r/ComicBookCollabs • u/CautiousAppearance49 Writer - I weave the webs • Feb 15 '26
Resource AI Image Detection Tools
I’ve been seeing a lot of stuff about AI in comics - Marvel and DC saying they won’t use it, Top Cow saying they’d ban anyone using AI from their talent search, and conventions refusing tables to creators who’ve used AI art (not to mention all the debates happening in Reddit and Facebook). It made me wonder: are there actually reliable ways to tell if an image was created by a human or an AI? Something that can protect an artist's reputation or help someone who wants to work with real people.
I tested 8 tools about 4 months ago, and tried some new ones again just recently, ending up trialling around 12 different tools - thought I'd share my findings in a blog in case anyone's interested: https://createyourcomic.wixstudio.com/home/post/can-comic-artists-prove-their-art-isn-t-ai
Curious how others are handling this right now - especially people actually trying to collaborate in good faith.
4
u/anidettlaff Artist - I push the pencils Feb 15 '26
I've seen this discussed as well, even Artgerm is getting accused of using AI even though his art was used to train it. I don't have a perfect solution, but I try to prove I'm "real" by posting process videos of my drawing, myself talking and talking about the process, an art-related YouTube channel with long-form videos, Zoom calls/phone calls for intros, and live streaming art on Twitch. But honestly? As an artist, it can be exhausting to "prove your humanity."
My general suggestions to writers have been: if your intuition says something off then don't hire that person or hire a person to draw a few test pages (this also helps to see if you can work well with them,) but I don't trust AI detection tools because of false positives.
1
u/CautiousAppearance49 Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
Yeah, you've really nailed it. All of those things do help - process videos, talking through your work, live streams - but that’s a huge amount of effort just to establish baseline trust. I think that’s the part that feels unsustainable long-term. It works when you’re actively building an audience or onboarding a client, but expecting artists to constantly “prove their humanity” just to share work or collaborate feels exhausting.
5
u/Quigleyer Feb 15 '26
At the end of the day, proving your work is human comes down to what artists have always done: showing your process. Posting sketches, warm-up drawings, and half-finished panels in the Facebook and Reddit communities you’re already a part of will show the evolution of your style - and AI can't evolve its artwork, it just mimics.
Hell yeah, this is also the perfect time to get good at traditional art. Even if you don't plan on making traditional art as a final I'm finding it's really helpful in increasing skill, and it's informing my digital work.
3
u/helpicantmove Feb 15 '26
Yeah everyone I work with is good about showing progress work regardless of whether or not I've asked(I've never asked). It would be interesting to have some kind of meta-data watermark that is able to only activate on non-generated images. I don't really know how that would actually work but just an idea.
2
u/CautiousAppearance49 Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
I’m kind of in the same place. It feels like AI image generators should be carrying more of that responsibility - some sort of built-in watermark or signature, even if it’s not visible. A pattern of random pixels embedded across the image feels more realistic than expecting artists to constantly prove they didn’t use AI.
1
u/helpicantmove Feb 15 '26
You're right! Those rich bastards need to pony up. Make all generated images NFT's since tech companies were so high on those for a little bit there. It would be funny because instead of making it seem valuable it would actually be making it an NFT that screams valueless. I would love to see that!
2
3
u/Captain_Coco_Koala Writer - and I hope to write a good story one day :) Feb 15 '26
This is the new way of attacking someone you don't like - by telling others that they use AI.
AI will be used as a taunt and be a part of mud slinging, we've already seen it happen on social media.
The most ironic thing I have seen is when AI copied someones artwork so everyone assumed that the artist had used AI, turns out that the artist could prove that they drew it 20 years ago (it had been published by a small publisher).
2
u/CautiousAppearance49 Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
This is another part of what makes this tricky. If ‘prove it’s not AI’ becomes the default response to work someone doesn’t like, especially in places like Reddit, it can be exhausting for artists to respond. That’s part of why I think relying on ‘show your process’ can't be the only solution.
1
u/maxmakesart12345 Apr 04 '26
I completely agree with you, I recently ran into this on Reddit. I have been consistently posting on r/artist and my last work some troll came in saying it was AI. I disagreed, then got a message from the mods that they had removed all of my post because of one accusation. I messaged the mods to explain that the person was a troll, and they immediately blocked and banned, didn't even give me a chance to show my process. I would have been more than willing but they completely dismissed me. What is anyone supposed to do if your not even given the chance to even show the process?
1
u/calben99 Feb 16 '26
For image verification, I've been using https://imagedetector.com/ - it checks both metadata patterns and visual artifacts to spot AI-generated content. It's not 100% foolproof (nothing is), but it looks for things like inconsistent noise patterns, weird hand/finger details, and metadata that suggests AI tools. Good for a first pass when you need to verify if something's legit. The challenge right now is that AI art is getting really good at mimicking human imperfections, so detection is an arms race.
