This Artist TRACED AI ART and DENIED IT...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 чер 2024
- Sending hate towards people is not okay! But, I just wanted to make this video to point out how AI tracing can look inconspicuous at first :o
ｓｏｃｉａｌｓ
twitch: / about
instagram: / katliente.ttv
twitter: / katlienteee
tiktok: / katliente
vlog youtube: @KatherinePan
discord: discord.gg/katliente
kofi: ko-fi.com/katliente/
etsy: www.etsy.com/shop/KatlienteTw...
outro soundtrack done by @real_ImJustTy on twitter!
tags, ignore these!
twitch streamer, twitch streaming, growing on twitch, 0 viewers, twitch affiliate, streamer, twitch rivals, twitch drama, streaming setup
I feel like ai art will become so normal to see and find that actual art from real people will be thought of as ai, thats heartbreaking to hear from someone saying the time and effort you put into your art is fake.😕
I’ve heard that’s already happening to some genuine artists 😢
Great artists will be accused of being AI, and bad artists will be accused of using AI generated from the great artist. 😆 IT's a shitshow. And everyone who becoems great at art, will further the development of AI art as the scrublords steal everything in sight, so they can make better Ai generated corn.
The amount of times I search up a refrence photo and see half of the results be ai art is one too many🥲
@@Moogchungus The worst part when you're like "oh this is nic... Fu... Damn AI".
Don’t jinx us
This situation was so annoying because it was obviously traced but people were swearing up and down it wasn't 😭😭
right!? the fact that even she was denying that it was traced, only saying she "referenced," but never showed us the sketching process, and only conveniently showed us her art process AFTER the lineart... like, cmon now...
This has happened FIVE times now on twitter. It goes like - someone posts art that's obviously ai/ai traced > artists accuse them of using ai > everyone jumps to defend them and insults the accusing artists > turns out the artists were right. It was AI! Do the people who attacked those that correctly indenitified it as AI apologize? Of course not. This exact thing keeps happening and it's so irritating. People seem to love to attack artists at any chance and absolutely refuse to believe us when discussing AI art. When we are fking artists, yes we can tell.
its actually so insane 😭
lol the hair is funny like imagine being that stupid
@@shut7353no it’s a lie. The people who are bad people enough to accuse someone without a proof are also the same who never admit that they accuse someone wrongly, because of their enormous ego. These are just jaleous people. Envy is a sin. Work more on your art instead of harassing artists better than you.
checked her account, and her most recent drawing is still traced AI. she’s actively choosing not to learn, doesn’t want to be better, and still wants to be a victim.
she also posted her old REAL art, and it’s sad because she can clearly draw and her old art is so much more charming.
YES TO THAT UGH her old art actually is so cute, which is why i don’t understand why she’s tracing 😭
@@katliente it might be for the clout
It’s definitely to double down and getting clout and likes on arttwt. The art style is so generic but it "looks nice" to many people so I doubt she’ll actually end up making a more unique style/develop her older style
What did it look like?
@@TheAroSpecWallet looks nothing like the traced AI stuff they posted.
I'm a decent-leveled artist, I've been accused of tracing over AI or using AI twice, both time the person ended up taking down their post because I actually stream so people defended me a lot and now I post a FULL process of everything I make. Part of why I was accused is because I dropped Twitter for ten days, training every day because I had enough of not being happy with what I did, and went back with a rendering level that had nothing to do with the one I had before (and people using my old SKETCHES vs my current full illustrations to prove the skill gap was too big).
It's disheartening as an artist to see that more and more people are being wrongfully accused of this (not this person, tbh, I suspected her since day 1, because of the blue haired girl drawing, if you watch her right arm sleeve it goes behind her arm instead of on top of it and it makes no sense with the fabric/clothing cut), but it's tough for some artists that are going through this while they actually draw everything themselves.
Honestly I'm part of the people that think that referencing (NOT TRACING) AI for poses and composition ideas is not a bad thing and can be pretty useful, and referencing (AGAIN NOT TRACING) the way AI shades actually helped me improve (I used to not use very dark and very light colors, which made my art look kinda dull. Now I ABUSE contrast, and this is because I studied a few AI pieces, also it showed me what NOT to do because god damn does AI mess up). I did not hide myself from that fact and anyone who followed my post during those accusations + all my friends know about this.
Sounds like an artist can't just post and be done with that anymore, now you have to stream and show layers just to have your stuff online for people look at and complain for free, instead of using all that extra time and effort with drawing something else lol
it sucks that to be recognized as an actual artist, you have to provide proof you actually did it
you didnt have to go through all this
I grew up using Ms-paint brush. And I had an idea of what I wanted it to be. So I never drew the background in, because that was a painstaking effort, especially avoiding the pixels of your actual drawing. And I don't use fancy software like whatever program this, or photoshop. I just use the simplest editing tool that comes with the your camera on your phone.
I don't have a computer. And I have been called out as using ai, because if you try to do the background, there's a chance you might affect your actual drawing again. And you can't just take an image and overlay the background to make it look right. Most of the time, I don't even shade, because as I said, it's not very precise. Now if I am to draw on paper, yes I can draw the background in without affecting my main subject, and I can even do shading with very little or no mistakes.
But this not AI then, because it's on paper, not a computer. I don't shame anyone who does it. You're doing something creative.
People being worried about having their art mistaken as AI art is so funny to me. It's not hard to prove you're drawing it yourself. "ahh noo but my reputation is tarnished" posting proof is going to blow any accusations out of the water so fucking hard you'll rebound into art Jesus.
Most people worried about that are 13 year olds that think their furry art is equivalent to the Mona Lisa.
@@user-zz6jx1qz5l No? I think young artists are just scared of backlash. Posting online is a little scarier nowadays so I don't blame them.
@user-zz6jx1qz5l the internet is attacking anyone remotely AI and that can be devastating to someone who isn't confident.
its very easy to prove a true thing xD I can easily prove i draw all my art myself by just streaming my process LOL
Seems like pointing out that people are making this accusation regardless got that reply deleted?
You know, not all AI art has tells to see it. Its far better at making simpler images like watercolor flowers and a discerning AI artist just needs to be familiar enough with what it should look like to ensure it does.
You aren't catching the AI art that is passing.
I saw it for myself
The artist litteraly trace over AI generated pictures and don't bother to change the imperfections, as for exemple, the hands , weird AI hands but actually drawn
The hands on the Ai images that I trace are always wonky, so I remove them entirely and draw my own. However, I suck at drawing hands and I use pictures of my own hand to help with that
"I'm going to trace over an AI generated picture."
"If you put in some effort, it should be fine."
(...)
"You will correct all the AI mistakes instead of blindly tracing, right?"
I feel like beginner/medium-level artists take "how to spot ai" way too seriously. Just because ai has one thing you do, or because one mistake they make you make it too, doesn't mean your art will be ai. Trust me, all artist knows what is ai and what is not. We know if you are a beginner making mistakes or not. We can see your process and preference in making art. Ai is not one thing, but the whole piece as a whole. It looks like a professional piece, but bland, no style, looks the same as every ai art. I think I've said this millions of times to younger artists, THERE IS NO WRONG WAY TO CREATE ART. Everyone is unique, have their own individual styles, and ai will never replace that. The amount of comments saying "I feel insecure because I did something ai would do" is insane.
