Posted under General
Mayhem-Chan said:
the only sus thing is the abrupt improvement in quality compared to every previous work from this artist, but i see a lot of visibly hand-drawn parts here, at least the vast majority of this is legit, if not all. If there's AI in there, it's ai-assisted at most
Only the two latests posts are drawn recently. Their previous works were drawn before November 2022. So the changes are not really abrupt.
8253803 said:
Only the two latests posts are drawn recently. Their previous works were drawn before November 2022. So the changes are not really abrupt.
it's true but even post #6321049 contrasts a lot with post #6328379 with only a few days of gap imo
Mayhem-Chan said:
it's true but even post #6321049 contrasts a lot with post #6328379 with only a few days of gap imo
Doesn't surprise me that a drawing with drastically more challenging framing, pose, perspective, anatomy, and lighting ends up not looking as good as a simple frontal half-body portrait. It doesn't prove much.
Both are obviously hand-drawn is what matters. If you boost the contrast with any image editing software you can see there are brushstrokes in even what looks like smooth gradients at first glance, so I'd say every pixel is human.
8253803 said:
Doesn't surprise me that a drawing with drastically more challenging framing, pose, perspective, anatomy, and lighting ends up not looking as good as a simple frontal half-body portrait. It doesn't prove much.
Both are obviously hand-drawn is what matters. If you boost the contrast with any image editing software you can see there are brushstrokes in even what looks like smooth gradients at first glance, so I'd say every pixel is human.
it's not about how polished or challenging the image is, i know it's a factor, but there's only so much it can explain; everything in post #6328379 looks much more advanced and understood, anatomy and coloring especially, i'm not talking about execution, i'm talking about visible art skills.
Now, i have to remind you, i'm not saying it's "proof" of anything, i even myself said that i see it being hand-drawn, i'm just pointing out the abrupt difference in art skills from one piece to the other, making me suspicious enough to not completely toss aside the possibility of ai-assistance.
Mayhem-Chan said:
it's not about how polished or challenging the image is, i know it's a factor, but there's only so much it can explain; everything in post #6328379 looks much more advanced and understood, anatomy and coloring especially, i'm not talking about execution, i'm talking about visible art skills.
Now, i have to remind you, i'm not saying it's "proof" of anything, i even myself said that i see it being hand-drawn, i'm just pointing out the abrupt difference in art skills from one piece to the other, making me suspicious enough to not completely toss aside the possibility of ai-assistance.
I still don't see it as abrupt, but OK, let's say the artist used something as a reference. Because of being in this thread, it's easy to first think of AI, but does it really rank high in possibility among all kinds of references? Photo, someone else's art, 3D modeling, these have been used by artists since far before LDM was a thing.
I don't remember AI being known as a good teacher of anatomy. It's in fact more famously known to be the opposite. As for coloring and shading, AI doesn't even generate proper brushstrokes, so if I want to understand how to do it with a stylus and various brush settings, I can't possibly learn it by staring at an AI image. I would far sooner stare at a zoomed-in high-res artwork or pay to get some artist's PSD file.
My point comes down to this: if this artist has improved rapidly by referencing, they are much more likely referencing materials much more informative and educational than AI art.
But of course, we don't really have big differences, as long as we agree that the art is at most possibly, not definitely, AI-assisted.
Updated
post #6330151
post #6330157
Both were uploaded by the same user. I posted a comment for each with more specific details.
post #6328171
It does say ai-assisted, but this looks very much AI-generated to me.
Marlor said:
Doesn't look like AI.
sadodere said:
post #6328171
It does say ai-assisted, but this looks very much AI-generated to me.
Maybe they painted over an AI reference but the character is hand-drawn.
Commentary says it's AI.
I don't know if it's ai-assisted or ai-generated though, and the source got deleted.
Below273 said:
Commentary says it's AI.
I don't know if it's ai-assisted or ai-generated though, and the source got deleted.
Character looks completely real, background is clearly AI, likely for a dream-like effect. Would put it down as ai-assisted.
post #6324112 and its children
While the art itself looks kosher, the other posts of the artist is deleted for being AI-generated, so I have a suspicion this one is too.
Jnglmpera said:
post #6324112 and its children
While the art itself looks kosher, the other posts of the artist is deleted for being AI-generated, so I have a suspicion this one is too.
Personally don't see why the other posts got marked AI-generated, to be honest. Except for the first upload, the other ones seem painted over by human and should be ai-assisted.
Tracked down the original source instead of rule 34, and it's from an AI gen pixiv account, and tagged as such on pixiv.
A decent amount of art in these 5 months. They have posted unfinished illustrations on Twitter with no mentions about AI, but I have come to associate this with trying to hide its use to assist/generate art. I think all of their works might be AI-assisted/gen? Some posts on Pixiv are marked as such.
EDIT: Thank you.
Updated
Individual said:
A decent amount of art in these 5 months. They have posted unfinished illustrations on Twitter with no mentions about AI, but I have come to associate this with trying to hide its use to assist/generate art. I think all of their works might be AI-assisted/gen? Some posts on Pixiv are marked as such.
They're tracing over upscaled AI-gen. Very clear in this image [NSFW] (twitter #1645537505599684611).
Commentary says ai-assisted.
Recent works of this artist has a feel of AI-ness into it, though this one is arguably the most blatant due to the relatively low resolution compared to their other works and the way characters were shaded.
post #6336162 is tagged as Ai-generated and is active. I don't see anything suspicious.