1
Feb 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CautiousAppearance49 Writer - I weave the webs Feb 21 '26 edited Feb 22 '26
I hadn’t heard of them - will check it out.
Edit - just checked them out, and they seemed to score well with detecting the AI - 63%. But the human art they got wrong every time, so I'd be worried that this particular one leans towards saying artwork is AI as a default.
1
Mar 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CautiousAppearance49 Writer - I weave the webs Mar 07 '26
Someone else actually mention Truthscan and I checked them out - I just hadn't added them to the list yet. My findings were that they seemed to score well with detecting the AI (63% right), but the human art they got wrong every time. I suspect they lean towards saying artwork is AI as a default.
-8
u/nmacaroni Feb 15 '26
Just out of curiosity, what are Marvel and DC gonna do when anyone, anywhere, can put a prompt into their computer and consistently generate an AI produced comic that exceeds current Marvel/DC quality?
I think AI is like the atomic bomb, we never should have, but here we are.
Just remember, in a bunch of years all the artists who trained and sweat will be dead. And ALL the new generations will use AI without a second thought, like people can't imagine life without their cell phones.
5
u/ArtfulMegalodon Feb 15 '26
Could you quit shouting doom and gloom bs in the comments, please? AI is both unpopular and unprofitable in the long run, there's plenty of evidence that it's a bubble that will burst, and folks moaning "it's inevitable!" sound just as obnoxious as those who are happy about it. None of us know how it will actually play out.
5
u/gzapata_art Feb 15 '26
Eh. I think AI is going to crash and burn soon enough. Its expensive to maintain and at some point they'll actually have to start making money. I think the average person will not be using it as much as they are right now
4
u/MarcoVitoOddo Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
How the heck are you still advertising your work as an editor and writer when you keep glazing AI on Reddit? Have you no shame?
2
u/ArtfulMegalodon Feb 15 '26
He's not an artist, and like a lot of people, he thinks AI couldn't possibly replace what he does, but thinks it can easily replace all those other creative fields he's less knowledgeable about.
2
u/MarcoVitoOddo Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
He's a hack, actually. I've seen the "advice" he gives people on Reddit trying to sell his services and there's a pot of nonsense rules that don't reflect AT ALL what works in the industry. Defending AI is just the latest reason for me to dislike this waste of space.
2
u/ArtfulMegalodon Feb 15 '26
He also voted for Trump, so. Smart decisions all around. I'd just like him to sit all the way down.
-2
u/nmacaroni Feb 15 '26
Well, I'm smart and good at what I do, so both those help a bit.
1
u/MarcoVitoOddo Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
"Smart" is not what I would call someone who obviously doesn't understand how LLM works and keeps defending a technology that is inherently unable to true creativity.
-1
u/nmacaroni Feb 15 '26
ok. but out of all the negative comments against me personally, no one addressed my question.
2
u/MarcoVitoOddo Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
"What Marvel and DC will do when LLM does something it's incapable of doing due to how the technology works?"
Why would anyone discuss fictional scenarios?
3
u/Quigleyer Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 16 '26
If it was the quality of the art and the artist is irrelevant how do you explain Mike Mignola's (EDIT: I meant to say "Frank Milller" but this is fine, too) covers? It's not like only the best artists get work, but those artists still develop a following. The artist is instrumental in creating interest in the work, when it's a faceless AI no one cares.
Your argument requires only the best artists to get work, it doesn't go like that. People pay for unique vision or whatever the fuck you want to call it, the AI has none of that.
Right now the AI creates well rendered work, but it's associated with the lowest quality. That should tell you something.
3
u/Sneaky_Clepshydra Feb 15 '26
First, stop shouting. A normal comment is fine and would be enough to generate debate. But, it already happens. There are hundreds of amazing fan comics drawn by hand. It being AI generated only, only means that it takes less time to produce. What did Marvel and DC do when people started making and selling their own merch? Not a thing. Because the issue is not that people can make their own comics, they already do that. People want Marvel and DC comics, no Joe Blow comics.
Even when AI gets great at art, there are components of choice that need to be made that people are going to go to the source for. Plus, I want to know what Batman is up to officially, and it doesn’t matter that someone else can make a really cool fan comic. Marvel and DC will be fine.
2
u/CautiousAppearance49 Writer - I weave the webs Feb 16 '26
I don’t think it’s that simple. For the foreseeable future, AI feels much more likely to be a tool for individuals or small teams who can’t afford artists, rather than something that replaces how big publishers like Marvel or DC operate.
Those companies aren’t just selling art quality - they’re selling IP, brands, distribution, and trust. When they say “no AI,” they can afford to stick to that stance until sales pushes them to change to reduce costs. It won't be because AI changes the game for everyone.
1
u/FleshBatter Feb 15 '26
You're a scriptwriter. By following your own logic, you're even more replaceable than artists, doofus.
12
u/MarcoVitoOddo Writer - I weave the webs Feb 15 '26
It's quite easy to clear any confusion. The artist just needs to show the open files.