specific, well-informed AI-detecting video I have seen so far! Truly well done.
As someone who legitimately struggles with anatomy and hands, and has been having a bit of a art glow up (due to watching tons of TH-cam tutorials practicing a ton), this entire AI witch hunt on the internet scares me.... (and ngl it is a witch hunt at this point...)
Thanks for that. I think we could all use this. I've tried dabbling in art, and produced one beginner's comic in an art class, but I still found myself not noticing most AI errors until someone pointed them out. So, I appreciate the video.
One flag I often rely on when looking at a whole gallery rather than just one piece, is the upload dates. AI art tends to be very elaborate, often looking like something that would take all day to produce if not longer. So, if someone has a gallery with a bunch of these, all submitted on the same day, it can mean one of two things: Either they just uploaded a bunch of old work from some other site, or it's AI. Or, it could be lifted straight from the portfolio of another artist, but that's even more worthy of scorn.
So, that's often one of the first things I turn to if I start to feel suspicious.
the irony of me getting an ad for an ai image generator immediately upon clicking this video
2:38
That’s the problem: people aren’t doing that. They are taking brief looks and making accusations without proper consideration. People don’t actually recognize ai art as well as they think they do, nor take the time to analyze other details that also come in ai art: hair blending in with background, eye shading lacking proper detail and just being smudged, no textures, etc etc.
It feels like people are just joining groups not because they care or understand them, but to feel included or to not be harassed if they don’t. You have so many people screaming about how outrageous everything is but when you press, they can only repeat the few things they kept hearing being repeated. It’s tiring.
"4 fingers and a thumb," Uhm... I drew a hand with six fingers once that all looked like octopus's tentacles. :D And that was years before AI art was a thing. It was in my art class in middle school. And everyone laughed at me for it. :(
I think as a general rule of thumb you shouldn't accuse somebody of trying to pass AI art off as handmade unless you're really damn sure. For me the first thing that tips me off is super generic conventionally attractive looking front facing character and a strange mix of photorealism and/or multiple types of rendering in the same image. Then if I decide to investigate, I'll look for 1. Extremely frequent uploads, like several a day 2. Most images have exactly the same vibe and pose but with wildly different types of characters. 3. Within the images, things flow into each other where they shouldn't, like hair turns into clothes, fingers are coming from the wrong direction, etc.
And for God's sake, it's so easy to spot natural mistakes with proportion, sketchiness, stuff like that. AI art's imperfections aren't those kinds of imperfections.
id like to add one thing to this list: if youre on a site that typically does not do much or any image compression, look for compression artifacts. sometimes maybe an artist would accidentally compress their own work when retrieving in from a site that does use image compression, but if an image is just posted and claiming to be a recent artwork that the account is claiming is theirs and its horribly compressed to hell in a way an artist with any self respect could never possibly let happen, look a little deeper and see if anything else in the image also suggests the use of ai.
Hmm… why? Is this because of the assumption that the generated work is small… and so will show artifacts…? Or that any person who uses AI art generators… doesn’t care about art? Just wondering how wide a brush stroke that is…
@@WingWong honestly it can be due to both. ive been in servers where ive had to study art posted to make sure it wasnt ai, and the compression is always the first thing that tips me off. ai art isnt made by placing brush strokes with predictable pixel patterns, im sure the ai is even consuming already compressed art. ai doesnt really know how an actual brush would interact with different canvas sizes. the generators might compress the images automatically i think, or its just a natural consequence of trying to shove a bunch of artwork of different resolutions into one canvas thats causes it. could also be through some means of keeping the technology cheap
Sometimes AI is used to upscale smaller/lower res pictures. This can end up making the image look ai generated even though the original is human made
I generated a lot of anime girls with weapons (sword, bows, spear, guns, etc.) and the AI's completely inept at drawing them. You almost always end up with people holding a sword by its blade, has two hand guards, missing parts, look completely wrong, or the character's holding the weirdest looking stuff that no human would ever imagine or draw. So that's one way to detect.
Hi Duchess! This is a very timely video. I appreciate it for its thought-provoking message, and for trying to calm a growing witch hunt.