There apparently is one wrong way to create art and Twitter attacks them for transgressing.
tis is not fact ppl make mistakes, and not everyone can tell
the more i see videos like this one, the more i wish i could live in a reality where ai image generation was never invented, or at least never succeeded as an invention.
Fr, ai “art” had such an impact on the art community it’s crazy.
Went from “it’s traced!!” To “it’s ai”it was such an insane switch
@@PaiiIettes yeahh, i would happily revert back to blissful "is this traced?" times. now i often overanalyze drawings and think to myself "is this ai?".
// also, my heart breaks for all newer/aspiring artists. starting out in a time like this must be very discouraging.
Cope and seethe
@@Kongongongg child response
I prefer to call it "AI generated images" or "AI image" instead of AI art.
It wasn't created by a human, or a living being for what it matters, so it'll never be art. Is a noise generator with patterns that might resemble something that already exists, generated images is a way more accurate name.
To be fair at 4:40 this is something I as a beginner artist infact did, moved to shading sections of my drawing while leaving some areas completely uncolored. This artist seems to indeed be tracing AI but the method they used here isn't really proof of that, and tood artists don't use this method that much not because they can't but because it can result in inconsistencies.
the problem with this is that their rendered sections both were done in that fashion, *and* it ended up perfectly matching the background they put down. its one thing if they rendered beforehand and it didn't match properly, but its another that the artist was able to perfectly visualize and correct for the planned background lighting conditions, especially given their other skills did not match this high level thinking and planning
It's not just one thing but the culmination of multiple things that make it clear
@@RubyDianArts Dead giveaway is the lack of object permeance in multiple locations, and the lack of logical consistency in item placement like with the ribbons.
I still do this simply bc i love shading way too much 😭😭
TIL the method ive been using to render/shade is a bad habit and i should change it :v
If it warms anyone’s heart, I saw a post recently of DALL-E 3 and how it’s gotten worse. It went from being able to replicate traditional styles to a HYPER ai style with the same exact prompt. The databased don’t discriminate on where they take art from, therefore it trains on AI made images too. It’s like inbreeding and it will ruin the databases eventually.
And futher when Nightshade and Glaze combine, you can start poisoning them even more for using your art. So I have hope!
(Although one treat is that when companies like Adobe make databases from real art made with their programs. Those cannot be poisoned or collapsed so easily. WHICH IS SCARY)
Nightshade and glaze don't actually work, they were dead on arrival. Actually look into them before you start singing their praises. They actually Benefit AI generators, Generators only take what's useful to them and then discard the rest. Think about it like people capable of brainwashing, that unsuccessfully try to brainwash you, it didn't work obviously, but you're now aware that there are crazy people out there that will try to brainwash you. All generators have different algorithms that work differently, some may be similar and may have similar images in their database, but midjourney/ Nijijourney's algorithm is not the same as Stable Diffusions, or Dream Diffusions, or my friend's who built her own generator entirely trained on her own work. Stanford University has been looking at both sides of the pro and anti AI spectrum, and were able to undo both Nightshade and Glaze with the use of simple forensics. I've actually spoken with the developers or some AI generators and a problem that they had recently. Notably with the prompts Anime and pretty girl combined. For that particular generator they have a number of styles that one could choose from, a place to type in your prompt, and press a create button. The problem was only noticed with a style chosen called Dreamland v2, when typing in Anime and pretty girl, it would make the pictures look entirely abstract, like you'd get if you'd choose one of the older styles available for use.
I spoke with them asking what their problem was, and I asked them about Nightshade, they said that they were aware of Nightshade, and stated that Nightshade isn't something that could do effective damage to any generator. It was actually crossing wires that were not meant to be crossed when trying to program in a new style. They had Dreamland v2 back up and running within just a matter of hours. This all tells me that it's not Nightshade that can do any damage to the generators because the programmers know exactly what it takes to make or break their generators, which in the case of the programmers I spoke with WAS THE CROSSING OF WIRES, not a program by an incompetent jackass who made something that can be easily undone through forensics. I'm not going to knock the programmers for being programmers of a generator, they were cordial, to the point, and Opted to keep in touch with me were I to have any further questions. I'd say if anyone can, they should find a way to seek out a programmer of a generator or seek out someone who has built their own generator, some are more than willing to share how they went about their process.
The inbreeding part looks like an actual issue for any ai model, which I'be delighted to think about,
If you can, could you share the link to the post?
Adobe is getting handled rn with its crimes lol
I saw a meme on tumblr recently. "AI should do my dishes and laundry so that I can do art and write poetry, not do my art & poetry so I can do dishes/laundry" Now that I see all these people using AI this way, I can honestly feel that some of these "artists" see the creation process and accumulation of artistic skill as a chore (ie. dishes/laundry) and they really really don't enjoy it and would do everything in their power to avoid it. they really want to get to the fun part, which is posting it on the internet and getting praised. this is why I can't call them artists. If the end result and the fawning is what they want out of creating art, then they don't even have the slightest clue what being an artist means. I'd say they probably felt more like an actual artist making slime when they were in grade school. At least they enjoyed the process. I seriously don't know whether I should be mad at them or pity them. They want praise, but they have my pity instead.
a really good tip i heard from another youtuber is to take a screenshot of artwork you suspect to be AI, and put the bright whites and etc under a teardropper, kinda like how u did to show the rendering. the colors will go absolutely NUTS and go all over the color wheel, which this person's work does. or at least you can tell they didnt bother going over white with white.
You might get false positives, as some people use colored noise to add texture to their art
@@botarakutabi1199 ahh, true, though typically those are pretty easy to spot in my experience. doesn't work for all, but if a piece looks really clear and free of noise its worth a try. one of those things that some artists genuinely have, and something AI tends to replicate (though unintentionally)!
What- i tried it but nothing happened it was normal?
noise is normal with low quality images. This isn't foolproof at all.
Tracing AI art 1:1 with all of its mistakes is just ridiculous and something I'd think as a joke.
Honestly, if someone's going to trace over a generated image, at least fix the mistakes, if you have a basic understanding of anatomy, or how things behave, it should be easy.
@@naraku971 Yea otherwise you're just using the stolen art verbatim. Atp why even trace?
@@naraku971 Still it's questionable but if someone would use it only for practise (not posting) and menage to fix ai's issue then it would be good step forward.
not many people want to say it, but the main reason you can tell its traced over ai is because the coloring still looks amateurish. if her fundamentals were that good, then the rendering wouldnt be so bad
I would like to agreed but .. I'm suck at the rendering but love and can do good line art (sorry for my english btw)
"There's my cat being an menace"
I want the cat.
his name is korn xD
This girl posted a whole book with her excuses for everything on twitter, and just refuses to record herself sketching anything
This is the exact bs I've been worried about with AI art... as an artist who makes BOTH art and music... I'm so upset about this and how hard it is to avoid the possibility of lots people using ai to cheat their works
This makes me feel so sad for where art is going :(
me knowing ill never be accused of tracing ai bc my art is ugly asf: 😎😎😎
YEAAAH!!!!
