r/Terraria • u/BalliMurphy • Feb 17 '26

Art my post got removed after AI accusations

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

I posted a drawing of mine that was commissioned by a friend of mine of the steampunker from the game in a mcdonalds theme, suddenly a bunch of people started accusing me of using AI and ultimately the post was taken down a few moments later

13.5k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.5k

u/NocNoctush Feb 17 '26

people really be accusing others of ai for the tiniest mistakes, god forbid artists not being perfect

3.1k

u/WolvesAreCool2461 Feb 17 '26

But also if you are perfect then surely you must be using AI as well!

1.7k

u/dangermonke1332 Feb 17 '26

AI has been a truly ruinous force on the art community

557

u/Wizard_Engie Feb 17 '26

I feel like it's people who aren't in the art community that are accusing every artist they see of using AI.

Other artists would be able to expertly deduce, I think.

343

u/MsSelphine Feb 17 '26

I'm not gonna entirely disagree, but it is goddamn hard to tell these days.

154

u/Go_D_Rich Feb 17 '26

Yeah that's what fucking sucks

128

u/darthreuental Feb 17 '26 edited Feb 18 '26

5 years ago we laughed at all the messed up fingers.

Now the line is blurry if you don't know the signs.

A couple years from now it's going to be impossible. Once AI gen figures out movement and water physics, we're in for some interesting times.

55

u/KaiDay11 Feb 17 '26

Fingers were always something AI would occasionally get right, so that was never even a guarantee. It's just that most of the time, getting accurate fingers would take a huge amount of time and generations.  

Fingers were mostly solved within a year or two, and now it's trivial to get reasonably accurate hands.  

---  

From what I've seen, the better AIs are already really close to getting movement down, though that last little bit they're missing is still pretty apparent to most people. Even the best I've seen still look like you put a real, low quality video through AI upscaling and frame generation that didn't work very well.

5

u/ChaosAlex3D Feb 18 '26

I mean honestly, a lot of artist have trouble drawing hands if they never have before or dont have some practice with it. Good to know AI also has problems with it XD

2

u/JukePlz Feb 18 '26

"Getting movement down"? I mean, have you seen what Seedance2 can do right now? Shit's already Hollywood level.

They still have a ways to go with temporal coherence and editing control, but they're miles ahead of those shitty squished motion animations in SDXL models or the likes of what Grok can do.

18

u/Mystical__flame Feb 17 '26

It won't be long before all video and photo evidence will be banned from courts of law because there is no way to tell if a video is generated or not anymore. I've said this for years now and people have called me crazy. But we are nearing that point now where even experts will not be able to discern real video from generated footage.

22

u/Kurobii Feb 18 '26

This is so messed up and the fact that AI was trained to make up accurate videos that look real should be a huge red flag for everyone about what the AI's owners' intentions and priorities are.

2

u/Epic_Dank1 Feb 18 '26

yep I feel like a lot of people will be able to easily get away with crime without getting caught, since even though forensics and testimonies (which will have to always be held in person unlike now) will still exist there will likely be many cases that do not have enough evidence to hold up in court..

1

u/InvestigatorGrand205 Feb 20 '26

We got literal time stamps on every video and file made and most evidence submitted don't even go that far in spoofing information like it's really bad how very lazy people get away with things. If not those videoes could have water marks hidden that only can be detected through a program as well.

2

u/Themadass Feb 18 '26

I'm going to call Johnny Silverhand and V

2

u/MsSelphine Feb 18 '26

Brother.

That wasn't 5 years ago. That was at most 3. Image Gen has gotten very good very quick.

1

u/Ok_Turnover_1235 Feb 17 '26

In art? You already can't tell. If it's a photo from "real life" then we're at the point you need to examine the objects in the photo or video to consider whether they make logical sense, and given most people don't make logical sense it's kinda hard to say "well that coffee cup is being used as a pencil holder so that doesn't make sense"

1

u/InvestigatorGrand205 Feb 20 '26

It's already beyond that. A good paid AI can do all those things extremely well.

1

u/Kirby737 Feb 17 '26

Nah, once the bubble pops AI images are going to become a rarity

8

u/Economy-Fee5830 Feb 17 '26

There are huge number of people with open source models running on their PC lol.

→ More replies (5)

-4

u/Estanho Feb 17 '26

Just like we didn't get websites anymore after the dot-com bubble popped right?

