guys I just want to apologize for misattributing starry night to warhol instead of van gogh - I’m very face blind and my name recollection is terrible, and I never went to art school so please forgive me for one mistake I made 😅
@@smuglinsley It's just funny to me more than anything. Most people who know about him didn't go to art school, it's just embarrassing for an artist content creator.
@katliente That's ok! Haha I know how it is. I didn't even knew who warhol was, so it was a discover moment to me (or at least it could be, strangely when I try to google about he starry night of van gogh appeared at image search!(what a coincidence) So if anyone could explain who this guy is would be cool 😅😂❤️) (sorry my english)
I'm the artist of the Eevee painting in question, thanks so much for bringing awareness to this! It sucks that generative AI stuff is destroying people's trust, but like you showed too it's so easy to just do some quick research on the artists' portfolio and history.
I was just having this thought the other day. There's this Tumblr user named Apofiss who does gorgeous work and they've been on the web for decades, but when I saw their art for the first time in a while, I couldn't help but think "AI art?" For the record, they are absolutely not an AI artist. However, the fact that they've been posting for maybe more than a decade + their art gets spread around a lot for sure means they ended up as a part of AI's dataset.
@@Pepyogurt I've been following Apofiss for years, and Apofiss is definitely not someone who utilizes AI to create art, seeing as the person behind all the art has a deviantart account that has been around for eighteen years, and I've been keeping up with the artwork.
Technically people steal, not AI, the scaper bots only understand collect and sort, they're not programmed to understand what is theft, and what is copyright, the people behind creating and abusing these programs? Absolutely understand theft and copyright, and should certainly be held accountable.
@@naraku971 But do you (and a lot of artists apparently) understand copyright? Mimicking a style alone is not copyright infringement, nor using other's work as an intermediary to make unrelated creations, including stylistically similar but unrelated works.
I’m very face blind and it also affects my memory of names 😅 i forget the names of ppl i used to be very close with, so when it comes to an artist that - albeit iconic - is someone I’ve never studied nor met (bc its not possible)…yeah 😅
Not necessarily, u can have name memory problems in general but face blindness is the cause for some. The best way to know if u r face blind is if when u watch movies u have a hard time if two actors look similar (like they have a similar hair cut n colour n stuff) or if u see a person once u have a hard time recognising them next time or stuff similar to that I have a slight face blindness but my mom has it a bit more and my sibiling the worst, if friends they've seen a bunch cut hair once she might not recognise them for the whole day until i say something or a different clue helps her@@Emerald_the_Umbreon
My brother in Christ the art community has always been incredibly toxic and throwing around baseless accusations. AI just gave them another reason to do it
I think the biggest crime AI has committed when it comes to art is that now... almost any glorious-looking piece of art can easily be mistaken for AI slop. It's like the very existence of AI art feels like it's just there to fuck with people's minds. Mocking them and making things feel like a "who done it?" mystery.
I never cease to wonder how artists manage to live in an eternal paradox: AI art is terrible, BUT we constantly cannot distinguish it from real art, and therefore it's also a danger... This is just stupid.
@@flamop1667 Because some bad apples want to use this outrage as a way to diss people, as always. It's really nothing new. AI is just the latest one (well to this point probably not even the latest one anymore). (Of course all of these builds on the assumption that an AI user is indeed a fellow artist whom uses it as a tool, not someone who knows nothing about illustrations but "this machine can do pretty pictures for me so let me click a button and pretend whatever it outputs is mine".)
The paradox of the online art community. "AI art is slop" "Glorious-looking art is easily mistaken for AI" Pick one. Or people could just stop witch hunting, that would probably be the best option.
Are there really that many people generating ai and claiming they drew it? I don’t really go on social media but it seems pretty ridiculous for someone to say that haha.
people have huge misconception that ai images are ai images, its what the machine learned from the images it was fed in, ofcourse when not given artist style it will use the style of images that matches the prompt order the most, i think ai bros and anti ai bros should stop fighting both are dumb and wrong, ai gen is not ai art and using a machine to "assist" your work doesnt mean the person has no art value or have produced machinery nonsense. this is some worthless drama... ai folks have to study the artist works tag them and train models to copy your styles and even then it wont be consistent or perfect....
"they accurate only fifty percent of the time", and when you chose randomly, you are correct 50% percent of the time, meaning they are total bullshit haha
That is very true, but I believe lie detector tests aren't so much used as an actual lie detector test but more as a way for investigators to get information out of people that wouldn't otherwise confess in other circumstances. So I would say still a useful devise, just not in the way it is advertised.
@@ShiitaKitsune64Absolutely, and once they have a good baseline they can definitely find certain answers where you MIGHT be lying and further investigate those to find new leads
@@Bejeodiehrubridjehfoekdjriwknr Yes! I also watched a documentary where the investigators had already researched the suspect's history and already knew all the answers to the questions they were asking him, but put him through a "lie detector test" to see how he would respond to them. Basically when he lied the whole time they knew he was the perpetrator. Super smart way to use the device.
this AI shit dropped in the art community and ruined everyone's perception of skilled artists and even possibly beginners. now you have to be "perfect"
@@voidmain7902 look I don't know if you're supporting ai art, but either way you need to know that the distrust and disgust towards ai art isn't because of artist in fighting. Ai literally is trained on artist's works, without their knowledge or permission. Their artworks that take hours to make, the things they sell to make a living, are being stolen, so people can type some words into a text box and generate an image in mere minutes, for free. Then people claim these free ai peices of stolen work to be their own, and sell it for a ton more than it's worth. It's as bad if not worse than tracing. I really don't see how one can just blame artists for this, when ai generated creative works are actively stealing people's livelihoods, and caused by capitalistic society believing in cheapest work = highest profit. I'd rather the sht jobs be given to the ai, so that people could enjoy their hobbies instead, but of course we chose to give up our fun in the sake of "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer."
@@voidmain7902And yet AI remains to be the core of this problem. Not only that, but AI has tangible detriments to multiple industries, not just art, and remains a legitimate problem even outside of hurtful human error.
Indeed. I still feel like it's gonna be a fad that's gonna be seen as cheap and trashy way to make "art," and people will probably forget. Or rather, I hope so. Like how crypto currency and nfts were big only to fall flat.