I love the fact that artists are upset at ai art and that art colleges are teaching artists how to properly use ai to assist artists 🤣🤣
"What if she really hates the undo button?"
Right any artist no matter what skill level will undo ONE specific speck of line they didn't like regardless of whether it looked good or not. That's mostly why I rarely ever show any of my recorded art processes, a whole lotta undos and deleting of layers.
Oh yeah I had a chat about this fraudster with my pals on discord, the effort they're putting in with this could easily go to making fully hand-made art. Ugh, they're clearly a beginner artist just from how they're rendering over AI images... and the chicken scratch video they posted to prove they're legit - proves nothing
and even if they have never drawn in their entire life it would still be better than ai images
no actually!! they’re putting in sm effort to hide the fact they’re using AI that they couldve mastered anatomy at this point 😅 /sarc
It's not there anymore because they deleted it but they did post a sketch to "prove" that they sketch their own stuff and it looked NOTHING like their other art. It looked really beginner level, face and body and then excused it with "oh i drew it within 20 minutes"
good news: it seems like she has taken criticism to heart! her recent posts show a genuine speedpaint of an organic sketch, as well as practicing poses from real photos.
They responded in the comments regarding points made in the video. Feel at the very least it could be pinned so that it has some visibility if they are taking it to heart
@@brandoncardozo1772 agreed. only knew about it bc i had checked the twitter
Although it's harder to fish out people who draw over ai 'art' , I feel there are clear signs, especially in the consistency of the the work, like it always looks like 2 people were drawing on the same canvas.
Regardless its still bad cuz theyre essentially taking the stolen work of mutiple artists and drawing over it. 😪
She has started to improve her own drawings instead of relying on AI, she is actually a decent artist and I hope that she stops tracing and realises her skill.
As someone with ADD, I absolutely don't do my rendering in a sensible order. I render the parts I'm most interested in at that moment generally. My lines and rendering also tend to change a bit from piece to piece.
i dont have add but same lol
my process is all over the place. ive had someone watch me draw once and they were so frustrated because i started rendering a part without even finishing all the linework
i am autistic and i do this too
@@ten1982 my process is also strange, I usually start drawing my characters from the left eye... But I'm so comfortable.
I very very rarely start drawing by drawing a general figure, only when I draw with someone to fit into the size of the picture, or into the overall composition.
I am deeply outraged by her statement that artists cannot paint in any other way than in one particular way.
I often don't draw the background at all, because I'm too lazy.. lol.
update on the artist: she posted on x a recording of her whole sketching process taking everyone's advice. whole screen, no bs (what most artists replying are saying, most artists are also supporting her ditching ai which is so wholesome to see instead of discouraging her to make art altogether)(it also actually looks way better) go check it out if you want to support artists ditching ai
dunno where these AI "artists" get the confidence to take commissions lmao. I'm here struggling with crippling imposter syndrome and feeling like my art will never be good enough to charge someone for. I am too lazy so I only draw a handful of times a year when I'm feeling extra motivated. most of my art live in my sketchbook never making it into the linework phase even. lmao the art process stops at sketching for me most of the time so it's hilarious to me how they have zero sketches to show and I'm here with a ton of sketches and almost no finished pieces,
they're just desperate for money, most people using ai for comms are around 10, sometimes 13, they're mainly minors
Has anyone who says/thinks "using AI for anatomy" is okay every heard of the numerous apps for figure posing that are literally designed for artists? Heck Clip Studio even has posable models built in. I'm just a guy who likes having a reasonable grasp of how things work & are made whether it is the CPU in my computer or the major steps that where involved in drawing & rigging the vtubers that I watch, yet I know about the tools that are meant for beginners to improve their anatomy skills while people who call themselves artists don't WTF.
That said I don't know how artists feel about using something like the 3d models in Clip Studio for tracing rather than reference, as a layman it seems far less problematic, at least from a legal (mainly Copyright) perspective, than tracing AI
NOTE: I am a Comp Sci Degree holder & though I have many qualms with current Copyright Law, to me current generative AI is generally just plagiarism & threfore Copyright Infringement with extra steps, though it is my understanding that tech companies & some governments disagree with my opinion of AI & how it operates
tracing over 3d models is really helpful, especially if u have a deadline, it speeds the process up. it's great for comics, too. I don't think it's looked down on much
Tracing 3d models is actually super common! Might not be AS productive as drawing a pose from scratch, but I think it still requires some knowledge of anatomy to make it look decent.
Not to mention programs that let you pose the model itself is such a godsend when you want a certain pose in a certain angle/scene.
3d models are not the same thing its a way better thing that helps artists and its used for practice and study That is why it was created
I use blender to model 3D room environment...I cannot get the perspective right while freehand draw 😅
It's funny seeing non artists in twitter defending the so called "artist" just because they put a proof that doesn't explain shit 😭😭 I saw they did a sketch but then again, the sketch never finishes (especially the face) and they never posts it finished?? Instead it was a different art entirely.
And the reason I'm confident it was tracing is because meet the artist sheet. The bangs are inconsistent when usually artist tends to draw themselves consistently from hair and style for fashion.
Tracing is okay for practice not to the point they make a commission out of it. I traced too but I used 3d model just to get a grasp of the poses and adds hair and clothes, since in the end, it's still your art.
It's funny seeing them making a statement like the hand is from my own and proceeds to trace it (they can) but they also fucked it up with the perspective
I gave the credit to sunvi for the colouring.
While I agree this is definitely traced, I've seen many skilled non-AI artists post their rendered WIPs without backgrounds. I think the most simple reason is that they DID a color draft of their background, but for the screenshot WIP they simply hid it to make the rendering stand out.
So I don't think that's necessarily a proof that someone is using AI, but in this case is definitely suspicious.
Also, I think sometimes AI art can be useful for rendering when you need to render something specific, but at that point it's better to use sites like safebooru that are heavily tagged (you can get real specific there) and has human artist.
I don't think it's necessarily lazy to reference AI art, to me it's like referencing from a collage of pictures, its just like... Why...?
I thought this too, they could've just added a plain background and hid it when taking a photo
I got 2 bachelors in art, and taking criticism is part of the art teritory. You dont go into art to be praised.... It's about self-improvement. If you can't handle people saying your art sucks then you shouldn't be an artist flat out.
Sadly lots of people disagree. Granted, it's usually young artists or people defending them, but the mindset that actual criticism shouldn't be given without permission is very common
I somewhat disagree with your second statement. The phrase "your art sucks" bares no sentiment for wanting a person to improve but rather telling a person then aren't good enough. At least when someone leaves a comment stating what someone should improve bares intent to see an artist improve, although I think giving criticism to someone who didn't ask isn't really necessary. Plus, you don't need to be good art art objectively to be an artist. Art is an expression of the human soul it doesn't always exist for criticits to pull apart.
