Unethical Generative AI is not welcome on VGen and you can read more about our AI Policy: here.
While Generative AI has gotten better over time and there are unfortunately more artist trying to draw over AI-generated works to pass off as fully human-made, there are still common signs that a piece of work may have been created with AI contributions and requires further investigation.
That said, human mistakes happen and we recognize the weight of AI accusations on an artist's career: falsely accusing a human artist and destroying their livelihood is never worth the same as correctly removing a generative AI enthusiast from their hobby.
We would never take administrative actions against an artist based on this policy unless we are 100% certain they used Generative AI in some way and would encourage everyone to do the same to prevent false accusations.
If you suspect something on VGen of being AI, please do not harass or witch hunt the artist; just report it and we'll investigate. Thank you.
Here is a non-comprehensive list of signs that an image was possibly created with help from Generative AI:
1. Unnatural body parts or textures
Human artists generally understand that:
- Humans have 4 fingers and 1 thumb
- Light sources come from consistent directions
- Lines are drawn - even if distortion tools are sometimes used, skilled human artists would make sure that lines do not disappear altogether unnaturally
- If items are matching or have symmetry, then shapes should match
AI often struggles with:
- Eyes (mismatched iris shape and highlights)
- Fingers (merged together, more or less fingers)
- Hair strands (merged together)
- Matching / symmetrical accessories (not matching; misshaped)
2. Suspicious style shifts
Style shifts within the same work
Final piece
Scammers who try to paint over AI mistakes to pass it off as their own work often are not as skilled as the AI — especially when it comes to rendering (for those unfamiliar with the term, it's the process of turning flat colors into dynamic gradients and shades to create visual interest) — which may then results in inconsistent rendering quality within the same piece of work. This could lead to changes in pixel density in different areas of the same piece.
Timelapse
While timelapses can be a great tool to prove an artist did create the work they claim to have, it's important to recognize that they are not definitive proof that someone did create the work all on their own. Sly editing may mask the trail of AI tracing to untrained eyes, but careful review by trained eyes will recognize style shifts within timelapses that are inconsistent within the same piece of work.
Style shifts over time
Human artists get better over time vs AI improvements are fast and all encompassing
While human artists may experiment with different art styles, they typically demonstrate a logical trajectory of improvement and understanding of art fundamentals.
Most artists improve one or two areas at a time — anatomy, line work, color palette, rendering, composition, background, pose — however, when adopting Generative AI, all of these areas may improve all at once, all of a sudden.
The vast majority of people cannot go from not being able to draw anatomically symmetrical eyes to a fully rendered character and background over the span of a few weeks.
3. Illogical placements from AI lack of context
Human artists generally understand that:
- Things don't just appear out of thin air
- Light sources impact all items equally
- There's a logical reason for why items are the way they are
AI often struggles with:
- Items or strange shapes appearing out of nowhere
- Shadows that don't follow the item that's casting it (ie hair or otherwise)
- Light and shadows appearing from nowhere
- Windows, architecture, or IRL references not following logic (ie window panes that don't connect to the end of windows)
- Flowers, ribbons, knots, buckles, symmetrical decorations (especially metal ones)
- Signage referencing IRL text and symbols
4. Posting schedule
We only have 24h in a day and quality art made by a human being — no matter how fast — will never be as fast as a machine built to ingest and spit out images.
The soul of a piece lies in the time that someone spent on caring about the piece, and human artists will never be able to consistently post multiple new, high-effort works everyday or multiple times a day like some AI users are able to do.
If you follow someone on social media that posts high-effort works every single day and is not explicitly reposting other people's works, they are likely a Generative AI user.
Conclusion
This list is ever evolving
While these are a few signs to look out for when trying to identify the use of Generative AI within an artists' workflow, this list is inconclusive and ever evolving due to the nature of the fast advancements in Generative AI technology.
Humans also make mistakes
It's important to recognize that human artists do sometimes make mistakes that can appear to be AI artifacts and that falsely accusing a human artist and destroying their livelihood is never worth the same as correctly removing a generative AI enthusiast from their hobby.
VGen's AI Policy
All people are innocent until proven guilty and while we are adamantly against the use of unethical Generative AI on VGen (see our AI Policy here), we would never take administrative actions against an artist based on this policy unless we are 100% certain they used Generative AI in some way.
If you suspect something on VGen of being AI, please do not harass or witch hunt the artist; just report it and we'll investigate. Thank you.
Note on AI references
While we are adamantly against the promotion of unethical Generative AI through VGen, we do recognize its prevalence across other parts of the internet. We do not penalize clients who mistakenly provide AI-generated references and leave the decision to accept or reject such commission requests solely to the artists receiving the request.
Note on AI detection tools
The tools are getting better but false positives are still all too common. That's why we don't recommend relying on AI detection tools to determine the fate of an artists' entire livelihood.
We feel that the consequences of destroying an innocent artist's livelihood over a false positive is far heavier than having to wait for additional evidence from a sus AI user and would recommend everyone to consider the same.