The distinction between technical and logical errors is a good point. I do however remember one instance of a human-made logical error. It was in a manga, in a panel showing a couple lying in bed. Amusingly, one of them had an extra, third arm. Since this would have been sketched first and then inked, I can only imagine the poor mangaka was too overworked to notice. This was before AI art burst onto the scene. Man, I miss those days more and more...
On another note, I feel I should bring up something you mentioned. A couple of times or so, you said AI art generators refer to a huge number of images, whenever they need to generate a new image. I get that simplified explanations are useful. However, I think this description can be misleading for viewers who are just finding out about AI art. I'm not saying this to be antagonistic; the reason I'm saying this is because I've seen Pro-AI commenters deride similar descriptions as being ignorant of how AI actually works. We shouldn't give them ammunition they can attack us with, I think.
(For anyone who's curious, what Duchess Celestia said isn't exactly wrong; rather, it's a description that collapses several steps into one. During the training of an AI art model, Millions of images are used. That's one step. After this, the AI art model that's ready for use doesn't contain any of the images... instead, it retains an "understanding" of the patterns it got during training. I'm writing the word "understanding" in quotes, because, as Celestia points out in the video, the AI art model doesn't really comprehend what these images mean in real-world terms.)
+1 on pointing this out. It will get attacked if used as part of one’s argument.
But I’m not really sure there is a definition or description which will satisfy both sides without incensing one side or the other.
Another note about repeated textures: people can use digital brushes with no variation in the shapes used, leading to repetitive plants and other background elements.
my favorite example of 'AI can't do jewelry right' has gotta be the Yu-Gi-Oh AI generations. AI can not do the millennium puzzle lol
I don't fully agree cause I've seen humans making logical mistakes. Extra fingers in manga, my bestie once swaped right and left feet, I sometimes sketch hands with the same thing, but all of that has one same reason: these were all quick drawings. Manga in question was old and even made traditionally, so author probably was way too overworked to notice, or did not have time to redraw that panel. My bestie just wanned to draw something quick and she, as well as I, does have adhd, so just did not notice that. I always draw my first sketch how it feels and later check to fix anatomy + I have a rule to NEVER finish and post art piece in the same day.
So, for the artists: even if you can draw quickly, you have to take breaks. Do the sketch and continue the next day, you'll see your mistakes and it won't be too late to fix them. Or too hard.
About AI: as people mentioned down there, there are usually artifacts, things blending and fusing in a weird way and overall logic. For example, yes, people and AI both have broken anatomy, but there is a difference. You can google creepy AI art to trait yourself. Also, if the art is really complex and detailed, like a professional drew it, but there are these logical mistakes, that might be a red flag, especially if a person is posting a lot, when that type of picture would take way more time to create
But it can be easy to prove for the artist, that art is real. Traditionally we can take a few photos with some backgrounds in your house or outside, cause that is not possible for AI + it makes a lot worse mistakes with rooms and stuff. Digitally we have our canvas and can show the layers. Yeah, you should be working on different layers if possible + it's beneficial in 99% of cases to do so for your art
Thanks for this video because IT’S SO DAMN ANNOYING SEEING OBVIOUSLY NON-AI IMAGES BEING CALLED “AI.”
8:40 speaking of intentionality when it comes to hands, there is a mutation known as polydactyly that affects limbs which gives people extra toes, thumbs, pinkies, etc. One of the most well-known characters with this condition is stanford pines from gravity falls. But thats because it was intentional! Similarly, certain art styles only allow for three fingers and a thumb, or species such as elves from The Dragon Prince. The key difference however is that A.I doesnt have any intention. Its physically incapable of it. And while an artist will be consistent with these choices, an A.I wont. Because it doesnt make choices. It spits out what it calculates you want, and then waits for the next input. (Side note: chopped fingies also count as intention)
AHEM
Ai hands include(but are not limited to)
Improper finger size (Mainly too long.)
Too many, or too little, or even halves of fingers.
Improper finger placement.
Oddly shaped hands in general.