@@Juniperxo Yes. Because not recognizing van Gogh is just pathetic. Even my 15 year old nephew who has no interest in art knows a van Gogh when he sees one. How can you confuse van Gogh and Warhol? Seriously, how?
@@Oozaru85 It's possible she mixed up the names, and being focused on making the video(ie speaking to the camera) her brain locked into andy warhol for some reason. It happens to the best of us, but lets see what she says before you start ordering out the firing squad, eh? :D
1:30 Also if you enter Art into these checkers you submit this art to be used to be trained with. It's in their TOS. So by checking artists pieces in this thing you expose them to be training data. Same company also offers image generation with a self trained high quality model.
I remember last month I was posting my drawings on Cara and 2 of them was spoted by the website as being AI, when in reality those were both traditional arts that I made on paper with ink pens and colored pencil, and I had the w.i.p. pictures to prove they were real if it was necessary, so it's hard to trust these detectors since they can detect wrong and tag as AI works that were actually made by a human being.
When AI pretty much exploded like a year or two ago, I saw a lot of pieces that looked like my fan art. Especially Batman and Poison Ivy pieces. I didn’t think much of it cos I know I didn’t have any rights cos it was fan art. I stopped doing digital painted pieces cos that’s what seemed to “look AI” more than the inked and colored ones. Granted I’m not exactly top tier but I had fans. I’ve been a comics illustrator since 2004 and joke’s on me cos I haven’t had a paid commission in like 2 years cos “AI is cheaper”.
Oh, I think its because the detection thinks the flakes are "stars over clouds". Especially since AI tend to overcrowd an area and blur the periphery of the focus. It was such an easy way to spot it but machines cannot separate which is stars and which is snow, dust particles, light refraction, glimmer, or stars.
These tools are not that sophisticated. It's more likely that some invisible noise (like light JPEG artifacts) got picked up as some proof that it's generated by AI, or at least reconstructed by it. The Hive one does it a lot to the point that you can easily make "AI generated" images from a non-AI one, that both would look exactly the same visually.
I hate those AI art Detectors, it's because of cases like this and I hear horror stories about Twitter and TikTok users abusing them. Plus, there's the fact that an evil rival will use the "It's ai art generated." To get rid of better traditional artists. At least, the programmers that made Cara are putting the detectors to a common sense and good use.
Coming from a programmer, AI checker are the same as asking the weather/future to Aunt Irma and her crystal ball. You will get an answer for sure, but certainly not an accurate one.
I expected this to happen long ago, artists will incorrectly be labeled as using AI, and artists keeps on giving them methods that aren’t accurate nor will they see the nuance of multiple problems vs a single problem by either inexperience or simple mistakes anyone could do since we aren’t infallible, they just fling around wildly and only hurt everyone in the process.
Another not so fun fact about Poligraph Test: A lot of Serial Unsubcriber pass the Poligraph test because they can maintain their heart rate in normal level.
I've followed johisart for YEARS now and I can tell you with 100% certainty that their art isn't AI and it's sad to see people accusing them of using it. You can literally look at their art from before AI art was a thing and know that they're genuine. And uh... that painting is Vincent van Gogh's Starry Night
AI image generation is only going to outcompete people who rely on common cliches in their artwork. Like Generic anime girls and furries with the same 4 expressions doing nothing. If your art work can be imitated by a robot that easily, you aren't very creative.
because of idiots going rampage saying "your work is AI because of the other machine I used for this argument", I got scared and started to post art streams (when the internet upholds or timelapse to show i'm not using ai.
I feel terrible for whoever is accused. There was a bit of proof in that art it was made by real means and being accused of having A.I. just because of a checker is like saying a TV is a monitor. And maybe even if it was A.I. there has to be proof of the art like that Vigo person had proof, and not by some A.I. Checker. P.s. The picture you analyzed with the stars is. Van Gogh’s Starry night.
All future artists should be required to include a speed paint with their submissions. That's what I did with my painting I submitted to the contest. Problem solved.
2:00 Thats not why polygraphs are inadmissible. They are inadmissible because their accuracy is reliant on the testers ability to read, account for variables and properly interpret what the machine is saying.
If you glaze, or nightshade your work it becomes flagged as AI as well, futhermore Glaze and Nightshade are being broken regularly like every 2 months, so it's shit and not a protection. If you really wanna protect your work you want to export it in 700x700-1000x1000 resolutions when posting publicly and post the higher reses for patreon. Also lower reses also work wonders hiding your mistakes and is perfectly suitable to view on social media. USE IT.
I googled "asylum night andy warhol" and Starry Night of Van Gogh appeared. What happened??? O.o Edit: I am confused with my google search, I am not mocking her
You know, the HIVE one tends to be really accurate, and I've tested hundreds of sourced samples... But there are so many different AI generators now, and they update the detectors to cover them. So accuracy has been on the decline because of this. Something I've noticed - if you generate noise in your artwork, it is more likely to get flagged as AI. Noise adds texture to things, and makes artwork look a bit more similar to a photograph. For some of my art, I do looping visual effects videos, and my most recent one has a fair bit of noise, and stars generated using old After Effects Starburst effect. I had it tuned so that the stars were too much like noise, and out of curiosity, as I do with all of my art (which is not AI by the way), I threw a screenshot (one frame of it) into HIVE's detector, and it threw a 91% positive AI result (which is a first for me, I'll be honest, I was surprised) I went into my project file and adjusted noise parameters a bit to make it less "noisy", exported it, and grabbed the same frame once again. That time, it was more accurate, with a less than 1% reading. I still had noise, and it didn't take away from the piece to adjust it that way. Just be aware that excessive noise is probably a culprit, especially for seasoned digital artists that like to use noise in their artwork for effect.
These checkers are such bogus. I used to freelance write, and while I don't often do that anymore, I have friends who do. Clients are constantly telling them they won't pay because their work went through some BS scanner that says it's AI when I know from like a decade of knowing these people that they don't use AI. We have all been writing since way before AI. People are literally losing work because clients are either too stupid or too lazy to get educated about how bad these scanners are. Ugh. I'm glad you're calling it out.
Yeah, at this point when someone accuses me of "prompting," I tell them to prove it. I'm just a terrible artist but I write and I can mimic writing styles. Even had a professor accuse me of it. Before this became a norm, I had to prove that I used what they taught, in a class I paid to go to, to back up my work.
