ok so also adding on to this. i made a comment on their post about this art looking like AI and they got mad at me, understandably. and their main talking point was about how you can't generate an image like that using AI. i deleted my comment out of shame and wanting to believe them but still feeling extremely off about it and unsure of what i should do.
they said i should do more research and after doing more research and looking at their images looking at what AI generators can get me and confiding in a more knowledgeable friend.
i still stand by what i said, despite the deleted comment.
this is the second time they've posted this specific art piece and they took it down before when people started saying it was AI.
my friend and i have spent about an hour or so finding little details/percieved errors that just don't make much sense for an artist to make in the creative process, and look more like something a machine that's imitating art would do.
additionally they are right that an AI wouldn't make this entire image by itself. but there is evidence that they use the AI images as bases to overlay the sleep token designs on to, i will give them credit for that, the images aren't just ai generated but ai has most likely been used to create them. which is a shame that this person can't admit to being honest about it. that's all i want from this is an admission because they tried to make me feel stupid. additionally its a shame this person has felt the need to turn to ai to gain likes and attention, it says a lot about the world we live in today.
i'd personally find it, and i hope other members of the fandom would find it more enjoyable to support someone on their art journey to develop their skills without the use of AI, even if the digital art isn't perfect, even if they make mistakes, i can respect someone who wants to learn a skill more than someone who uses AI to pretend so they can get a surface-level good drawing, that people don't look close enough to check the discrepencies of. and i respect someone more if they own up to using AI than lying about it and trying to make people feel bad for calling them out. though obviously i cannot be 100% sure they are using AI i will go through the evidence one by one so people can form their own opinions. i don't want people to attack this person unecessarily but i do want them to feel guilty about taking from other artists, and lacking the honesty they used to have back in 2017, and to try and to stop more people from using ai in this way. so this is why i am making this.
firstly there's the images in question themself.
^ii has uneven spikes on his jacket, 4 on the left side and 6? on the right. whether this was a purposeful thing for the design idk but it doesn't feel like a mistake someone just makes, if it is one.
^this looks a little off, especially with the editing gradients around each of the ?spikes? looks as if they've been pasted over another design
^again this gradient/outline can be seen surrounding IV's necklace, it's visibly a different colour than the background, like its been pasted on top. it looks like it wasn't originally there
^at this point its meant to be iii's arm but the presumed AI got confused with the lapel of the jacket and his arm, so his arm appears to be missing a piece out of it. additionally, near the end of the jacket, its hard to explain but basically the end of the jacket gets confused with his sleeve and turns into one thing
^additionally his hands appear to be a kind of cover up that this person has added, which props to them i guess, but if you contrast it with the detail of the face and the shade used on the face, they don't match
^lastly not an outright evidence of AI but something is strange about the way IV's tie phases through his neck
i have more smaller points, like the chain details not making sense in a way that an artist would draw, some of them the links get really unclear
then we take a look at their other recent art.
^looking at the details that the viewer often misses, such as the missing fingernail. logically it wouldn't make sense for an artist who's spending hours drawing and looking at their image to miss out a fingernail, but its much more likely an AI generator would.
^my friend pointed out the inconsistency of the buttons, surely, trying not to assume, someone who had drawn this shirt would choose to have all their buttons look the same, seeing as its the same shirt? instead of different looking buttons.
^then there's the more obvious, AI creating uneven jackets again. one side is visibly a different design and bigger than then other. if this was intentional i want to understand why.
another thing to consider is this person's loss of integrity. back when they first posted some of the art they had done they admitted they hadn't fully created it themselves.
but it was still cool to look at. these days (a 4 year gap between their previous stuff) its sad that they've moved on to presumably AI as a base but try to present it as their own creative work. its disingenuous and kind of hypocritical. saying anyone who asks to see more proof that your work isn't AI, is making real artists want to quit. when in totality its the fact that AI art that can make such pictures with little effort that gets used and endorsed by these people is making it harder for artists that have practiced their skills for many years and perpetuating the idea that art is a product to be consumed, that it doesn't matter how you got there. whether a machine generated half of it and you barely did anything but colour overlaying or whether you spent hours meticulously designing it.
anyway i hope that if you have a conscience, you change your mind about lying to people and if you have proof i'm wrong, because i wish i was, i hope you can show it to me.
gummygunk
blakekathryn
tangentwithtanner
theartofmadeline
pixelskylines
origamiaround
kaledo-art
titsay
germansingergirl