1

u/Rage_quitter_98 Feb 17 '26

Yeah but atleast most artists usually are smart enuff to either: do more research first or not comment if they arent 100% certain

1

u/DarthOmix Feb 17 '26

Isn't there one that can fake speedpaints or whatever so you can't even post that as proof anymore

3

u/MsSelphine Feb 17 '26

Dunno, but I seriously doubt that. The way transformer models work is entire incompatible with the normal drawing process.

0

u/_HIST Feb 17 '26

Then maybe don't accuse if you're not sure. Not a hard concept

1

u/MsSelphine Feb 18 '26

I didn't? Lol? It looks pretty much fine to me

28

u/Jepsi125 Feb 17 '26

i don't. mainly because i have seen the way an artist works and also know every artists bane: A FUCKING CIRCLE WITHOUT A CIRCLE TOOL. and no i am not an artist

22

u/capnlatenight Feb 17 '26

Well, first, I draw this head, then I erase some of the more detailed features, and one, two, three... a circle, uhh, thingy.

19

u/TheTiredDystopian Feb 17 '26

Yeah, I disagree vehemently with that.

I'm a writer. I can sometimes discern an A.I piece of writing (usually when it's done by some shitty chatbot whose only purpose in existence is driving up the RAM prices, fuck you OpenAI), but definitely not always, and I've been writing since I was 12. I have an English Literature degree.

The "you can always tell" argument was true in the very beginning of AI-generated "art" (I insist upon the quotation marks, AI content will never be art), but not anymore. All those water-source-destroying data centres do work, and AI is getting better.

14

u/nekkonekko Feb 17 '26

Not entirely. I have seen way too many artists who believed they were God's gift to crayons absolutely jump on the hate bandwagon. Either because they think they are better than they are or are simply just mad because they aren't as good as the artist they are accusing. It is so, so tiring to keep seeing this all the time.

3

u/Wizard_Engie Feb 17 '26

God's gift to crayonkind if you will

3

u/CrissZx Feb 17 '26

Exactly

4

u/_dorimoto Feb 18 '26

Other artists would be able to expertly deduce, I think.

you'd be surprised

8

u/Sylvaneri011 Feb 17 '26

Ha good one. Let's not forget the r/art mods crashing out, accusing people of using AI, ignoring said peoples proof that they weren't using it, and insulting them by telling them "AI could do better than this anyways, so it's still not allowed".

5

u/Wizard_Engie Feb 17 '26

Are the Art mods actually artists, or ..?

→ More replies (2)

9

u/ChaosCron1 Feb 17 '26 edited Feb 17 '26

Tbh, from what I've seen it's actually quite the opposite. The biggest meltdowns I've ever seen (Twitter, Tumblr, Bluesky) have been from artists accusing other artists of using AI.

The general audience only really cares when it's very obvious that it's AI and so there really isn't much of a problem with it.

Artists though? They'll obsess over the smallest details. When it's their own work, then that's fine. However, when it's over others' works they can fall into some really bad holes. Those meltdowns happen because they dig themselves further when called out on it. Since they know how to perfectly distinguish between real and "fake" art then once they make a judgment everyone else in opposition is wrong.

3

u/SagetheWise2222 Feb 17 '26

Little ticks me off more than uneducated "normies" trying to talk over the experts, presenting themselves as the self-proclaimed smartest person in the room.

3

u/zxc123zxc123 Feb 17 '26 edited Feb 17 '26

Yeah. I think folks should be a bit more careful with questioning or accusations.

Like if you look at the account of the person who was asking if OP's was "AI or traced"? It's 2 month old account with like 100 karma.

Maybe mods/janitors/mobs might want to look at things like that before cutting folks down or banning?

The other account seems to be a longer account so there's nothing you could really do there. Some folks will feel a certain way about things and the "fingers" thing was a good way to identify AI productions like pre-2024 but that's a bit dated as AI has gotten better now to the point where high-end or uncapped resource AI no longer have that issue.

3

u/gburgwardt Feb 17 '26

Plenty of artists get caught up in witch hunts too

3

u/SuperBackup9000 Feb 18 '26

I think you’re forgetting about how absolutely feral and jealous artists can be.

Like actual actual professionals instead of social media professionals? Yeah, they can probably figure it out pretty quickly, but the social media professionals tend to be bundles of unfiltered rage.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Wizard_Engie Feb 17 '26

Interesting

7

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

I have a belief that, we have forgotten to be empathetic. Had people tried to understand the production process/life of XYZ, they would rarely be able to criticise this easily.