What I hate the most about this is theirs a big difference in how they look. Real artist with their real artworks have a more rough and obvious brush strokes that Ai can’t do right. Ai is normally more blurry and dreamy and unrealistically smooth. If you notice like a pen mark shape like a transparent circle or the layers of brush strokes. It’s very much real art. Artist nowadays need to post receipts and their art process and stuff just to reassure people it’s not ai.
AI detection tool are mostly shit. I try to comparing like some artist work from 2018 below and there are a lot of them that get flagged as an AI. The only way we can detect is the image made by AI or not is really just the common mistake and trope that AI do like you said, finger and like eyes and hair. But i will give another important point how to detect is the image are AI generated or not are by feeling. Some image are detailed in the place where there is no way artist will waste that much time to create that detailed while the main vocal of the image aren't.
Vincent Van Gogh was a Dutch artist that made starry night and was a post impressionist artist. Andy Warhol was an American artist who did pop art like the Campbell’s soup cans and the many prints of Marylyn Monroe.
Funny and Sad that most of the "AI artist hunted" were just professional Artist that just got falsely accused by a random account on social media that do it for exposement and then use the hype to announce their commissions and patreons. Most of AI Detection Tools use the deep learning trained algorithms to detect color patterns, shapes, and textures and compare them with trained models made with humans and AI images to give you a result. Even some said "Likely" when give you a result because is not 100% accurated. You can upload a smartphone photo with some beauty or HDR filters and it will give you "generated by AI" result.
@@Hurricane047 Plenty of other art forms have weathered automation. Also what is there to do? Something like fast fashion is demonstrably bad on multiple levels but its not going anywhere not to mention almost every other facet of humanity that has been impacted by automation. Like the first person said artist always tear each apart go back and look at 2014 and all the posts on digital artists when the market for digital art started exploding. The "real artists" could not shut up about how fake and awful digital artist were.
Is not a matter of pointing and using tools to spot AI. You must investigate the author if it has a portfolio and see if the style is consistent across all their work, so they are able to repeat it. If it's a random person like this Vigo without an online portfolio or the rest of the portfolio is filled with easy to see AI patterns, that's a red flag. That's also another reason why many programs has timelapse features. You can keep those to later demonstrate you made everything from scratch. Make use of it.
bruh these AI checking tools are a joke. didn't knew they existed so I gave it a shot. it has major issues with paintings overall. It told me my art is AI lol. I feel so bad for people who get accused.. especially high detail work and paintings. Ive seen it repeatedly now. Thankfully not something i had to face (yet).
johisart always been one of my biggest inspirations, so i def felt like it was their style that was ripped off i even think that eevie (or similar anyway) art has been online for way longer than AI even been a thing too bad they were dragged into it, i hope that most people are able of thinking with their own minds not just asking a program
this has nothing to do with the video, but i got kinda annoyed with 1:22, you say that people put their "written work", and after that "same thing with art", i mean writing is an art. Art is not just drawing, it's also music, writing, architecture, video making etc. I don't blame you at all for saying this because sadly nowdays all other form of art excluding drawing / painting lost their "art" designation, but I find it quite sad for artists who produce another form of art than drawing. Anyway apart from that it was a very good video you explain really well, I wish you the best for the future of your channel :)
Oh yeah, art I did over 10 years ago gets flagged as Ai. Music I composed over 10 years ago, same thing. ...Btw, I did a college dissertation on Vincent Van Gogh. It's a shame he never got any recognition for his work while he was alive.
i think now a days if you're gonna submit art that they should make you submit a step by step process as proof that you made the artwork. which will take out the ai ppl
I'm an artist, it's been 12 years since I started drawing and because of that I learned many different styles and I don't have a fixed style, because of that I was accused of using AI since my art is not consistent, I was only able to defend myself because I paint and draw in paper too and have many sketchbooks. Honestly, the AI police makes many artists paranoid instead of helping them.
ignoring the miscredit of Starry Night.. The AI calling the real artists the fake while getting away with using those artists, my mind thinks of the story of King Minos who imprisoned Daedalus as a conspirator only after he had built the labyrinth to imprison the Minotaur; there’s a mean to use the imprisonment to keep them silent but also their control. I’m not the camp that adamantly opposes the AI as it’s still young and being developed by many with various intentions, but it is with its development that society is also going to shape the morality of the tool itself. We artists can’t do anything to stop AI from existing or functioning, the real battle is the few who intend to exploit it and devalue the artists that fuel it; and i fear they intend to make it so artists don’t value themselves enough to keep making the stuff they want. that’s what i get from the AI calling real artists AI while calling the AI real art, it’s not a fluke but a manipulation tactic
in one or two years it will be 100% impossible to check if art is ai or not considering how fast mistakes like hands or or backgrounds not making sense are fixed. two years ago it was hard to get a decent ai image and now its hard to tell ai and real art apart so what will happen in one or two years from now? its just sad tbh but there is nothing we can do about it
my school recently began using an AI and cheating program to check if kids have plagiarized, used ai, etc. Its accuracy is horrible if you use a quote from somewhere correctly but a random college student also uses it it will flag as plagiarizing a private paper. It also takes common phrases like presidents names and will flag them if anywhere on the internet also mentions that name. The AI tool for art seems to have the same level of accuracy
This is why I look for the original artist online who come up with a specific artstyle, since Ai copied from the actual artist to steal their style. Ai can’t come up with its own style.
After watching your first vid about this, I learned about AI websites and decided to try one of my drawings in it. 89% is what my handmade drawing got. I was so sad. Thank gosh these aren’t accurate, it can really wreck a hard working person’s image quickly.
I tried one of those AI detectors, and it thought two of my entries were AI generated even though they really were not! So I had to make TikTok videos showing the layer breakdown of the three images, to show that they are the real deal. Since AI art can’t make layers like a photoshop file.
oh i tried those AI-checker in the past, almost ALWAYS wrong! i put arts of that are made by famous mangakas before gen-AI was created, the "checker" would almost always say they are made by AI, usually hitting 70-90%
I don’t understand why these contests don’t ask for psd’s. You’ll never get a layered, step by step painting with AI in psd format, that’s the way to know if someone actually painted it. I follow this artist for years, they are amazing and this is exactly the kind of painting you’d expect from them. It’s really sad this happened.
