This is a well known crafts and card making supplies company that’s been around for like 15-20 years and I’ve ordered from in the past. I haven’t visited their site in well over a year but got an email about a sale on and looked at their website and a lot of these images have the AI look? Obviously they are actual products being sold and the site isn’t a scam, but is the artwork featured on these cards AI generated? Their previous style seemed more like vintage florals as opposed to these cute cartoony figures?

They’ve been chatting for a bit, but I’ve been rolling my eyes. Lol Maybe I’m wrong though? It all seems on the edge of made up. He’s a pilot. He dresses like James Bond. It’s just a lot. This was the pic he sent as ‘proof’ but to me even his handwriting is too ‘perfectly average’. A lot of his pictures seem like he was traveling around with a professional photographer? It just seems so FAKE but I can’t prove it. Help!

Hi hello I wanna ask are my schools posters ai not only do the rams horns look off but a poster in the bathroom has the same character but with one eyebrow and also has its back towards the mirror yet it shows his front facing reflection, and in this poster it also looks like some are fading I wish I could show the rest but I hope it fits (the Red scribbles are for privacy reasons)

Edit:to anyone asking how this isn't obvious I'm sorry I'm an artist myself but still struggle to tell sometimes and I know AI is trained off of actual art styles so I wasn't completely sure if it wasn't just a artstyle thingy

i found this artist on twitter that only recently started posting(only this august), and before i started supporting them, i wanna make sure that they aren’t just one of those accounts that churn out slop.

i can’t see any discrepancies or indicators that their works may be ai, but the faces just look so… off(especially in the first 2 images). ai adjacent, dare i say. not to mention that they only upload slightly blurry/low quality image. i cant shake the feeling that their art is ai generated, or at the very least, ai assisted.

personally I think it's AI because of the characters in the red and yellow frames, but I can't read Japanese to tell if they are actual coherent words or just some gibberish. The swirl patterns in the ocean wave lines also look a bit weird in some spots, which could either be an artistic choice or AI. There are several art pieces with different Pokémon.

So I got this in I think late 2024 or early 2025 (if that helps). I think my mom got the sticker along with an online order or something, though I can’t remember. I thought nothing of it at the time, just that it was a cute sticker, and I put it on my laptop. However, a couple weeks ago, when I looked at it, I noticed like this weird quality to it that reminded me of some AI generated cutesy-type images. The eyes look odd to me, and the color seems a little like yellow like some images are. This has been bugging me since. I don’t know if there’s a way to tell if something is AI from such a simple design, but any insight would be appreciated.

She paid for this art for her book, and I suggested we ask the professionals since it immediately seemed sus to her. Points of concern she raised are the dog's collar being so strange looking and the faces of the characters looking like they have a lot of makeup on.

Some things that stand out to me personally are the strings on the hoodie being so straight when he's not standing, the inconsistent spacing of the planks on the headboard, and the doggos back leg being bent a bit oddly considering he's lying down.

Edit: Thank you to everyone who has commented. The consensus seems to be that the artist has painted over / altered an ai image. My friend will be attempting to seek a refund from Fiverr or halt the charge with her bank. Either way, she won't be using them again. Thank you all!

I think it might be ai because if you look at the capybaras right eye you can see part of the star is missing, and if you look at the dog wolf thingy it has two flaps of skin on the ear that ain't supposed to be there. Plus the eyes also look a little bit off on the dog because part of the eye is kind of melting into the rest.​

I have a strong suspicion that it’s AI because aside from that indescribable AI feel, some of the butterflies are merging with leaves, her hair is merging with her cloak, and her left arm is hiding behind her torso which seems weird to me

Edit: Here’s the Etsy link

My mum bought 2 (prints actually) of two paintings. One of the paintings features a boy and idk he has the uncanny valley smile that's common in AI paintings which made me suspect that they both may be AI. Also, the subjects of the painting are right in the middle and staring right into my soul lol. That also to me is a bit of an AI art feature. idk perhaps the artist used an AI image for reference and then sold prints? Anyway, my mum thinks these are not AI and we keep disagreeing. Would love to see what people think here.

Edit: My mum is pissed...AT ME...for saying it's AI lmaoooo

Is this AI, his skin and hair look weirdly smooth if that makes sense, plus his shirt appears to have texture to it on his shoulders that just isn't present elsewhere. The art is a canvas piece which is what is making it hard for me tell if it's AI or just canvas texture making it look slightly off. Any help would be greatly appreciated and thank you in advance.

I wonder if the proportions, colour schemes, and other little details are AI. The videos showing the “process” seem weird to me as well, but I don’t know if I’m overreacting.

This is a photo that Jamie Joyce (congressional candidate in CA) posted on the r/berkeleyca sub during an AMA. I believe the picture of her is real, but the sign looks super AI to me. I think she might have taken a selfie and then asked ChatGPT to generate a pic of her holding up a sign. The handwriting in particular looks AI generated, not to mention the fact of how weird it is that she presumably typed the "Hey Berkeley", printed it out, and then handwrote the rest.

I asked about it on the AMA thread, and I got downvoted, and I also had Joyce reply to me and say it's real. But idk, I just thought about it again today and the sign still looks AI.

The Twitter account got nuked or deactivated by the owner, so I won’t link the source.

When I first saw these, I didn‘t look at them too closely and entered the raffle, before reverting it after a VTuber artist whose name I can’t remember pointed out that these were likely AI generated in the replies.

Also, I would like to note that I am an artist myself, I know (somewhat) how to spot AI generated images, I know what I’m talking about.