May I remind you that AI generated images are built off of other people's real art. So, just remember that when someone's artstyle looks like AI, that could mean it was stolen to create AI image "models"
(I do too much research on this type of stuff.)
But then again, anyone could make those mistakes. But in all generality, you should be able to tell the difference between AI hands, and Artist hands.
I'm really glad this video mentioned that the technology is advancing so fast that all these red-flags may be entirely invalid in a year or two... or maybe even in a month or two.
Seriously, I frequent a few sights where both AI generated images and actual human created art can be posted so long as everything is properly tagged. I used to be pretty consistent at predicting what those tags would be based on just the thumbnail preview, but it's been getting harder and harder, and seems more and more likely each passing day that it will eventually become impossible.
Which is equal parts terrifying, but also kind of exciting. I mean, I do feel so bad for all the human artists who have put so much effort in to training a skill... but at the same time the potential for anyone to easily create a visual representation of whatever they imagine is not entirely without value... already I've seen things like D&D groups that use AI to quickly generate scenery references.
Of the big old elephant in the room isn't really how individual people might use AI image generation, it's how corporations will use it to cut costs and phase out an ever-increasing number of jobs.
I’d like to add something:
A human is perfectly capable of making the “direct proof” mistakes, except a human is likely to fix it once they zoom out.
Correct. Real artists will zoom out on their art and see if there's any errors, like missing sections, parts that might've been merged wrong, or parts that weren't coloured.
Heyo! I was the one who wrote the reddit post in the description. I wrote that post about a year ago, and since then, I have learned a bit about how ai models and training models work, so I've edited the post lmao. But that aside, The big concept about how to identify ai generated images are correct though.
The incorrect information is as follows:
generative ai models are a bunch of parameters that imitate brain neurons, and with how many of them the average stable diffusion model has, it's about as smart as a magpie. WIth that said though, digital neurons are stupider than fleshy ones, so stable diffusion probably *isn't* as smart as a magpie.
Also, image generation is just a denoising algorithm. To train the model, you just do the process of generating an image in reverse. You give Stable diffusion a picture with a description, and ask it to re-noise it.
Cheers!
Stuff like this is why in a story I’m writing about a military AI, that is able to access the internet, gains sentience, and just wants to live, and not hurt anyone because it sees humanity as beautiful, due to their creativity and doesn’t understand why’d they want to war with each other, is unsure if it itself could create any art that is truly meaningful, because it doesn’t know whether or not the thing it creates is something it generated from a prompt and what it knows from the data under the word art, or if it’s actually something it created from having genuine emotions with experiences, and it knows that if it did make something meaningful to it, humanity would just toss it aside under the rightful assumption it means nothing because an AI made it.
The AIs whole arc is figuring out if it is in fact truly alive or not, finding out what it means to be alive, and learning what it means to truly love and care for someone. With the AI also using it’s optimism towards humanity to help it’s human friend learn to grow into himself and be confident with who is, as the human acts as the AIs northstar, the AIs guiding light to how kind humanity can be. My story is supposed to be introspective, and optimistic, while also talking about the prominence of people using AIs as shortcuts in today’s day and age, if an AI did become sentient how could it prove it is alive, and to provide another perspective on what would happen if an AI became sentient.
Honestly, I just found out how good ai art has became a few days ago, like DAMN. I was just using it to differentiate between my bots on character ai (they are private). I really hate the fact this stuff is being misused. This could be a GREAT way to help us artists figure out character designs as inspiration and more, but these companies and others just keep pushing for advances in ai art. It's honestly disheartening that they seem to want to push us artists out of the picture so badly
Thanks for this video by the way!❤
No one actually wants to push artists out of the industry, that's just a potential consequence of people pursuing AI art for their own reasons. Those reasons most commonly being: for the companies making these tools, making money; and for the people using these tools, creating images specific to their tastes or needs that they wouldn't have been able to acquire otherwise.
@@yurisei6732 well how do ai art generators make money if they're not replacing human artists? Their business model is built on it so ofc it will happen
@@anny8720 Three places:
1. Corporate imagery and stock footage, where there are already no artists.
2. Selling to the tech bros who try to turn everything into a bubble, who were never going to hire artists because their projects specifically depend on the flare in the word "AI".