I just a test with an AI checker, one with a drawing I just finished today and another with a photo I took and photoshopped last year. Both results were zero. These checker tools are useful for sure but are by no means flawless.
The images being release this week on Midjourney and Leonardo are SO REMARKABLE that they are nearly flawless. My jaw dropped. They met and in some cases exceed my expectations. The only tell in a few of them is that cast shadows and reflections don't match up. But in everything else it is now nearly impossible to distinguish AI art from real art. This means detection programs will now be 100% useless going forward.
I also was been accused that my art is ai even though i show the vid of my drawing some still say i use ai video honestly if they know ai is banned in my country their mouth would have been shut down but because of privacy that i don't want anyone know what country i am i couldn't say
4:21 sorry andy warhol? Just for correct credit, that painting was made by Vincent van Gogh in 1889. Any warhol created pop art screen prints in the 1960s
Those web sites that detect AI images are unreliable, because you can take any non AI generated image and still make the website detect it as AI. 1.- Take any non AI generated image 2.- Go to your favorite AI image generation service 3.- Use the img2img function to let the tool process that image with virtually no changes. 4.- Take the resulting image to your favorite AI detector and it will likely tell you that there's over 90% chance to be AI generated. Now you can use that to smear any artist you don't like. This AI witch hunt is hilarious as I expected with folks accusing real artists of using AI because another AI tool in a website told them.
You can also do the reverse, either by filtering, adding your own noises to cover up the AI noise they were detecting, or the easiest, just modify the AI images here and there. It's funny to see people advocating to not over-rely on automated tools (AI image generators), yet they themselves would do the exact same thing they advocate against but with a tool they think is justified to over-rely on.
whenever i make art and consider posting, always thinking i would be accused of using ai… -_- whoever is TOO good at making art is now accused of using ai.. since ai only references good art
The simplest solution would be to ask the artists to send a screenshot of the drawing at different stages of creation. Then doubts about the AI art would immediately disappear.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
guys I just want to apologize for misattributing starry night to warhol instead of van gogh - I’m very face blind and my name recollection is terrible, and I never went to art school so please forgive me for one mistake I made 😅
'Misattributing' is an understatement. It's basically on same the level as confusing Justin Bieber with Beethoven.
@@smuglinsley It's just funny to me more than anything.
Most people who know about him didn't go to art school, it's just embarrassing for an artist content creator.
Oh no oh no no no no
@katliente That's ok! Haha I know how it is. I didn't even knew who warhol was, so it was a discover moment to me (or at least it could be, strangely when I try to google about he starry night of van gogh appeared at image search!(what a coincidence) So if anyone could explain who this guy is would be cool 😅😂❤️) (sorry my english)
I WAS SO CONFUSED LMFAO
I'm the artist of the Eevee painting in question, thanks so much for bringing awareness to this! It sucks that generative AI stuff is destroying people's trust, but like you showed too it's so easy to just do some quick research on the artists' portfolio and history.
I feel so bad, people just go and accuse someone with out going through person portfolio.
People need tho realise that AI did NOT create this type of style, it stole it! So yeah, some "AI type of art" are still real artists
I was just having this thought the other day. There's this Tumblr user named Apofiss who does gorgeous work and they've been on the web for decades, but when I saw their art for the first time in a while, I couldn't help but think "AI art?"
For the record, they are absolutely not an AI artist. However, the fact that they've been posting for maybe more than a decade + their art gets spread around a lot for sure means they ended up as a part of AI's dataset.
@@Pepyogurt I've been following Apofiss for years, and Apofiss is definitely not someone who utilizes AI to create art, seeing as the person behind all the art has a deviantart account that has been around for eighteen years, and I've been keeping up with the artwork.
Technically people steal, not AI, the scaper bots only understand collect and sort, they're not programmed to understand what is theft, and what is copyright, the people behind creating and abusing these programs? Absolutely understand theft and copyright, and should certainly be held accountable.
@@Pepyogurt Thanks for sharing Apofiss, their art is so cute!! Definitely doesn't look like AI art though haha
@@naraku971 But do you (and a lot of artists apparently) understand copyright? Mimicking a style alone is not copyright infringement, nor using other's work as an intermediary to make unrelated creations, including stylistically similar but unrelated works.
She did not just disrespect Van Gogh like that- 💀😭
I used to think Warhol wasn’t valid, but he was. That said, he was no Van Gogh
I’m very face blind and it also affects my memory of names 😅 i forget the names of ppl i used to be very close with, so when it comes to an artist that - albeit iconic - is someone I’ve never studied nor met (bc its not possible)…yeah 😅
2:55 "Ears don't attach to the head"
Speaking of Van Gogh :^)
@@katliente”affects memory of names”?
Guess I found out I am face blind… :(
Not necessarily, u can have name memory problems in general but face blindness is the cause for some. The best way to know if u r face blind is if when u watch movies u have a hard time if two actors look similar (like they have a similar hair cut n colour n stuff) or if u see a person once u have a hard time recognising them next time or stuff similar to that
I have a slight face blindness but my mom has it a bit more and my sibiling the worst, if friends they've seen a bunch cut hair once she might not recognise them for the whole day until i say something or a different clue helps her@@Emerald_the_Umbreon
I hate how AI had ruined the art community. Now we got people throwing false accusations at one another.
The art community has sucked for 20 years, this is just yet another problem it has among many.
My brother in Christ the art community has always been incredibly toxic and throwing around baseless accusations. AI just gave them another reason to do it
@@GhostDraggon_I hear that. Drama upon drama. Someone tell me why I watch these videos…
That's not Andy Warhol. It's Van Gogh's Starry Night.
I was literally like "That is not the same guy"
@@YusukeYuichie exactly
I felt a oof when I heard it lol
@@Piaprika that's my point exactly
I knew the difference between Van Gogh and Andy Warhol when I was 6 years old. The two have such distinct styles. This person is… a joke.
I think the biggest crime AI has committed when it comes to art is that now... almost any glorious-looking piece of art can easily be mistaken for AI slop. It's like the very existence of AI art feels like it's just there to fuck with people's minds. Mocking them and making things feel like a "who done it?" mystery.
WHODUNNIT?