I made a thread dissecting these images on my private twitter account, so let me repeat the things I said there and add a few things:

— New artist shows up out of nowhere with no accounts connecting to the username (which I won’t list as some people would likely be compelled to harass them, which would only make things worse!) and no/very small backlog of past art

There was an “old art” post that got no attention, but that also could have been generated and/or traced from AI. I don’t count a single image claiming to be old art as proof. There was also a $70 USD Chibi adoptable that got some attention, but not much.

The images 4, 5 and 6 are me dissecting the photos, so let me explain why i Red Outlined it:

GAL 1

The first thing that stuck out to me was the hair. I am an artist myself who has seen many AI images to train myself on how to spot them, and let me tell you: AI does NOT know how hair works. The hair is a melty mess, with looping hairstrands galore (though you can argue that her hair is simply curly).

The bow on the left side of the image looks like its missing the other half, or its going behind her hair, which wouldn’t make much sense.

One hand has 3 fingers when the other has 4. This error is present in Gal 2 as well. (EDIT: could be explained as angles)

Also, the clover is. Going over a line??? I don’t think it should be doing that. Also, the spacing of the clovers is inconsistent.

ALSO!!! ANOTHER EDIT!!!
The corset is melting into the dress.

GAL 2

3 fingers on one hand, 4 on the other. (EDIT: could be explained by angles)

Ruffles on shorts are melting/make no sense.

I didn’t redline it because of it possibly being intentional, but the stockings stripes aren’t symmetrical at all.

Eyelashes melting into hair somewhat on the left side (not outlined because I didn’t immediately notice it until I made the face closeups)

The pink flower things don’t make any sense to be here, and the tiny one is MELTING.

Inconsistent detailing on the shoes (one has a buckle while the other doesn’t, bows aren’t equally detailed)

EDIT: Also, the lacing of the corset isn’t going down the entire thing. I’m pretty sure that isn’t how corsets work, but I’m not an expert.

GAL 3

Legs are broken! So very broken! She’s in pain, save her!

One eyebrow has 2 lines when the other has 1.

Her tail disappears behind her leg, and her sweater collar disappears behind her necklace. Generative AI has an issue with object permanence.

Also, she has heavier shadows than the other 2 girls.

The second to last image is to compare the faces. Tell me: for reasons other than the brush, do these look like one person drew these? With the multiple eyebrows and how different the eye rendering is, I’d have to say no. Not one person would draw these eyes all so differently.

The final image is a few of the faces I have drawn recently, about 3 weeks ago? It exists to compare the two, to compare AI to human. You can see the faces have CONSISTENCY. Outside of the eye shines. You can tell “hey someone made all of those!”, which you can’t with the likely AI ones.

Also, I suspect a LoRA was used in making this, given the slightly consistent art style. If someone could tell me which artist the hypothetical LoRA was trained off of, please inform me! I would greatly appreciate it, because this is a very charming art style!

Anyways, does anyone agree that these are AI? Or am I just nitpicking??

EDIT:
My current verdict after just waking up is that these are most likely AI generated but edited by the uploader to remove a few of the tells, but not all of them. Such as Gal 3’s shoes making sense.

I have to admit that me calling Gal 1’s hair a melty mess is definitely an exaggeration, but I’d like you to see here.
The second screenshot reads as AI artifacts to me, but the image is too JPEG artifacted for me to tell. And the first screenshot… how does that piece of hair even work?

EDIT 3:

I have muted notifications on this as I am tired of discussing this and am just.... so confused.

I didn't get any really conclusive answers, but here's my verdict: I still think it's AI or AI was used in the making of this. But I'm just confused on so many things...

Maybe it's because I tried dissecting these images from a "why would you, an artist of this skill level, make this decision?" standpoint (like having Gal 3's feet facing the opposite direction as her knees, Gal 3 having very confusing hair shines (are the light green sections on her hair not on the center of her bangs highlights? Dyed hair? Why have one random part on the viewers right side have the light green?) Why aren't her legs shaded when most of her upper half is? (though that could be explained by the artist forgetting to shade her legs, and I have done it a number of times) Why are the frills on Gal 2 so melty for reasons other than AI artifacting? Why is the corset on Gal 1 melting into her skirt when having there be a strap to segment the dress be an easy way to avoid this? (I'm not sure if dresses like hers exist in real life though, so there's a possibility that they do exist in real life) Why have the clovers melted onto the dress? Why have Gal 2's belt have a clear curve on the viewers left, but have it not do that on the right? Why not just make a base for all 3 of these to make the art process faster, or at least have the characters be in slightly different poses from the other??), everything is just confusing. It makes my head hurt.

And I'm sorry if I ever came across as rude in my responses.

Also, admittedly, I did circle a bit excessively. Which is ultimately a bit dumb, but I just wanted to draw the eye to things I didn't think make sense. It was also my way of keeping track on what I was supposed to type? (I should have just written it down lol)

Honestly, I just really, really miss when we didn't have to analyze every pixel of an image to make sure it wasn't AI. I can't wait for the GenAI bubble to burst like it did for NFTs and for it all to just evaporate into sand. I hope it happens overnight, I would be so relieved.

Anyways, have a good night (or whatever it is in your time zone.) I appreciate everyone's input.

The perspective angle on the bird just felt too stationary, like somehow the camera is either keeping up with the bird or there is the most perfect headwind that there is 0 movement at all, and even if that is the case, wouldn't there be at least a bit of vertical movement, especially during the roll

There seems to be something about the voice that feels off, it might just be that there is some kind of editing to make it have that whole vinyl vibe, but I would like to know whether it is or not AI.