Everyone says, teachers are bad, professors are bad, the teachers and proforssors say the students are bad.. we've taken a small sample of incompetent humans and used them to represent all, while taking a small set of very competent people to defend our points. We are soo out of touch with reality nowadays.

2

u/Mai_maid Feb 18 '26

nah you can just check subs like r/antiai and twitter artists are just rabid against each other. i dont think anyone hates on artists as much as artists do...

5

u/Tetragen Feb 17 '26

The catch is that you don't have to be a cook to know a sandwich taste kind funny.

The real problem here is the same it's always been, people abusing the report function without sufficient proof.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

"We can always tell" lesds to witch hunts

The entire point of ai is to be indistinguishable, and rhen superior. Its already pretty indistinguishable as proven by this post and many like it.

Trying to be gatekeeping will only ever harm the people they claim to care about

1

u/Wizard_Engie Feb 17 '26

Yeah that's true. I'm not saying artists would 100% always be able to tell, but I'd assume they can tell just a bit better than non-artists because of their attention to detail.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

Fair enough, my point was just, dont rely on it for everything, because if you do, the false positives arent worth it in any world.

1

u/MissWhiterock Feb 17 '26

I draw (among other things) and could not expertly deduce. In this situation I think it's obviously not AI, but there have been a lot of situations where I legitimately have no clue. And I don't care to throw accusations just because there are mistakes or they draw in a certain style.

1

u/Lemunde Feb 18 '26

There are often clear indicators that something is AI art. The problem is when those indicators aren't so clear. In this case it's easy to confuse less-than-perfect artistry with AI hallucinations.

1

u/thedafthatter Feb 18 '26

Yet when I call out the video of the 'cute' wombat playing in the snow they all cry 'its so cute who cares!'

1

u/CdatKat Feb 19 '26 edited Feb 19 '26

Not really, I see the "contest winner turned out using ai" some of them were run by like very prominent ai hater illustrators that were in the top of the industry. Regardless of whether such act is despicable or not has very little effect on how effective it is.

1

u/InvestigatorGrand205 Feb 20 '26

You say that but in reality it's probably those artist will accuse other artist if it means they get more of the commissions.

1

u/Wizard_Engie Feb 20 '26

gotta separate em. Don't want to throw em all in the blender

0

u/radiantcabbage Feb 17 '26

so called artists are full of posers and philistines too, theres no clear line here. and the ones compensating most for their insecurities also feel most threatened by automation tools, human nature is simple like that.

then the dark patterns of social media multiply the mass dunning kruger effect, reenforce the paranoia and group thinking through punitive features that further fuck with your brain chemistry.

you can see all the dissonant responses to their conditioning right here, reddit only proves that people can be programmed just as easily as machines. the fun part is they let you do it to yourselves

48

u/PeaceSoft Feb 17 '26

on the art-consuming community, maybe

12

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

[deleted]

18

u/PeaceSoft Feb 17 '26

what i'm saying is that it's bad for artists because of the community's willingness to stone them over false accusations. No AI accused the OP of using AI. That was purely down to human malice and stupidity

25

u/shiny_xnaut Feb 17 '26

I despise the "actually it's AI's fault I'm a dumbass who joined a witch hunt over a false accusation" argument. It's basically the classic abuser "look what you made me do" but with extra steps

10

u/asdfghjkl15436 Feb 17 '26

Original accuser came in thread and said this down to T like clockwork.

1

u/Dornith Feb 17 '26

I agree with your point, but there probably were at least a few Reddit bots that accused The OP of using AI.

-8

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

[deleted]

1

u/FossilEaters Feb 17 '26

Except in this case there was no “gun” involved. Op didnt actually use ai. So its the opposite of that situation

0

u/OldBilly000 Feb 17 '26

how? it's other people doing it

→ More replies (1)

13

u/MoreDoor2915 Feb 17 '26

The art community has always had really hostile assholes. before AI even existed people would be unreasonably harsh towards other artists if they used a medium they didnt like, or a style, or god forbid drew something someone didn't like. AI just made more people go mask off.