3. Use by private civilians who need a lot of tailored assets, eg people running D&D games, who were never going to hire artists because commissions are too expensive to be used like this.
As a self taught artist of more than a decade plus 6 years, the way I can spot AI art is how it has a sheen to it and also looks "Perfect". I can tell a artwork from an actual human being compared to an art made by a person who typed in a prompt in an algorithm software that uses scraped (stolen artwork) saved into a database.
DeviantRhal (A veteran artist of the industry) made a video critiquing Shadversity defending his lazy usage of AI and the reason why AI art is just wrong and takes away from skilled artists.
I want AI to help me do things like laundry not to take something I’ve spent years developing and making to be my likes.
Ai was created to help us for small tasks NOT to do our jobs and hobbies for us
ask the computer scientists, we WANT it to do everything it can. if you don't want to use AI then stop using Adobe PS or Clip studio or Procreate so many of your "digital" art features have technically been AI for a very long time.
@@BenjaminAlternate AI is artificial intelligence. Lots of stuff that is called AI isn’t AI, people just need to learn the difference between technology and artificial intelligence.
@@BenjaminAlternate that's not how digital art works...?
Don't use it
Another piece of supporting evidence I think is worth bringing up is inconsistent character design if an artist is claiming to be drawing the same character, if the design is always slightly off I think that's a bit sus because while an artist can sometimes forget details/change, add or remove accessories to a character design, it might be a bit odd if they seem to not be able to draw consistently most objects on the same character
Agreed, artistic AI cannot reliably reproduce what I like to call "fingerprint" details -- mostly superficial details but which we humans intuitively use to tell different (but similar) individuals apart.
For example, I tried prompting an AI (for several hours) to draw Renamon (the popular Digimon) and part of this character's design are magatama markings on their upper legs. The AI simply _could not_ reliably reproduce these markings, and even minor changes to otherwise the same prompt (even within the same RNG seed) resulted in slightly but noticeably different patterns.
@@Stratelier do you mean stuff like facial features? Cause if that’s the case the fingerprint features are what i suck at the most lol all of my characters look entirely different whenever I try to make them look on model
@@selenite3890 No, not exactly -- and it would be "supporting evidence" to include alongside a stronger argument, not an argument on its own.
Every time you design a character there will be certain key details you make sure to get right every time you draw them (but it's okay if they're not precisely identical each time; precision is hard). An AI, however, has no consistency on basically anything.
really useful guide. I've been looking mostly for elements of intentional design - essentially the first point - but will now be paying attention to lineart. Makes perfect sense that an AI wouldn't be able to replicate a line outside of very specific styles, considering it doesn't know what a line is!
Anyway all that being said, I can't help but remember that time when a family member was entertaining child-me and drew a hexapod bird because she couldn't remember how many legs birds have lol
I made a few drawings to start off with, took a lot of time and effort, posted it to my Facebook and the first comment was "Nice AI work" that caused an echo chamber of "of yeah this is totally AI"
I love when people are like _"I think your art is AI, guess you'll have to show us more of your art 🥺😔🤩"_ type of stuff! I think it's so cute when people are joking around and genuinely want to see more of someone's art 😭
How i spot AI art:
-Crippled Hands or fingers
-Shiny glossy textures if its a digital painting
-clothes melting into the skin
-deformed legs and feet (Sometimes they'll have more than two pairs of legs)
-items such as jewelry, flags or logo's would be badly misshapen and placed in random areas or floating. someone found out an artist was using Ai by pointing out the zipper on the jacket
-Microsoft copilot puts a watermark on AI images
As a newer artist who is testing out a LOT of different rendering techniques and brushes as I hunt for an individual style... *sweats* xD
I get frustrated with the way artificial images are filling up social media and art sites (and even being promoted by them), but we can't go around attacking eachother abou it. A friend of mine got that accusation despite the fact she'd been posting work-in-progress posts, and the person saying it was pretty rude about it and gave her a list of "mistakes" that were... really just choices she'd made in constructing the scene, but, even so, they wrote it out like "no human could be that bad at art"... like, geeeeez.
