4 ms·

I was looking for tells, but things like landscapes or pictures where there's no hands or eyes tend not to have them as much.

YurgenJurgensen 4y ago
Since it didn't tell you what ones you got right, I can't use my 76% as evidence (I got a lot of blurry pictures of forests, which are hard because it's either an AI or a low-effort background art asset), but while landscapes are the hardest, a bunch of obvious tells without hands or eyes (and the other well-known one: text) are: Shoelaces. Or anything where things pass over and under other things. The AIs did really poorly with belt buckles too. Its sense of object permanence is entirely stochastic, and small details don't get a lot of virtual brain power devoted to them. Straight lines and repeating patterns. "Human hand holding a 30cm ruler in front of a chain link fence" is probably AI kryptonite. Symmetry. If there's a nontrivial object that's supposed to be symmetric, chances are, it won't be. Swept curves and perspective. Another thing that's stochastic is the AI's understanding of how 3D spaces map onto 2D images. Circular objects being transformed in 3D, like a roundabout being viewed in perspective, or a curved road moving off into the distance will typically be inconsistent with human expectations. Of course, some of these mistakes are also made by human artists, but generally the human artists who make these mistakes also have amateurish colouring, lines or brushwork, and AIs are generally pretty good at emulating good brushwork.
tialaramex 4y ago
Hands definitely, AI doesn't seem sure if a hand ought to have 0 1 or 2 thumbs, and it's also unclear how fingers work. I haven't noticed big problems with eyes. AI doesn't really seem to understand how boobs work, but human artists (presumably especially male artists?) don't seem to understand how boobs work either so it isn't a tell. Today's AI doesn't understand how text works, several images I was shown had human text which made sense in context and therefore must be human made (e.g. a scene of an office front with a car having a plate with number in the form AA99 AAA, that's how plates work in the UK an AI has no reason to write AA99 AAA rather than 9A9 99 or whatever), one was trickier because the text was Japanese, and I don't read Japanese - I understand a couple of easy characters but not enough to be sure, I marked it human because the text looked plausible, if I could read Japanese I'd have been confident. Cliché is in general a hard problem. Is this really obvious trope in the image because the AI just copies what it has seen (in some broad sense) or is it there because human artists also copy what they have seen in some similarly broad sense.
bakugo 4y ago
They almost always do have them if you look close. I got 28 of 30 (93%) and correctly identified all AI images. Anime-style ones are obvious even outside of the hands/eyes because SD can only produce one really specific type of shading that is a mishmash of many anime styles but doesn't match any of them, pictures of houses always have some part of them deformed, pictures of landscapes tend to be the hardest to identify but usually have some detail in them that doesn't make sense when you actually think about it (one drawing of a forest had a subtle but consistent horizontal line behind the trees), etc.
smusamashah 4y ago
If you can see a certain vagueness in a landscape, its AI. A stone/mountain/grass/river/hill can appear diffusing/blending to become something else.

YurgenJurgensen 4y ago

Since it didn't tell you what ones you got right, I can't use my 76% as evidence (I got a lot of blurry pictures of forests, which are hard because it's either an AI or a low-effort background art asset), but while landscapes are the hardest, a bunch of obvious tells without hands or eyes (and the other well-known one: text) are: Shoelaces. Or anything where things pass over and under other things. The AIs did really poorly with belt buckles too. Its sense of object permanence is entirely stochastic, and small details don't get a lot of virtual brain power devoted to them. Straight lines and repeating patterns. "Human hand holding a 30cm ruler in front of a chain link fence" is probably AI kryptonite. Symmetry. If there's a nontrivial object that's supposed to be symmetric, chances are, it won't be. Swept curves and perspective. Another thing that's stochastic is the AI's understanding of how 3D spaces map onto 2D images. Circular objects being transformed in 3D, like a roundabout being viewed in perspective, or a curved road moving off into the distance will typically be inconsistent with human expectations. Of course, some of these mistakes are also made by human artists, but generally the human artists who make these mistakes also have amateurish colouring, lines or brushwork, and AIs are generally pretty good at emulating good brushwork.

tialaramex 4y ago

Hands definitely, AI doesn't seem sure if a hand ought to have 0 1 or 2 thumbs, and it's also unclear how fingers work. I haven't noticed big problems with eyes. AI doesn't really seem to understand how boobs work, but human artists (presumably especially male artists?) don't seem to understand how boobs work either so it isn't a tell. Today's AI doesn't understand how text works, several images I was shown had human text which made sense in context and therefore must be human made (e.g. a scene of an office front with a car having a plate with number in the form AA99 AAA, that's how plates work in the UK an AI has no reason to write AA99 AAA rather than 9A9 99 or whatever), one was trickier because the text was Japanese, and I don't read Japanese - I understand a couple of easy characters but not enough to be sure, I marked it human because the text looked plausible, if I could read Japanese I'd have been confident. Cliché is in general a hard problem. Is this really obvious trope in the image because the AI just copies what it has seen (in some broad sense) or is it there because human artists also copy what they have seen in some similarly broad sense.

bakugo 4y ago

They almost always do have them if you look close. I got 28 of 30 (93%) and correctly identified all AI images. Anime-style ones are obvious even outside of the hands/eyes because SD can only produce one really specific type of shading that is a mishmash of many anime styles but doesn't match any of them, pictures of houses always have some part of them deformed, pictures of landscapes tend to be the hardest to identify but usually have some detail in them that doesn't make sense when you actually think about it (one drawing of a forest had a subtle but consistent horizontal line behind the trees), etc.

smusamashah 4y ago

If you can see a certain vagueness in a landscape, its AI. A stone/mountain/grass/river/hill can appear diffusing/blending to become something else.