True...but some people will literally say a good artist is shit because they want to harm the artist not help the artist, so that's why artist are critical of people who tear down artist because it's hard to tell if someone is being genuine, or if their just demeaning an artist under the guise of critique
Incorrect. Sometimes people draw to draw. Someone shouldn't just "not be an artist" because they aren't looking for feedback. Some people rather move at their own pace and a lot of times it's just hobby. If they're satisfied with the waythey create (ACTUALLY drawing, not stealing art tracing/using ai) then there is no reason to insist they listen to the opinion of someone they didn't ask for.
When it comes to posting online, it's to be expected, but an artist does not owe you their ears and to listen to you 100%, especially if your criticism is "you art sucks"
Would gladly get critiscm, but if insult i will find their mothe-
Jk but criticism ≠ insult
As someone who renders sections at a time. I feel like this approach can spark a bad narrative.
I have a more painting approach, but still add line here and there as needed. But since my process goes Sketch > Block out> some lines> Render my grayscale> Color... you get the point.
Regardless of background i already know my characters environment. Im aiming to push values.
I felt like i was being gas lit, i was like "nah they might just be overreacting","maybe they are just that good" then the tweet saying "i use ai came out"
It looks like they used elements from MiniYen's (prolific AI user on DeviantArt) gallery. Compare the blue hair night city girl with the hundreds of city anime girl in a city on MiniYen's dA, the background is very much similar in style and colors. They must be very young and don't realize that using AI as "reference" is extremely recognizable to those with experience
Hi! I actually generate them privately, I've never been on DeviantArt, the art isn't found anywhere because it's all on my PC only
It's literally so easy for them to prove themselve. Just post full time-lapse from sketch bc they always only post their rendering and coloring process smh either way, it's clear that they trace over AI art so they have nothing to prove.
No real artists can record all his process because we draw so much and you don’t have the space in you computer memory. So what I did when I was accused was to record a Timelapse of the same character with a different pose. But my aggressor said it proved nothing for the peace’s of art he was calling out. These people are just jealous bullies, unfortunately.
Yeah man, its so easy to store a couple hrs video for each and every one of your art works, and having it stored on your pc for who knows how much time so that you can have it ready in case someone accuses you...
What a mindless way to go about it. Most people dont have so much space to throw away to appease the angry mobs online, even less those who work on their Ipads exclusively
And even if you went about it to record it as light as you can it still takes layers of extra work and time not everyone has or should have to do.
And as many other people have pointed correctly and you are struggling to think, the problem doesnt go away with just proving yourself when someone accuses you. Its already hard enough for some artist to expose their art to the public criticism and now they have to do it in fear of their art to be accused and receiving harrassment online.
@@Lozak huh? I'm an artist myself and using a Galaxy tab as my medium. I post my art time-lapse from time to time and my art program does it for me, recording and resizing it. Anyways, the artist already admitted that they trace over AI so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Oh yeah, i was on that tweet drama, there is art piece u didnt show with a weird thumb and the artist said they "use IA to trace and they have said it clearly"
im so sick of this.. cus of all this real artists r being accused of using AI all the time.. imagine staying up for days and nights to finish one piece of art and all u get is "AI".. this has happened to me several times and its really very frustrating..
If they're called out rightfully, then it's justful. Especially if they make money off of it. There are obvious signs and the artist haven't actually posted real proof. Just because they can paint and color doesn't mean they can draw the base themselves, so they trace, which means stealing art. Referencing means looking at it and taking inspiration to draw your own stuff, there's a difference.
@@novu6196 yah ofc i understand that.. im not talking abt people who trace or who cant draw in the first place.. im talking abt the people who got damaged cus of them! the first thing that comes to everyones mind when they see good art this days is "AI" and everyone on tiktok thinks its a trend or smth they js accuse everyone of using AI for no reason.. its really frustrating and exhausting.. i wish AI art didnt exist..
I really love how easily you explain it for the people who aren't actually into art. I can show this to my friends, and I know they'll understand what you mean! Thank you for putting the work in!
The blue-haired catgirl lighting isn't great in the first place. While I'll say that the evidence of them going in with shadows and lighting while rendering without having a background is very weak evidence for AI referencing... the other parts are much more convincing with the disappearing hair. You don't need a background set down in order to start going in with shading. It'll help, but it isn't necessary. It doesn't take *that* much skill either as long as you are aware of how things are supposed to work
[Mild correction: Kat is still correct that the shading is done in a strange manner for other pieces that don't have the background filled in, being that AMBIENT LIGHT is supposed to be applied later on when other details are filled in -- but general shading can still be done without requiring background elements. Very much depends on style and process]*
That said, the values and tones for that catgirl piece aren't great in the first place with fitting in with the background
The thing I hate the most about the "evidence of AI" examples is that... a number of them are really weak. Most of them are really weak. And that's coupled with people's illogical assumption that everyone does things the same way. 'People don't go in with a round brush for shading'? Um... No. There are people who will still use that. Some people will also go around the color wheel* and try whatever colors seem close to lay down color/shading to see what works, then blend them all together -- and that creates a particular effect as well. Which is reminiscent of traditional, specifically color pencil coloring/shading though may apply to other media as well. Granted, there won't be many artists that render in this manner if they have an option not to because it simply isn't time-effective
The strongest example I've seen for AI is the "things disappearing behind each other" example where there is supposed to be continuation. That on its own is typically enough. Others strong examples are details that make little to no sense whatsoever -- but this one varies quite a bit, since sometimes some 'nonsensical' things are people being extremely lazy and not going through proper steps to apply effects and the like. Strands of hair blending into each other is sadly not that strong as a piece of evidence -- that can be seen as a particular art style quirk. Parts that blend into each other due to shading is also not that strong a piece of evidence as well. You can use it as supporting points, but you'll have trouble using it as a main piece of evidence unless it is extremely blatant and illogical (eg. blending details further back can make some sense, but blending details that are still fairly close up tend to be nonsensical)
THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE THE SAME COMMISSION CLIENTS AS ME, I'M BOGGLING.
Aw man, i saw them in a discord server asking for art trades and i almost fell for it, but the way they rendered the skin but had no clue about how clothing works just rang a bell for me... im a higher level artist and i know for a fact that someone who has that level of rendering should know basic rules of clothing folds ...
they're actively trying to scam people to draw for them that way i guess? The sad part is they get a lot of recognition and people are actually Falling for the art trades they offer...
This pisses me of so much as an artist
Here's the thing, non-artists simply don't care.
Only other artists understand.
And real artists are in the minority.
So... yup. There is no way for stopping frauds. The world is unfair like that...
I hate that anything me and MANY artists make that takes long is just kinda hated sometimes but when people make ai art or trace it most will defend it.
This is a little long, but I had a lot on my mind about this sort of thing.