I foresee a world where digital artist will be obligated to share psd of the art to prove it's not ai generated.
I foresee a world where people won't really care whether an image was human or ai made, unless they care for the artist or the process of the imagery.
YAY NEW CELESTIA VIDEO 💖
Exactly !!!
The one phrase that terrifies me through out this video: "as it continues to improve". We MUST establish laws that require people who use AI to generate art or help with the creation process to disclose that AI has been used in the process.
Free tools to protect your art from AI (both developed and offered by the University of Chicago):
- Glaze makes your style not recognisable by the AI, therefore it cannot imitate it
- Nightshade makes the subject of the image easy to recognise as a different subject by the AI, so that any AI that takes that image into its database won't be able to classify it correctly, therefore spoiling the database of information about that subject and producing uncorrect images based on that spoiled database
Read all the explanations and indications on the internet pages dedicated to these tools in order to use them effectively!
The glaze and venom tools are pretty amazing. Though.. I do wonder what the long term impact of doing this will be. Ie, I see this corrupting non-image systems down the line as people use these images to train things like dictionaries or vision-to-text systems. Or vision comprehension systems.
I suspect that what lie at the heart of these accusations are not only a lack of information on how an AI art program thinks and function but a fear of being replaced and of the loss of authenticity. The internet needs more videos like this! Thank you so much Duchess Celestia for helping to combat the spread of misinformation!
How to spot ai art
Step one: boba tea saying "bteobab bttaeo"
thank you so so much for taking into account artists who just aren’t very good, we appreciate it 😭
This is such an important topic these days
This is both a useful checklist for sussing out AI art, but it's also a super good checklist of art mistakes to practice/avoid, as someone just starting out!
There should be a law where you have to put a watermark saying "THIS IS AI!" on the bottom left or smthing. Even though this can be easily avoided by just coloring it in, cropping the photo, etc., it would still do an effect to stop a bit of AI art frauds.
This was so helpful. Not because i call artist out for using AI but because I dont want to end up accidently supporting somone who only uses AI art. I legitimately can not tell the difference sometimes 😭
Yeah, I gave up on drawing because I drew like trash and was told i was drawing AI....bro I was just bad at drawing.
I hope you keep trying despite that. Everyone is bad at drawing at some point and it's always a climb to improve. You have the exact same starting point as Vermeer, Da'Vinci and Rockwell, etc.
You’re definitely way better than I am if you drew your own pfp.
@@cosmicspacething3474 I didn't it's just some random image i found online.
if you use Ai to draw than your lazy
@user-yb7rz6bg3f who are you talking to?
Im not sure if its lack of sleep, your mic, or the topic making my brain pick up on things not there. But your voice has a slight robotic effect to it at certain tones/frequencies and parts in the video. Im not complaining or trying to nitpick, but i find it really funny in a vidro about ai art. Anyway, love your videos, you have a very jice voice to listen to and your points and opinions, and your art is just soothing to look at. Thank you for posting
Always keep psd files (or whatever program format you use) I was shocked to get the accusation myself once, cause as weird as it sounds, I did not think my art was actually good enough to be accused of Ai! It’s one thing I have a problem with these accusations, cause as much I may not like Ai, Ai is REALLY fucking good at rendering! And I have often concerned the discouragement some younger artists might get hearing that. Like “if this looks bad to people then my art must be horrendous!” Like it’s one thing to get on the soulless nature of Ai, and some of the glaringly obviousness mistakes, but most the time Ai still makes detailed outputs, and acting like humans don’t make mistakes in their own work is just insane and toxic.
if theres one thing r-34 taught me is spotting ai images, and seeing how "lack of emotion" they are, when you realize it, they're really not interesting just "pretty" and I look for actually artist drawn pieces for observing and their "style"
am i the only one who loves hearing celestia talk about squarespace every time
Thank you for making this. I am so glad it came up in my Browse because this topic comes up in my comments as a question quite often in classes I teach or occasionally here on YT. (I'm a machine learning engineer). I will save your video and direct people to watch it!