If by no evidence you mean conclusive evidence specifically, that will always be true, simply due to the nature of the problem. I’m not trying to impugn the artist in any way, AI is a tool just like any other.
What sort of evidence would you require though?
edit: This also no longer appears in his portfolio.
Appologies if i came across as argumentative, that was not my intention. I rely on the community as a fallback to notice any AI stuff i might miss, since as you know it can be hard to notice, i have already removed a couple of my own submissions due to this. As a personal rule, when im not sure if Its AI in normally do the following:
Check the account age E.g. 2 month old account with lots of high quality posts is normally a giveway its an AI user.
Check the gallery for wildy different styles or subject matters between posts, usually a sign of someone messing with AI.
Look for mentions and examples of software used.
And most importantly look for improvement of art quality over time, since this is more natural.
In this case the artists seems to check out for me, so im inclined to beleive its a legit digital work and will be leaving the post up. I really do appreciate your feedback though, since we have community rule about no AI art, and they do slip by me.
So I’ve been thinking about this for a couple days, and I think it ultimately comes down to the perception of AI.
AI is not simply a cheat code that can turn amateurs into seeming like professionals. It’s also a tool that can shave hours of time off the work of a busy professional, so they can spend more time with their family and doing other hobbies.
I don’t think artist reputation is a good measure whatsoever. It should depend on the work itself, not the person doing it.
If by no evidence you mean conclusive evidence specifically, that will always be true, simply due to the nature of the problem. I’m not trying to impugn the artist in any way, AI is a tool just like any other.
What sort of evidence would you require though?
edit: This also no longer appears in his portfolio.
Appologies if i came across as argumentative, that was not my intention. I rely on the community as a fallback to notice any AI stuff i might miss, since as you know it can be hard to notice, i have already removed a couple of my own submissions due to this. As a personal rule, when im not sure if Its AI in normally do the following:
Check the account age E.g. 2 month old account with lots of high quality posts is normally a giveway its an AI user.
Check the gallery for wildy different styles or subject matters between posts, usually a sign of someone messing with AI.
Look for mentions and examples of software used.
And most importantly look for improvement of art quality over time, since this is more natural.
In this case the artists seems to check out for me, so im inclined to beleive its a legit digital work and will be leaving the post up. I really do appreciate your feedback though, since we have community rule about no AI art, and they do slip by me.
So I’ve been thinking about this for a couple days, and I think it ultimately comes down to the perception of AI.
AI is not simply a cheat code that can turn amateurs into seeming like professionals. It’s also a tool that can shave hours of time off the work of a busy professional, so they can spend more time with their family and doing other hobbies.
I don’t think artist reputation is a good measure whatsoever. It should depend on the work itself, not the person doing it.