Probably one thing that sucks so much about people accusing each other for using AI is that i once saw someone literally make their whole video describing everything that AI does and how if it's in a drawing, that means AI HAD to be the one that did it, but the person literally described things beginner artists do, and they also did this weird thing where they said "if there's more than one style in the drawing, that's AI", and that's not true. I've been studying art by watching anime lately (I want to understand how they're able to make anime characters look so simple and the world look so detailed and have the character not look out of place in the environment), and you actually will have different styles going on in scenes. Backgrounds, especially if they are of non-moving things, will be more detailed, and the things in front won't be because they are likely being animated. An example is from Ouran High School Host Club where Tamaki is standing in front of a rose covered background, and every rose was detailed, but the rose he was holding had little to no shading to make it stand out from the background, and also because it would be animated. Plus, usually in animation studios, especially if they have a bad budget and bad working conditions, the art style often changes. Sometimes, noticeably. I remember watching some Spongebob episodes and hating what they were doing with the art style that episode. They also pointed out issues with the fundamentals in the art, and before the AI art thing came to be, I was getting better at spotting weird issues in anatomy and shading in real artists' works. Just because it's rendered in a pretty ways doesn't mean an artist actually knows what they're doing, and I've been tired of people thinking "artists know how to draw, computers don't. Artists don't make fundamental errors." the AI was trained on work by real people, and real people make mistakes. It wouldn't be making mistakes if they only trained on stuff from the masters, but they aren't artists, so they don't know how to see the flaws in pieces yet.
I wanted to come in and mention another thing, so I'm editing this. I once heard of an interview with an artist where they were asking her(?) what the significance of drawing a bar scene was without an exit (they thought it must be a philosophical reason) and the artist literally want "dang, I did it again..." she forgot to draw it. Professionals Make mistakes. They draw on the wrong animation layer. They forget details or add details incorrectly. They do weird things with the anatomy, and not in a fun, stylized way. in an "oh god wtf is going on with her spine" kind of way.
It's super hard these days to be an artist just because of the lack of support you get. The AI art community literally shares all of their secrets and gate keeps far less than the art community. Meanwhile, in the art community, they have developed this insane us and them mentality that drives new artists away.
The argument about rendering before coloring other parts is kinda... Ehhhh...
I do that. I do not use multiply/overlay layers and i usually just wand tool select the skin first and paint it, THEN i select clothes and paint on separate layer. It's a skill issue, i can't use multiply for shading. Whenever i do the colors look horrible and i refuse to do it like that.
I usually go eyes>skin>hair>clothes>background
ALSO I KNOW PERSONALLY artists that can't line art for shit and their line work is messy, but their rendering is in fucking sane. Duh there are artists who chicken scratch whole line work, yet theie rendering and posing is on whole new level, i have seen them do poses looking so dynamic and natural, feeling like they are literally moving and messing with your brain.
Those are all my issues with the arguments tbh.
Ai just looks like ai. Can you not tell that is traced off ai? Even when it has been confirmed and proven? Does one thing make the whole thing ai? Does one thing artist do make it ai? One look and it's so clear that the image in the video is copied off ai. Pointing out specifics will lead to people saying things like you, so I only way I know is because I just know. Call me insane I've talking to so many different artists and they can point out ai immediately and I hope you could too. Would love for you to tell me a better way to spot ai because it isn't just made up of one single thing and is very hard to explain!
I appreciate you sharing your own experience because that's exactly what it is to me as well
heyy, you should shade / render in grayscale, then when ur done, add the colors using overlay or multiply layers! like everything in art, it does take practice to get right, but i have been doing it and it has helped me improve a lot!
@@AzureSky-dq5xf I know it's AI, all i am saying is you can't shame other artists and accuse people of using AI based on that part of their process alone and i do not want people to get witch hunted.
4:02 I understand that in the case of this artist in particular we can say that...but believe it or not there are plenty artists out there who are able to visualize their light source like that so if you personally watched the video and are one of those artists (like me) you're valid. Some of us have more skills in this area and less in another
damn, hearing "ai usually only uses highly saturated colors in coloring" really made me feel insecure as i LOVE using saturated colors ._.
I dont think that what she was getting at, its more of the shading style as well
Well, don't let these clowns put you down. Draw however the hell you want, be proud of it!
Personally, I have no issue with an actual artist tracing over, or using AI art as base, for their actual art. like, dude. its fine. Its literally one of the points of AI art - to be an aid for artists.
@@helix33933 Did you miss the part where AI gen machines are full of stolen artwork and bad for references bc of the mistakes (not to mention the horrible environmental impact it has to simply generate ONE image)
@@helix33933i don’t think I’ve ever seen an artist that likes ai or think it’s helpful 😧
@@helix33933 ai art is never good? if you feel like you need an aid: use references, not a bot that has been fed stolen art that also doesnt know what object permanence is. it's like using already chewed and regurgitated cookies as base for a cake
My only thing with this video is what about artists who don’t draw backgrounds. At 8:24 you were talking about how only “really experienced artists” can render their pieces without a background but that’s just not true. I personally can’t draw backgrounds for anything. So I usually just keep it white or do something simple like make the background a different color. It’s just a character design if you don’t draw backgrounds but you can still add the shading and make it look right without a background.
For me if AI art is used if its used in a sorta "ha ha funny" as in just a fun way and not used in a sorta fraud way as in taking talent away from artists.
On the part where only partial of the character was rendered, that is a common thing for newer people to do. Get stuck or too focused on 1 portion and then color the rest after. I did that when I was 16-17
I posted some concept sketches on Reddit earlier this week and somebody very agressively accused me of using AI because they didn't like the way my hands looked. I stood my ground and very quickly they silently disappeared after a ton of backlash. As you said, it's very easy to prove you're a human artist.
My tip to any artist who's afraid of being accused of using AI: *there's no need to panic, stay confident and stand up to accusers* . Question them on why they think your work is AI and fire back hard proof and responses, accusers will tend to fall apart after one or two questions. Don't feel the need to justify anything if they get rude, you don't own them anything. The community will always have your back on this.
i think it wouldnt have been so bad if they didnt took comissions and just did it for fun/practise together with learning anatomy
Can AI art just die already?? Seriously, it's only done more HARM than Good. I'm so tired of artwork being fed to AI, people being accused of using AI, people USING AI and DENYING it etc etc
It's only made our artist community worse, because you have to do so much just to make sure what you're looking at isn't AI or is, it sucks so bad..
Calm down buddy 😂
@@RedArchive1 ok!!!!
@@RedArchive1 Nah, let him cook.
it's crazy that they didn't notice these things like the skin coming out of the shirt and hair strands disappearing as they were tracing it, like if you're gonna try to scam the internet into thinking you made it yourself, you'd think they'd notice and just quickly fix these tiny things WHILE they're doing it ToT
so HERE is my question. What are the thoughts on people who will create ai art as a REFERENCE for something else? I know there are a lot of people who can not afford to pay someone to create reference art to then create the base line of their vtuber so they will turn to ai art to bring their description to life and ask for something similar. Not exactly whats shown, but just so they can get something as close to what they want as possible to give the artist a picture to go off of?
This is something im fine with. Especially since a lot of the people that want this are not artistic at all so they cant come up with a concept on their own due to lack of knowing how to draw.
Personally, I use AI art as a reference or for inspiration for unrealistic characters like monsters or something similar. It helps me get character design ideas. I’ve seen an artist use AI art for inspiration, but she didn’t directly trace it.