(sorry had to throw in that dr ref
I've apparently made it to being mistaken for AI, and accused of posting AI art to dA account, and said accuser blocked me. :/
I never cease to wonder how artists manage to live in an eternal paradox: AI art is terrible, BUT we constantly cannot distinguish it from real art, and therefore it's also a danger... This is just stupid.
@@flamop1667 Because some bad apples want to use this outrage as a way to diss people, as always.
It's really nothing new. AI is just the latest one (well to this point probably not even the latest one anymore).
(Of course all of these builds on the assumption that an AI user is indeed a fellow artist whom uses it as a tool, not someone who knows nothing about illustrations but "this machine can do pretty pictures for me so let me click a button and pretend whatever it outputs is mine".)
The paradox of the online art community.
"AI art is slop"
"Glorious-looking art is easily mistaken for AI"
Pick one. Or people could just stop witch hunting, that would probably be the best option.
99%: It's not any warhol its van gogh
1%: Actually talking about the topic of the video
No?
@@Jane-ow7srthey mean the comments
@@Jane-ow7sr Maybe scroll a bit.
AI artist's "I MADE THIS" :Regular artist's "Wow i did a good job time to post thi- "HeY tHaTs Ai"-edit OMG I GOT 622 LIKES
Usually if it’s an artist that “look ai” means the bots have been trained to copy their art 🙃
Are there really that many people generating ai and claiming they drew it? I don’t really go on social media but it seems pretty ridiculous for someone to say that haha.
@@kenyenmusic7548It's even more common than tracing now
people have huge misconception that ai images are ai images, its what the machine learned from the images it was fed in, ofcourse when not given artist style it will use the style of images that matches the prompt order the most, i think ai bros and anti ai bros should stop fighting both are dumb and wrong, ai gen is not ai art and using a machine to "assist" your work doesnt mean the person has no art value or have produced machinery nonsense.
this is some worthless drama... ai folks have to study the artist works tag them and train models to copy your styles and even then it wont be consistent or perfect....
Well that's the toxic community artists are cultivating... good for them
"they accurate only fifty percent of the time", and when you chose randomly, you are correct 50% percent of the time, meaning they are total bullshit haha
That is very true, but I believe lie detector tests aren't so much used as an actual lie detector test but more as a way for investigators to get information out of people that wouldn't otherwise confess in other circumstances. So I would say still a useful devise, just not in the way it is advertised.
If it's not a 100%, it's 50%
@@ShiitaKitsune64Absolutely, and once they have a good baseline they can definitely find certain answers where you MIGHT be lying and further investigate those to find new leads
@@Bejeodiehrubridjehfoekdjriwknr Yes! I also watched a documentary where the investigators had already researched the suspect's history and already knew all the answers to the questions they were asking him, but put him through a "lie detector test" to see how he would respond to them. Basically when he lied the whole time they knew he was the perpetrator. Super smart way to use the device.
@@Flamestorm1622mandjtv
this AI shit dropped in the art community and ruined everyone's perception of skilled artists and even possibly beginners.
now you have to be "perfect"
As if it's AI's fault that artists always had this tendency to do in-fighting.
@@voidmain7902 it sure has made it worse.
@@MACHOLOR Literally anything could make it worse though. It just appeared to be AI.
@@voidmain7902 look I don't know if you're supporting ai art, but either way you need to know that the distrust and disgust towards ai art isn't because of artist in fighting. Ai literally is trained on artist's works, without their knowledge or permission. Their artworks that take hours to make, the things they sell to make a living, are being stolen, so people can type some words into a text box and generate an image in mere minutes, for free. Then people claim these free ai peices of stolen work to be their own, and sell it for a ton more than it's worth. It's as bad if not worse than tracing. I really don't see how one can just blame artists for this, when ai generated creative works are actively stealing people's livelihoods, and caused by capitalistic society believing in cheapest work = highest profit. I'd rather the sht jobs be given to the ai, so that people could enjoy their hobbies instead, but of course we chose to give up our fun in the sake of "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer."
@@voidmain7902And yet AI remains to be the core of this problem. Not only that, but AI has tangible detriments to multiple industries, not just art, and remains a legitimate problem even outside of hurtful human error.
I feel like this is the equivalent to being called a hacker in a game while not hacking
That’s what scares me about ai almost as much as it replacing us. It’s people accusing us of using it. Thank god for auto timelapse recordings
Indeed. I still feel like it's gonna be a fad that's gonna be seen as cheap and trashy way to make "art," and people will probably forget. Or rather, I hope so. Like how crypto currency and nfts were big only to fall flat.
@sketch-eee4165
I find that crypto currency to be a sketchy gambling thing that you would lose money 100% of the time, and as for nft's..... meh
theres now an AI that makes false timelapse videos so it might be over
@@ReddBubbles if there a source for this?
@@christianr.5868 its not letting me post it in the comments :(
....Andy didn't make Starry night..... You meant Vincent van Gogh Right?
No, she meant Andy W. Otherwise she wouldnt have repeated Andy being the artist so often. Clearly she knows little about art.
@@Oozaru85yeeesh, one mistake and her art knowledge is erased?
@@Juniperxo Yes. Because not recognizing van Gogh is just pathetic. Even my 15 year old nephew who has no interest in art knows a van Gogh when he sees one. How can you confuse van Gogh and Warhol? Seriously, how?
@@Oozaru85 It's possible she mixed up the names, and being focused on making the video(ie speaking to the camera) her brain locked into andy warhol for some reason. It happens to the best of us, but lets see what she says before you start ordering out the firing squad, eh? :D
@@tm5123 Sure, its possible. Or its possible that she doesnt know what a van Gogh looks like.
4:10 Did you mean Vincent Van Gogh's 'A Starry Night'?
1:30 Also if you enter Art into these checkers you submit this art to be used to be trained with. It's in their TOS. So by checking artists pieces in this thing you expose them to be training data. Same company also offers image generation with a self trained high quality model.
Calling someone’s art AI when it's not is the new popular form of bullying disguised as providing a public service in the art community.
I remember last month I was posting my drawings on Cara and 2 of them was spoted by the website as being AI, when in reality those were both traditional arts that I made on paper with ink pens and colored pencil, and I had the w.i.p. pictures to prove they were real if it was necessary, so it's hard to trust these detectors since they can detect wrong and tag as AI works that were actually made by a human being.