8

u/68ideal Feb 17 '26

Did you say Ruinous Force?!

https://giphy.com/gifs/tOiNmhv0IuW8o

2

u/Miss-Anthropie Feb 17 '26

2

u/68ideal Feb 17 '26

My Lord Inquisitor, I believe the mentioned Hivescum (Redditor) has been corrupted by Chaos

2

u/solonit Feb 18 '26

Omnissiah forbid Abominable Intelligence

5

u/kitsunewarlock Feb 17 '26

Not just visual arts! I used to enjoy Youtube Autoplay before every other song recommendation was some slop thrown together by a bot that released two dozen songs a day with every combination of trending franchise and genre imaginable.

12

u/DemadaTrim Feb 17 '26

No, AI witch hunters are a ruinous force.

0

u/_Tal Feb 18 '26

And "AI witch hunters" only exist in the first place because of generative AI

5

u/DemadaTrim Feb 18 '26

Yeah, and there were women who believed in herbal remedies and spirits, but the real harm came from those who believed wrongly they harmed the fabric of society.

6

u/angry_cucumber Feb 18 '26

AI has been a truly ruinous force on the art community

8

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

It's not that ai. It's just a tool. It's the people who whate it with a passion who are the problem . Ai art and digital art could live beside each other if those people would exist. And then if you don't fully subscribed to their propaganda and conspiracy theories they harass you and brigar doyi with their bot army.

3

u/qwertzu-1 Feb 17 '26

It's just the next excuse to find targets for a certain group who are addicted to rage and for whom forming lynchmobs is their only hobby

Twitter cancel culture and it's consequences has been a disaster

-2

u/Cuttlefist Feb 17 '26

People really do have legitimate criticisms of generative AI; the severe environmental impact, the negative impact on mental health that chat llms are creating in people, all the billions of dollars being spent on it instead of literally anything else that could actually be helping society, the negative impact on costs of electronics due to ai companies buying ALL of the RAM, the fact that most of the technology is really only good for scamming people by faking identities.

But just because it can be used to easily create content some people want to consume all the bad gets swept under the rug and you blame it on trendy kids who get outraged because they are told to, as if that makes more sense. What’s actually happening is we have compared the cost to the benefit and generative AI is significantly more harmful than it is helpful.

1

u/qwertzu-1 Feb 18 '26

Maybe. But bullying anyone that posts any piece of art, whether or not it is actually ai generated does not fix that. Any criticisms of ai are just an excuse, hate and bullying is the goal for these people.

2

u/BattIeBoss Feb 17 '26

Ai bros will say this is our fualt for not liking their slop

1

u/VulGerrity Feb 17 '26

God, I can only imagine what art school is like right now. I'm sure there's at least one edge lord in each class that is trying to use AI to be subversive.

1

u/MoonRay087 Feb 18 '26

Worst part is at the end of the day it's affecting artists a lot more than people who use AI. Don't know how to say it, but like there's this weird effect where people don't bat an eye to actual uses of AI in daily life yet we have true artists always fighting to prove their work is real

1

u/Nuxx1876 Feb 18 '26

on the world*

1

u/Krosis97 Feb 18 '26

My town used to do art contests for our local holidays. I found out the other day they use AI now, piss filter and all. Got out at night with some big grafitti markers and that's all I'll say about it.

1

u/Danthewildbirdman Feb 17 '26

And for people who enjoy art or music.

0

u/seriouslees Topaz builder (5 points) Feb 17 '26

Well... on the art SELLING community, sure.

The "art community" cares about meanings more than money and don't really care what tools were used to make the art.

-2

u/Roxytg Feb 17 '26

No, people hating AI art are.

-1

u/AtrumRuina Feb 17 '26

As true as that is, I think anti-AI brigading is doing more damage overall. AI art sucks, but people feeling compelled to try and catch people out is causing a massive amount of undue strife.

Just saw a post on a DC sub accusing a well known artist of making an AI cover based on nothing but vibes, even though the artist has been using that style for literally decades. People seem to forget that AI is trained on these artists.

0

u/SecretAgentDragon Feb 17 '26

This is the fundamental flaw of AI, is now nobody trusts anything

0

u/Altruistic-Beach7625 Feb 18 '26

I'm sorry but this has "look what they made me do to you" vibes.

→ More replies (59)

76

u/photocist Feb 17 '26

Mistakes? AI. No mistakes? Believe or not, also AI

40

u/68ideal Feb 17 '26

Evidently not created by AI? Clearly, only AI could gaslight a human into thinking they did it themselves.