This is incredibly frustrating, many amazing artists use wiggly lines and thin line art. Even Kim Jung Gi who even has lines like that on his digital artworks. Muddy Colors? Have you seen Yohann Schepacz or Jama Jurabaev's digital art? It's almost all muddy but perfect and intentional.
What I'm saying is, This tweet is so sure to call out these specific elements as something a beginner or a tracer would do. A total manipulation for young artists to completely avoid these intentional styles. This tweet is doing harm than good.
example: Thin lines are even harder because the amount of detail and shape to complement on anatomy is challenging, so avoid that now? Plus many artists do not hold their pen the same way (range of motion).
Why does this person have to tweet something trivial like this? i know AI is crap but please let's avoid these stupid arguments too without really backing it up with concrete examples.
I'm an artist, and I use unstable linerart. So cook, brother
Not every artist can actually tell if you are just a beginner or using AI, so pro tip, save time lapses or step by step progress images of how you do your work. If you can stream or record the process instead, even better. There really are some people that will accuse you of using AI just for making beginner mistakes.
it would be okay if they werent posting their traced art online and opening comms...
The artist that is the main focus of this video has responded in the comments addressing points made about them and it also has quite a few replies/likes, but doesn't show up when you sort by top which is weird... At the very least it should be brought to people's attention or pinned so it doesn't just turn into cyber bullying
Ive been drawing for a few years now and that part of grab background and multiply with lower opacity is something i never thought of! thank you
imma be real i also do the background after if finshed the character XD
Same.
Also if you can't see any of it it's usually because clip studio has a timelapse option. But it's weird they said they used obs--in that case you would see all of it. But Ipad users only option would be timelapse is they use clip studio paint. Trying to record anything while drawing on my older ipad pro makes it overheat and literally shut down on me twice, or issues where it didn't record, as well as drain your battery insanely fast. Timelapse at least it saves it IN the document so as long as your file saves so does the timelapse!
But yeah this artist I knew was fucked right away. Just wanting you give a heads up about some stuff you pointed out because lots of artists do that stuff and not everyone draws on pc. (though in this case they lied, since they say they used obs.)
The amount of ai art i have seen passed as real art scares me
actually, I think AI art is great as a reference to SPECIFIC things (characters, scenes, etc), for beginners...not as a tracing material or anything, but like, if you use it IN ADDITION to other stuff, it can very much speed up the rough draft stage, like figuring out where clothing folds go, roughly how hair might fall, etc (of course, better have several images of the same character for a bit of variance, remember to use the same seed when generating), while some stuff you can find actual people's art for, not everything is that easy to find, and while AI stuff tends to get some parts wrong, it's great as a kind of sketching/blocking up tool
of course you shouldn't be dishonest, or asking people for money for it
imho if someone is new, and is already asking money for their stuff, that's already kinda red flag, whether or not they "cheat"
Hi!! I’m the person who posted the thread, and thank you for making this video! 🙏🏻 and THANK YOU for talking about the harrasment artists who call ai users out get!! Cause I went through HELL. I myself got accused of AI art many times, but proved myself really easily. It really isn’t that hard to make a video when you sketch! 😭❤️🙏🏻 thank you thank you thank you 😭
ugh im so sorry ur going through all of this for calling them out >< i saw ur tweet and i hope ur health gets better!!
Omg thank you for posting that thread and educating people
@@katliente Thank you! I will see a doctor today so all good! ❤️ Thank you for standing by real artists and not nitpicking my thread to bring me down. 😭
good job on bullying duh
@@autist1cvoice I just warned people about a scammer. I won’t be silent about scammers taking our space as artists. Duh.
(15:36) nothing is wrong with using tools to help in the process of learning, the problem is claiming to have no such help at all. ALSO saying nothing is implying no help as well: If I saw someone get robbed on the street and took a picture of what the robber was wearing, but then say nothing to investigators implies I have no information. If somebody asked if I saw anything and I say I saw nothing is me lying. This artist basically had their phone searched and showed their own photo of the robber, and then laughed and said "ha ha lol I actually totally did watch that old lady get robbed"
At this point, she's admitted and caught red handed for tracing AI. That she openly uses AI to "learn". And everyone that is an artist is saying "hey, don't use AI to learn. use literally ANYTHING ELSE but ai" .. then you have those who are just crying for her. Regardless, she got what she wanted. The attention and quick growth. More power to her I guess.
That said, Qutar_Art actually started doing original stuff and only using reference images (and NOT TRACING!!!!!!!) , so props to that person.
Its crazy bc she’s setting up commissions too 😭😭 and i remember checking up on her account and she went from a few hundred followers to thousands after her “ppl think its ai” tweet blew up
What bothered me the most is that that person acted like a victim... and then they said like "yes, I copy it, I don't care 🤪" ... like wtf~ It also discourages me as an artist that they have gained so many followers for something they didn't create... 😿
In cases of AI art claims I try to immediately be the devil’s advocate until I can’t anymore.
I’m an artist myself, my style doesn’t look like AI, but I know people who’s style does, and they get a lot of crap sometimes.
So this whole video I was trying to do the same thing- I sit down and go “Yeah this could be explainable..” I was even saying “Well sometimes I do lighting before the background.” And “If I color-blocked out a background, I wouldn’t show it in my progress pictures.” The fact the shading is the EXACT SAME throws me. Even when I do lighting before my background, I always know what my background is going to be or look like. And the lighting ALWAYS changes at least a little bit as I make adjustments.
Not to mention they admitted it at the end but like. Idk, just sharing where my personal “devil’s advocate” meter ran out.
[edit: Finished revising. I know we can investigate better than this. Ty to anyone who reads this.]
As an artist, I have an issue with this. Your nitpickings do not rule out that these could all be manual mistakes, or even more likely, an artist's preference. In fact, what if some artists are manually doing everything you pointed out, as a purely personal preference, just having been inspired by how AI art looks? Sound ridiculous? Then you haven't researched anything because that's exactly a study method that Whyt Manga published just 10 months ago. "STEAL from AI Art and become an art god" by Whyt, currently having 90k+ views means a lot of potential artists could've tried this out or are doing this. How have you actually proved tracing and ruled this out as a possibility just by "scrutinizing" images (really, you're just projecting your preferences) as a method of getting anywhere close to the facts?
You aren't. I agree that this is a lose, lose situation, but setting up pressure for artists to "verify" themselves (by what standards btw? And how consistent is that going to be when practiced? With how quickly the tech is advancing you really think that won't be able to become fraudulent soon enough?)
Not to mention an artist could also generate an image locally and tweak it following the traits and procedures you're talking about so it looks handmade but only took a small fraction of the time. How would you tell, then?
It isn't until you can get actual data, actual evidence that this was using AI that you can then go and confront artists. Otherwise you're targeting artists who use a style that's been a target of AI farming and you're just going with your gut and preferences with poor reasoning and investigation methods.
Even if all those images turn out to be 100% AI generated, that could only be trusted if either the person you're talking about has admitted to that or you verifiably found the actual source of the image. Your investigation approach would STILL not have gotten you anywhere other than a self-deception according to your biases.