When AI pretty much exploded like a year or two ago, I saw a lot of pieces that looked like my fan art. Especially Batman and Poison Ivy pieces. I didn’t think much of it cos I know I didn’t have any rights cos it was fan art. I stopped doing digital painted pieces cos that’s what seemed to “look AI” more than the inked and colored ones. Granted I’m not exactly top tier but I had fans. I’ve been a comics illustrator since 2004 and joke’s on me cos I haven’t had a paid commission in like 2 years cos “AI is cheaper”.
Oh, I think its because the detection thinks the flakes are "stars over clouds". Especially since AI tend to overcrowd an area and blur the periphery of the focus. It was such an easy way to spot it but machines cannot separate which is stars and which is snow, dust particles, light refraction, glimmer, or stars.
These tools are not that sophisticated. It's more likely that some invisible noise (like light JPEG artifacts) got picked up as some proof that it's generated by AI, or at least reconstructed by it. The Hive one does it a lot to the point that you can easily make "AI generated" images from a non-AI one, that both would look exactly the same visually.
I hate those AI art Detectors, it's because of cases like this and I hear horror stories about Twitter and TikTok users abusing them. Plus, there's the fact that an evil rival will use the "It's ai art generated." To get rid of better traditional artists.
At least, the programmers that made Cara are putting the detectors to a common sense and good use.
Coming from a programmer, AI checker are the same as asking the weather/future to Aunt Irma and her crystal ball.
You will get an answer for sure, but certainly not an accurate one.
Did you just say one of the most legendary paintings in history, Starry Night by Van Gogh, is by Andy Warhol and is called “A Silent Night?” 😭
came to the comments for this 😭
UA-camrs when they're rushed to make content that they make the most obvious mistakes on the planet. 💀
@@BloomkyaaaI don’t feel like this is rushed content, just someone who forgot one little thing. Everyone won’t remember everything at everytime,
@@blvcktea2479 *She "forgot" the name of the painting AND the artist?*
@@Bloomkyaaa Yes, it happens, as amazing as it sounds, we are humans
Nice Video But the art work at 04:10 is The Starry Night from Vincent van Gogh ^^
Yeah 😅, but at least she corrected it with her pinned comment tho-
I expected this to happen long ago, artists will incorrectly be labeled as using AI, and artists keeps on giving them methods that aren’t accurate nor will they see the nuance of multiple problems vs a single problem by either inexperience or simple mistakes anyone could do since we aren’t infallible, they just fling around wildly and only hurt everyone in the process.
Another not so fun fact about Poligraph Test:
A lot of Serial Unsubcriber pass the Poligraph test because they can maintain their heart rate in normal level.
Serial Unsubscriber?
@@ethanbear360 YT filter. Makes discussions more annoying because we have to get around them.
@@ethanbear360Serial unsubscribers like Jeffery Dahmer except unsubscriber is not the term we’d use to describe him.
Serial demonetizers
@@ethanbear360yes, haven't you seen that the writings to other people get unsubscribed too? Or maybe yours too.
the list of all those people ai STOLE FROM make me sick. i knew ai was trained from stolen art but seeing it infront of me makes me so so sad
I've followed johisart for YEARS now and I can tell you with 100% certainty that their art isn't AI and it's sad to see people accusing them of using it. You can literally look at their art from before AI art was a thing and know that they're genuine.
And uh... that painting is Vincent van Gogh's Starry Night
AI image generation is only going to outcompete people who rely on common cliches in their artwork. Like Generic anime girls and furries with the same 4 expressions doing nothing.
If your art work can be imitated by a robot that easily, you aren't very creative.
Wrong painting name, wrong artist name
Everyone makes mistakes
@@Sodapop777 Sure, chat gpt does it.
Cannot event fact check while editing.
because of idiots going rampage saying "your work is AI because of the other machine I used for this argument", I got scared and started to post art streams (when the internet upholds or timelapse to show i'm not using ai.
I feel terrible for whoever is accused. There was a bit of proof in that art it was made by real means and being accused of having A.I. just because of a checker is like saying a TV is a monitor. And maybe even if it was A.I. there has to be proof of the art like that Vigo person had proof, and not by some A.I. Checker.
P.s. The picture you analyzed with the stars is. Van Gogh’s Starry night.
All future artists should be required to include a speed paint with their submissions. That's what I did with my painting I submitted to the contest. Problem solved.
It reminds me of people accusing unbelievable video game skills as bot.
0:38 LOOKS AT WHAT⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖🍖
2:00
Thats not why polygraphs are inadmissible.
They are inadmissible because their accuracy is reliant on the testers ability to read, account for variables and properly interpret what the machine is saying.
I wish my art rendering is good enough to be accused as AI art
this is so real though
Easy peasy, just draw an extra finger or so :P Fake it til you make it😅
This is a certified human "artist" moment.
If you glaze, or nightshade your work it becomes flagged as AI as well, futhermore Glaze and Nightshade are being broken regularly like every 2 months, so it's shit and not a protection. If you really wanna protect your work you want to export it in 700x700-1000x1000 resolutions when posting publicly and post the higher reses for patreon.
Also lower reses also work wonders hiding your mistakes and is perfectly suitable to view on social media. USE IT.
5:25 The internet doesn't care about context clues is the issue, they just always assume everything so like 💀💀
A Silent Night by Andy Warhol...
I googled "asylum night andy warhol" and Starry Night of Van Gogh appeared. What happened??? O.o
Edit: I am confused with my google search, I am not mocking her
She said a silent night. She just messed up the name and artist. It’s actually Starry Night by Van Gogh.
@@damntae6540 Yeah, I know. But it appeared on google, I am more confused with the google haha
@damntae6540 Ah, and thanks for correct my hearing ❤️ English is not my native language and I have no idea who andy warhol is 🥲
Yeah she made a mistake between the name of the art and artist and now there’s a bunch of people mad at her for that tiny mistake
@@Sodapop777 But I am not 🥲 I swear
You know, the HIVE one tends to be really accurate, and I've tested hundreds of sourced samples...
But there are so many different AI generators now, and they update the detectors to cover them. So accuracy has been on the decline because of this.
Something I've noticed - if you generate noise in your artwork, it is more likely to get flagged as AI.
Noise adds texture to things, and makes artwork look a bit more similar to a photograph.