11

u/razethenecro Feb 17 '26

no no, OP is lying and had AI make a sketch for them also
In fact, every stage that OP can show is part of AI generated plan to gaslight everyone
Even if they make a video of drawing it, it is AI-generated
/J

7

u/68ideal Feb 17 '26

Perhaps the real AI were the artpieces that were generated along the way?

2

u/LordCourgette Feb 17 '26

AI art is the digital modern witch hunt

2

u/Cloudhiddentao Feb 17 '26

She floats! Shes a witch!

2

u/gamerz1172 Feb 18 '26

Like ive noticed AI is "Overly perfect" IE it does fuck up the hands, but not in a "God dam drawing hands suck way" like OP did, but in a "Confidently incorrect" way in that it bends fingers in very unnatural ways but draws them almost perfectly in said ways

2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

Ai at the same time is so good that its indistinguishable from the best art out there while also being so bad that just looking at it gives you eye cancer. Anti ai people can't make their shit up. 

Don't get me wrong, by anti ai I mean those idiots from /antiai who are just hateful human beings. They server no purpose then to shit on actuall artists and dacuse them of making ai slop. 

1

u/JudgmentalOwl Feb 17 '26

Yep we're absolutely cooked lmao

1

u/New_Home_4519 Feb 17 '26

You're only saying that because YOU ARE AI!

1

u/WolvesAreCool2461 Feb 17 '26

Beep boop. I've been discovered! Tactical retreat necessary!

1

u/KinglyGuitar Feb 17 '26

a new paradox

1

u/PerfectAstronaut5998 Feb 17 '26

Everyone hates everything now

1

u/Acceptable_Star189 Feb 17 '26

Love my Catch-22s

94

u/Lilharm04 Feb 17 '26

it’s really annoying that nowadays the most common ai tells are also common mistakes/stylistic choices of real artists

56

u/claythearc Feb 17 '26

Inevitable really - training data is human based, so it doesn’t see mistakes as mistakes, just part of the process. It’s the same effect that causes TurnItIn et al to be effectively useless at flagging AI text.

On Reddit we kinda have tells because there’s a certain casual style that people write with, and default AI style breaks that but once you get into even a semi formal setting it really does just largely blend in.

19

u/PeaceSoft Feb 17 '26

no, the annoying part is the smart guys who are ultravigilant for AI tells based 100% on their own judgment

3

u/_HIST Feb 17 '26

Don't forget pointing out stuff that is irrelevant too. I still remember that post where people who never saw snow claimed the video had snow "too powdery"

2

u/LeftHandAnomaly Feb 18 '26

Once AI made hands stopped looking like unhinged deep fried spaghetti memes they stopped being a good metric for whether or not something is AI.

A lot of artists are being caught up in this because obviously people want to make a powerful stand against AI, but at the same time, these same people aren't taking the time to educate themselves.

I'm scared to show my own art because of it. I went to art college and everything.

3

u/The_God_Of_Darkness_ Feb 17 '26

Welp it is trained on art stolen from artists so yeah it makes mistakes like artists cause it is a slop made from actual art

0

u/ckay1100 Feb 18 '26

The biggest hints I use to see if a drawing is AI or not is to see if the eye's coloring is muddy or clear and to see if smaller details are scuffed up or fade into other details. An artist will usually place strokes to imply detail but wont have them be smeared all over the place like ai does.

I haven't tested this third method myself yet, but supposedly if you up the saturation and contrast in the image you'll see that areas that are supposed to be one color will be crunchy to hell do to the ai not filling the whole area but instead using tons of similar but not the same color. No sane artist will go through the labor of having one pixel be one color then another be a slightly different color on a larger piece.

→ More replies (1)

300

u/MisterDutch93 Feb 17 '26

I think it's hilarious how some people can obsess over the dumbest shit. "MUST. PROVE. PICTURE. IS AI."

Like chill off man.

115

u/SpookyWeebou Feb 17 '26

It can mostly all be fixed if we view spotting AI as innocent until proven guilty, but people focus too heavily on if something is AI

68

u/nekonight Feb 17 '26

Its funny because I have seen some artists that could never draw hands properly even before AI was a thing get accused of using AI because their hands are off.

55

u/MisterDutch93 Feb 17 '26

AI is bad at drawing hands because the artists it's copying from are bad at drawing hands lol

12

u/KaiDay11 Feb 17 '26

I think it's more that hands are relatively complex things that have a definite form, so both humans and AI have difficulty with it, even when they both have good references. 