You labeling these aspects of the images as "sloppy" are not evidence, that's just your preference being projected. You being suspicious because someone could be just using a different process than what you label as "professional" isn't evidence of anything nor is it even reasonable because that's just a failure of imagination on your part.
The ONLY reasonable way to see this kind of situation is if the visual choices look like the same patterns you see in AIGen. The hard truth of the matter is that your experience and biases aren't enough to tell the difference nowadays and it'll get even harder in the near future. Not even artists uploading WIP's will be good enough because of this reality. So stop doing it and stop promoting it with your platform.
Stop endorsing "verifying AI usage" by shoehorning this tired, toxic, myopic, and elitist approach to "verify" someone's "skill level." You wanna find out if AI was used in this content? Actually investigate THAT with methods and tools that will ACTUALLY find out for sure. Meta-data, post history, tech that can source these images, and so on. But don't do this. This is what causes more drama, makes a hostile environment for new artists and those who do things different or have a different preference than you, and promotes a garbage culture overall.
I feel like people are using AI art to witch-hunt, and you explained perfectly that feeling in your comment.
thank u so much for saying this!! i have different things that i do as js a personal choice or as my own art style.. sometimes i make the characters hair so weird and doesnt make any sense js cus i wanted the character to look weird.. sometimes i shade the entire drawing w a heavy shadow too even tho i leave the background blank white or js put a random colors as the bg cus thats my art style.. and sometimes i dont even blend at all and sometimes i use some filters on my drawings and glitches and other stuff.. this ofc doesnt mean that i use AI!!! its js my personal choices and my own style as many artists do.. my own style and drawing process shouldnt apply to whatever this girl in the video does for her own art so that im not a "fake artist" for her..
So are you saying there is a chance this user isn't copying from ai? Even after looking at their entire page?
??? You're supporting something illegal 😂 She does commissions, she literally makes money off of tracing over AI art (stolen art). Everyone has all the right to call out on such people. Even in law, "guilty until proven wrong", they could literally just post a full video process. That's what bigger artists do and WHABAM!! no one is "harassing" them 🤣
@@_g0r3c0r3 The thing is, these are purposeful choices. You are very much human, and I bet make a lot more sense even if its not "professional" or the "typical" way. Everyone definitely has their own ways of doing things.
What she's pointing out is someone's attempt to mimic art that wasn't made by a human, who has little artistic knowledge. When she points out things that you may do similar things to, she's not targeting artists like you. Because similar mistakes/styles you make are made with human intent & your own experience.
Some of us are much quicker to point out what we deem as AI vs human-made mistakes, because of our experience with art. We can recognize these things quicker, but its not an attack on you or others. Artifical mistakes are not the same as human ones.
The discrepancies definitely suggest it was AI that they then traced. The devil's in the details.
However, I think it's a little bit off to suggest that because someone can't draw hands, they can't render without a background. I personally can't draw hands to save my life. However, I'm really good at rendering, even without a background; mainly, I spent far more time rendering an unfinished product to avoid drawing hands...
yes! my point though is everything TOGETHER that makes it sus. Being better at backgrounds vs hands ALONE isnt enough to prove AI usage :o
14:18 this was what threw me off also at first. Personally I'm the same where I usually render top-down or at least render by main parts but she started fully rendering just the bottom half of the top like?? The most unfortunate thing is you can tell she DOES have knowledge on drawing but just got lazy or something
I do render without the BG but I usually put all the base colors down, render each base color, then I put a multiply layer on top once the Bg is done and add second shadows basically. I also post a Timelapse of all digital art I make and usually a few process pictures of the traditional art.
My opinion:
A.I. art is cool, but people shouldn’t be making money off it because it's not theirs.
That's like asking Bob Ross to make a painting and then selling said painting and claiming it as your own.
Also, I don’t know why you'd trace A.I. art. At that point, just do A.I. generation...GOOFY.
Some time ago I found an account that gave me many ai tracing red flags, but tried to be positive and asked for some sort of process video in their dm's, good moment to note I didn't accused them of using it although I had my suspicions, and they blocked me without even trying to defend themselves. Then went out and cried about someone accusing them of posting ai... Funnily enough, their anatomy was better than that of a beginner but their lineart/perspective had so many wonky parts, lines overlapping, parts not rendered although most of it was.
The funny thing is AI art is indistinguishable from beginners art (except when it's good enough that people don't realize it's AI art; like CGI in movies, the best stuff just blends in surroundings like it belongs there, and people only complain about CGI because they only notice the bad stuff).
It's amazing how quickly artists forgot the in-joke about how hard it is to draw hands once AI got in the scene...
[Original]
I saw this on twitter and it was so sad seeing people actually believing this person and supporting. Their art has been proven to be AI traced, they even found the original art behind and still this "artist" receives support and people still believe it's real... it's frustrating. [Edit] The person clarified that apparently the original work or was fake, and that they have the original works on their pc as it is from the program they use.
[Edit]
I do not hate AI, I think it could be a good tool for many things but be honest abt from the start, show what you do with it from the start, say what you do with it from the start. Whenever you buy something it comes with the information of how was it made, let it be food, school materials, garden tools, etc. Companies are obligated to tell the customers what their product is made with, same treatment should go with AI, you write a book? clarify it was with AI, you draw something? clarify it was with AI. The customer deserves to be aware of what they are consuming, and has the right to avoid those things they don't want to consume.
However, though I think it's a good tool... it's still stealing, there IS a difference between fanart of a character doing whatever (as long as the place where they're from is okay with it) and using a million different drawings to feed a machine to create a piece abt said character. I think I don't need to explain how free advertising works, but basically if a game or movie (whatever) has a lot of fanwork abt it and even fans merchandise the original source gets more traffic as people get curious abt why are people making fanwork of it, why there's even people paying for this fanwork. There's a lot of people that never try the original product, happens a lot with games, but instead consume fanwork and official works (a lot of people are fans of Arcane or KDA but never played LOL) this generated traffic which makes the algorithm recommend it more as it sees people interested, I'm the end the original product doesn't even need the totality of that traffic to try the product bc the interaction provided by free advertising and time to time original work is enough.
That's why even though the characters are not theirs, artist can work safely, it's free marketing for the original source and usually you don't see companies trying to get rid of it as that would literally kill their product.
Finally AI also makes no... por... of fictional characters and even real people, bc the machine doesn't understand consent, copyright, law, etc. and even apps like Adobe are taking advantage of that before they start making laws abt it, if they ever focus on it instead of puritans bs.
The "original art" was someone who had no source for the images they posted, because, it wasn't proof. I have the real images on my PC only because I used a private generator. Nobody has access to them except for me, people just kept using it as a response because they immediately believed the poster was right.
@@SunviArt You're wasting your time. Don't explain yourself, it won't change anything. Those who hate Ai won't change their opinion of you anyway, and I don't know why you should care about them. You decided to trace Ai, it's your decision and you can't change it. And I don't know if you have to. Your attitude towards Ai is your business. Especially since a large part of Ai's haters are a bunch of hypocrites
Many artists have, at some point, committed copyright infringement. A large part of them make a living by selling drawings (often nude versions) of characters to which they do not have the rights. Suddenly, in front of Ai, they started pretending to be saints and started playing witch hunts.
worst thing is they actively make money with it, they're doing commissions based off those stolen artwork...