For some of my art, I do looping visual effects videos, and my most recent one has a fair bit of noise, and stars generated using old After Effects Starburst effect. I had it tuned so that the stars were too much like noise, and out of curiosity, as I do with all of my art (which is not AI by the way), I threw a screenshot (one frame of it) into HIVE's detector, and it threw a 91% positive AI result (which is a first for me, I'll be honest, I was surprised)
I went into my project file and adjusted noise parameters a bit to make it less "noisy", exported it, and grabbed the same frame once again. That time, it was more accurate, with a less than 1% reading. I still had noise, and it didn't take away from the piece to adjust it that way.
Just be aware that excessive noise is probably a culprit, especially for seasoned digital artists that like to use noise in their artwork for effect.
Andy... Warhol? He was like the exact opposite of an artist. Probably would be an Aibro
These checkers are such bogus. I used to freelance write, and while I don't often do that anymore, I have friends who do. Clients are constantly telling them they won't pay because their work went through some BS scanner that says it's AI when I know from like a decade of knowing these people that they don't use AI. We have all been writing since way before AI. People are literally losing work because clients are either too stupid or too lazy to get educated about how bad these scanners are. Ugh. I'm glad you're calling it out.
Yeah, at this point when someone accuses me of "prompting," I tell them to prove it. I'm just a terrible artist but I write and I can mimic writing styles.
Even had a professor accuse me of it. Before this became a norm, I had to prove that I used what they taught, in a class I paid to go to, to back up my work.
It's almost like witch hunting is bad or something.
What I hate the most about this is theirs a big difference in how they look. Real artist with their real artworks have a more rough and obvious brush strokes that Ai can’t do right. Ai is normally more blurry and dreamy and unrealistically smooth. If you notice like a pen mark shape like a transparent circle or the layers of brush strokes. It’s very much real art. Artist nowadays need to post receipts and their art process and stuff just to reassure people it’s not ai.
AI detection tool are mostly shit.
I try to comparing like some artist work from 2018 below and there are a lot of them that get flagged as an AI.
The only way we can detect is the image made by AI or not is really just the common mistake and trope that AI do like you said, finger and like eyes and hair.
But i will give another important point how to detect is the image are AI generated or not are by feeling. Some image are detailed in the place where there is no way artist will waste that much time to create that detailed while the main vocal of the image aren't.
Andy Warhol? TIL the Campbell Soupcan guy painted Starry Night.
AI-hunters cause more harm than AI-artists. How many times do they need to do this before they learn?
Correction: AI-users. They are not artists.
And I would argue that they are doing pretty much the same amount of harm.
Vincent Van Gogh was a Dutch artist that made starry night and was a post impressionist artist. Andy Warhol was an American artist who did pop art like the Campbell’s soup cans and the many prints of Marylyn Monroe.
i cant believe we have to do this now...
Funny and Sad that most of the "AI artist hunted" were just professional Artist that just got falsely accused by a random account on social media that do it for exposement and then use the hype to announce their commissions and patreons.
Most of AI Detection Tools use the deep learning trained algorithms to detect color patterns, shapes, and textures and compare them with trained models made with humans and AI images to give you a result. Even some said "Likely" when give you a result because is not 100% accurated. You can upload a smartphone photo with some beauty or HDR filters and it will give you "generated by AI" result.
AI is destroying art in so many ways, not only stealing from and replacing artists but creating mistrust against real artists as well, I hate it
LOL artist have been attacking each other for like forever new witch hunts if it wasn't AI it would be something else
@@stealthbrandon you're not wrong but this is just adding to it even more, I don't think it's worth dismissing it as an issue
@@Hurricane047 Plenty of other art forms have weathered automation. Also what is there to do? Something like fast fashion is demonstrably bad on multiple levels but its not going anywhere not to mention almost every other facet of humanity that has been impacted by automation. Like the first person said artist always tear each apart go back and look at 2014 and all the posts on digital artists when the market for digital art started exploding. The "real artists" could not shut up about how fake and awful digital artist were.
Is not a matter of pointing and using tools to spot AI. You must investigate the author if it has a portfolio and see if the style is consistent across all their work, so they are able to repeat it. If it's a random person like this Vigo without an online portfolio or the rest of the portfolio is filled with easy to see AI patterns, that's a red flag.
That's also another reason why many programs has timelapse features. You can keep those to later demonstrate you made everything from scratch. Make use of it.
bruh these AI checking tools are a joke. didn't knew they existed so I gave it a shot. it has major issues with paintings overall. It told me my art is AI lol.
I feel so bad for people who get accused.. especially high detail work and paintings. Ive seen it repeatedly now. Thankfully not something i had to face (yet).
johisart always been one of my biggest inspirations, so i def felt like it was their style that was ripped off
i even think that eevie (or similar anyway) art has been online for way longer than AI even been a thing
too bad they were dragged into it, i hope that most people are able of thinking with their own minds not just asking a program
this has nothing to do with the video, but i got kinda annoyed with 1:22, you say that people put their "written work", and after that "same thing with art", i mean writing is an art. Art is not just drawing, it's also music, writing, architecture, video making etc. I don't blame you at all for saying this because sadly nowdays all other form of art excluding drawing / painting lost their "art" designation, but I find it quite sad for artists who produce another form of art than drawing.
Anyway apart from that it was a very good video you explain really well, I wish you the best for the future of your channel :)
it’s strange how people either don’t notice AI or have falsely accused an actual artist of using AI just because it’s shockingly high quality.
No artist should have defend themself from accusations.
Oh yeah, art I did over 10 years ago gets flagged as Ai.
Music I composed over 10 years ago, same thing.
...Btw, I did a college dissertation on Vincent Van Gogh.
It's a shame he never got any recognition for his work while he was alive.
Even my art came out as AI made. Even tho I made it years before AI art even arrived
i think now a days if you're gonna submit art that they should make you submit a step by step process as proof that you made the artwork. which will take out the ai ppl
It's hard to believe anything is real anymore.
I'm an artist, it's been 12 years since I started drawing and because of that I learned many different styles and I don't have a fixed style, because of that I was accused of using AI since my art is not consistent, I was only able to defend myself because I paint and draw in paper too and have many sketchbooks.
Honestly, the AI police makes many artists paranoid instead of helping them.
ignoring the miscredit of Starry Night.. The AI calling the real artists the fake while getting away with using those artists, my mind thinks of the story of King Minos who imprisoned Daedalus as a conspirator only after he had built the labyrinth to imprison the Minotaur; there’s a mean to use the imprisonment to keep them silent but also their control.
I’m not the camp that adamantly opposes the AI as it’s still young and being developed by many with various intentions, but it is with its development that society is also going to shape the morality of the tool itself. We artists can’t do anything to stop AI from existing or functioning, the real battle is the few who intend to exploit it and devalue the artists that fuel it; and i fear they intend to make it so artists don’t value themselves enough to keep making the stuff they want. that’s what i get from the AI calling real artists AI while calling the AI real art, it’s not a fluke but a manipulation tactic
I have checked 10 of my painting in a checker. 8 came as human made, 1 was 50/50, 1 AI. Everything was made before AI was a thing.
As an artist i can tell immediately
in one or two years it will be 100% impossible to check if art is ai or not considering how fast mistakes like hands or or backgrounds not making sense are fixed. two years ago it was hard to get a decent ai image and now its hard to tell ai and real art apart so what will happen in one or two years from now? its just sad tbh but there is nothing we can do about it
Art checkers will say paintings are fake.
my school recently began using an AI and cheating program to check if kids have plagiarized, used ai, etc. Its accuracy is horrible if you use a quote from somewhere correctly but a random college student also uses it it will flag as plagiarizing a private paper. It also takes common phrases like presidents names and will flag them if anywhere on the internet also mentions that name. The AI tool for art seems to have the same level of accuracy
This is why I look for the original artist online who come up with a specific artstyle, since Ai copied from the actual artist to steal their style. Ai can’t come up with its own style.
It's sad to see the artist behind one of my favourite warrior cats covers to get accused like that
After watching your first vid about this, I learned about AI websites and decided to try one of my drawings in it. 89% is what my handmade drawing got. I was so sad. Thank gosh these aren’t accurate, it can really wreck a hard working person’s image quickly.
I tried one of those AI detectors, and it thought two of my entries were AI generated even though they really were not! So I had to make TikTok videos showing the layer breakdown of the three images, to show that they are the real deal. Since AI art can’t make layers like a photoshop file.
oh i tried those AI-checker in the past, almost ALWAYS wrong! i put arts of that are made by famous mangakas before gen-AI was created, the "checker" would almost always say they are made by AI, usually hitting 70-90%
I don’t understand why these contests don’t ask for psd’s. You’ll never get a layered, step by step painting with AI in psd format, that’s the way to know if someone actually painted it.
I follow this artist for years, they are amazing and this is exactly the kind of painting you’d expect from them. It’s really sad this happened.
Thank you 🩷
My art doesn't look ai generated but man i'd be so sad if anyone ever thought my art was made by ai
I just a test with an AI checker, one with a drawing I just finished today and another with a photo I took and photoshopped last year. Both results were zero. These checker tools are useful for sure but are by no means flawless.
I upload one of my art in a Ai detector for fun and it's saying 56% Ai, like wtf loll
The images being release this week on Midjourney and Leonardo are SO REMARKABLE that they are nearly flawless. My jaw dropped. They met and in some cases exceed my expectations. The only tell in a few of them is that cast shadows and reflections don't match up. But in everything else it is now nearly impossible to distinguish AI art from real art. This means detection programs will now be 100% useless going forward.
I also was been accused that my art is ai even though i show the vid of my drawing some still say i use ai video honestly if they know ai is banned in my country their mouth would have been shut down but because of privacy that i don't want anyone know what country i am i couldn't say
AI reader literally saw Bloom and went "NAH BRAH DAT AI FR FR!
i put a ai image of a cartoony dragon into the ai checker and it got a higher human rating then one of digital paints which is crazy!?
1:55 I tried that thing with a flipping shaded blob I made in ibis paint x and it said 70% ai...
1:15 ai checking if an art is ai
this ai situation is so depressing
4:10 this and the whole AI image culture is the real reason why Art History should be part of basic school curriculum
4:21 sorry andy warhol? Just for correct credit, that painting was made by Vincent van Gogh in 1889. Any warhol created pop art screen prints in the 1960s
Andy Warhol Made Starry Night? Girl, seriously??
Who is that?
Mistakes everyone makes mistakes it’s what makes us humans even multiple times
This is why I hate AI. Some people shaft real artists with AI and some artists get falsely accused of using AI. You can never be sure these days.
I love Andy Warhol's classic work, A Silent Night 🤣
Johis does beautiful art. They are legit. They've done a bunch of GORGEOUS covers for Warrior Cats books.
i don't know who Andy Warhol is, but that's Vincent Van Gogh
He painted a soup can. He filmed a guy eating a burger. He filmed a Dutch angle of a skyscraper for several hours. I think that's all he did.
@@tahjkuemmerle oh... okay then..
Those web sites that detect AI images are unreliable, because you can take any non AI generated image and still make the website detect it as AI.
1.- Take any non AI generated image
2.- Go to your favorite AI image generation service
3.- Use the img2img function to let the tool process that image with virtually no changes.
4.- Take the resulting image to your favorite AI detector and it will likely tell you that there's over 90% chance to be AI generated. Now you can use that to smear any artist you don't like.
This AI witch hunt is hilarious as I expected with folks accusing real artists of using AI because another AI tool in a website told them.
You can also do the reverse, either by filtering, adding your own noises to cover up the AI noise they were detecting, or the easiest, just modify the AI images here and there.
It's funny to see people advocating to not over-rely on automated tools (AI image generators), yet they themselves would do the exact same thing they advocate against but with a tool they think is justified to over-rely on.
whenever i make art and consider posting, always thinking i would be accused of using ai… -_- whoever is TOO good at making art is now accused of using ai.. since ai only references good art
The art is genuine there's no extra toes or messed up eyes or globed up leaves or flowers
The fact that People are now ACCUSING great art of being ai is proof of how scarily good AI has been getting at it.
The simplest solution would be to ask the artists to send a screenshot of the drawing at different stages of creation. Then doubts about the AI art would immediately disappear.
AI detectors are very bad. I put images through it that are 100% unedited AI garbage, yet it says it was 90% likely a human who made it