Tbh, I'd rather somebody trace AI art and color it in themselves than just upload raw AI art and take complete credit for it. At least it still has SOME sort of human touch, and I see it as not all that different from somebody drawing in a coloring book.
As a kinda new artist I use AI only for pose reference tbh bc my style is Anime lol, but tracing it is a no go it won't help you learn anything at all. AI is getting worse and worse and is more easy to spot out these days so instead of tracing use AI for pose references and then draw hair, eyes ect by yourself since you will learn much easier from that. You can also look up youtube videos because they can really come to handy if you're struggling on how to draw some things. You will never learn anything from tracing because you're just following lines but by drawing from skratch you will get better and better. Art takes time and it takes a long time to be good at it.
this is so funny i saw the art in ur thumbnail and i was like "hold on i called this girl out like 2 days ago on twtter"
3:57 WAIT that what i do 💀😭, i just completely uses shades shadow and lighting immediately after i use base color
(The result are lighting nonsense, so eh..)
One of the art just pure arse white bg and i added blue as if its night time 💀, make sense for me, im not pro-pro
I think using AI to for learning but not when you lie about it...
omg i was waiting for you to cover this one!
this situation was crazy, I was going insane trying to explain to non-artist people why artists were angry. It was like pulling teeth, omg.
You should try a no undo challenge they are really fun and help to make your lines and strokes more confidence! So sucks man thank you for covering! ❤
omg yes! i once did a one layer challenge and that was...something xD
The whole thing is wild, but the craziest thing is her trying to justify using AI/tracing for commissions 😭 and that even when it blew up she stated she didn’t get any so she “didn’t scam anyone”
lmao i was checking on, my cats when listening to your video cuse ur fuzzy buddys screaming XD. I love the way you cover this btw!
When you want to learn how to draw and open a twitter account for sharing, but you see things like this and you're affraid of posting your learning journey. Here, I don't talk about katliente or the content, but all the AI art account on Twitter. I don't want being accused of doing AI Art when i'm just learning digital art haha. (also sorry for my english, i'm french so if there was mistakes, i'm sorry).
The whole situation is so annoying for real artist. I'm not one and even me can feel how hard it is for the artist to being known on Twitter and then things like that happen? Unfortunately, the more we go in the future, the more the AI will be better and the more the AI fraud like that will be not see. I hope we always seed the difference, but we can't say that for sure.
4:15 I actually do render this way, but once everything is done I go back over it to draw it all together. Ngl THAT art does look a bit suspicious
If one becomes dependent on AI generating apps, one loses his/her creativity because another "mind" is doing the thinking for you. And creativity is one of the most powerful tools an artist can use.
I dunno about that, I know someone who built and trained her own generator solely on her own art work, and she prolifically posts new art made entirely by her own hand, but it's also her work, so she knows what's going into it.
the way you had to add so many disclaimers to you explaining basic fundamentals hurts because I unfortunately had to engage with the supporters of the tracer, and so many of them would twist the things you say just to defend a fraud...
I'm a shitty artist but I could TELL they painted over ai. They showed the color phase only and I could NOT SEE any of the sketch face, the way the hands and feet were painted expertly made it super weirder. I suck at anatomy, I suck at hands, and I've been inconsistent since I was young and still am, but you can freaking *tell* when it's ai. You really can. It was 100% traced. I even told them to do a timelapse or recording with their sketch included.
If they need help with anatomy, clip studio has 3d models you can download and pose free on your own if you struggle with it.
Also I do want to mention something with color changing as an artist--I have vision problems and I have layers and layers of color adjustments and saturation adjusts to change my picture later because I have to draw on low brightness on all my devices due to eye pain and then change it later, I also just sometimes mess with it to see what looks better. So saying the color adjustment later is not a good take---tons of artists due that, and tons of artists have adhd and change their mind on shit while working on it. I've drawn a new hair and outfit or accessory on a char like 5 times + before because I didn't know what I wanted LOL
The traditional undo button is different ways to fix the piece like when I sketch, a eraser, painting, a sponge, cloth, rag and so on. Their is a way to get rid of some mistakes, not always but their is definitely a undo or fixing way for a traditional art if this make sense.
i actually do a lot of stuff that the person in this video does, i draw a lot of lineless art and when one subject or part of the piece looks weird or starts to blend in with another i'll put some lines that are usually a darker shade of the subject color.
i also START shading or rendering without a background then blend it in, but i just can't understand the way they did that lmao
9:21 OMG... this "artist" is working backwards to make it look like it's not AI art. The image on the right is the Ai art the "finished image" and they worked backwards to remove the colors and background to make it look like a wip on the left. There is a filter in Clip Studio Paint where you can remove ALL color in a image and just leave linework (with some messing with the settings, it's A filter called Artistic).
With a bit of photo editing they can fake a wip. ALSO on the sketch, look at the top of the left shoulder where it's missing a line so the sleeve is blending into the hair. I took a screenshot of the side by side, and did the artistic filter to remove all the color of the image on the right, I was able to replicate that missing bit of linework on the left from the image on the right. =facepalm=
Who knows what software they use for this art, but I feel this isn't their work at all.
15:31 Nah, I don't think they're tracing, or doing the art themselves (to a extent). The only time they might have done it themselves is that art showing them coloring, BUT after you pointed out the eye color change I think I know what AI they used for that. They used a AI plugin for that, that's why the eyes changed so much, Now I think the art software they use is Krita. They should NEVER post art that is heavily using AI art while learning, that was a big mistake on their part. Even the before and after mouths screams that Krita plugin to me. How do I know about this? UA-cam really likes to shove AI stuff in my face when I look up art tutorials or art drama XD
20:24 Yep, yep yep, yep. =softly crying=
It's kind of hard to tell, it's the same art style. When you think about it almost everything looks identical in one way or another. It's just the way that it is done. I could probably recall 10 anime that have a almost identical looking character in them that were from different artists.
But I will admit, maybe someone did digitally trace a character. But it's kind of hard with accusations, when as I said it's the way the art style is.
the only thing i can defend is the background thing. i dont use backgrounds (i hate doing backgrounds) so i render in my own way? although im working on a piece with a background and lots of types of lighting so itll be a challenge but, i never add backgrounds, i just can never get them to look right.
jsut wanna say that inconsistency in art doesnt always equal ai. I have neve rlearnt how to draw hands or do proper lineart and my anatomy is bad but my lighting and colouring work is good. I have been drawing for 17 years but my art still looks like begginers work despite endless practice, but i didnt do enough study
Most of the attributes of their art and art process that was used to accuse them of using ai are redundant. There is so much diverse methods and styles, as well as different levels of expertise in certain aspects, that many of the evidence ( which is more or less educated guesses) that are used to argue can be easily refuted. In my experience the strongest and most compelling evidence will be inconsistencies between each of their artwork, if their expertise levels, styles, and methods are constantly changing between each piece there is little chance of it being genuine art. And the most compelling is if someone posts very intricate art at a suspiciously high rate that is probably the most telling.