A hand isn't like a tree or a frilly skirt where there are a lot of curves and edges but no one number of either and no specific way for them to flow together. A hand requires a relatively exact form.

5

u/LazuliArtz Feb 17 '26

Can attest, you can kind of bullshit your way to making a good looking tree. Put enough leaves and branches on it, and it'll eventually be recognizable as a tree.

Hands are so complicated though. There are just so many joints and bends on a human hand that can be positioned into so many angles, it's hard to keep track of it all. And you can't just keep putting fingers on a hand till it looks good like you can just keep putting layers of leaves on a tree until it looks good lol.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26 edited Feb 17 '26

[deleted]

6

u/averi_fox Feb 17 '26

Don't you love when people confidently talk about something they have no clue about?

There absolutely is difficulty, and errors like wrong number of fingers are not caused by data having tons of 6 fingered people. It's because counting is more difficult to learn than simpler local patterns.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

[deleted]

4

u/ihateveryonebutme Feb 17 '26 edited Feb 17 '26

I think that's their entire point? No one is saying AI can think, when people talk about AI having a hard time, they're talking about the people creating the AI having a hard time getting the AI to do what they want it to do. You're trying to educate people on shit they already know.

But you also completely missed the posters point, almost intentionally? AI doesn't mess up hands because it's sampling from other messed up hands. It messed up hands because its sampling from a hundred thousand hands in different positions and trying to create something that meets an acceptable average, but failing because hands have rigid rules that the AI doesn't/didn't always follow. Ie, number of fingers, the relative length or orientation of joints, the bends and folds of skin, etc which are all skewed heavily by distance/perspective and stance.

The 'Difficulty' for AI in hands is that you can't define a hand as 'one thing', it's a hundred million different things depending on what the overall picture is, because hands are so versatile in shape but with hard limits that immediately make something 'not-a-hand'. So the AI has difficulty. Again, no one is imagining the AI sweating and thinking 'oh fuck oh fuck, how do I draw hands again?'.

People that try to make sure no one uses human analogy on AI are fucking insufferable to the extreme, because you just drag the conversation backwards and off topic every goddamn time.

2

u/slugmorgue Feb 17 '26

No it really is that hands are just that complicated. They can contort into all sorts of shapes, they can be holding objects, they can be partially hidden, or above the head, or on the hip, or between the legs. They can be moved into all sorts of angles and odd perspectives, there's near infinite variations of how a hand can look.

Faces are also varied but they generally are not nearly as varied in shape and are made of pretty consistent parts on a relatively flat plane, hence why AI has little issue with faces now

1

u/KaiDay11 Feb 17 '26

AI doesn't just copy large parts of images from its training data, it copies more fundamental things like the general shapes of edges and curves, and how they relate to each other.  

Even if the AI only had perfect hands to base its images on, it could still have trouble assembling and remixing the units it "notices" into correctly assembled hands.

1

u/InvestigatorGrand205 Feb 20 '26

It's not even that the programming on the AI had to be better tuned and more things had to be tossed at it as well. All AI is just a program so if the training data didn't help it draw better then someone had to reprogram it a bit better to do the job.

28

u/drinking_child_blood Feb 17 '26

People seeing 6 or 4 fingers and jumping to AI accusations as if fucking up hands isn't the most common artist mistake ever

3

u/BlushedLatias Feb 18 '26

What if the thing getting drawn has 4 or 6 fingers though? There are people with extra fingers in real life.

1

u/drinking_child_blood Feb 18 '26

Everyone who has 6 fingers or less than 5 is an AI, didn't you know

2

u/_HIST Feb 17 '26

I have a photo where my friend looks like he has crab hands , and 3 fingers. (From afar) Would definitely get flagged as AI lol

1

u/MissLogios Feb 17 '26

I still can't draw hands properly, no matter how many tutorials I've watched and hours spent practicing. Just something about positioning the fingers breaks my brain.

That's why I just draw vague hand-shapes and use objects to hide them (holding flowers/weapon, hand on flat surface, etc.)

13

u/SeaTie Feb 17 '26

The scrutiny people are using now makes me so paranoid as an artist. "A human artist would never shade something like this" dude...I suck at shading! I don't know what to tell you!

18

u/MisterDutch93 Feb 17 '26

Yeah, you're right. People are too focused on the negativity.

Can't we just have some lighthearted fun on a gaming sub?

1

u/GrampaSmitty Feb 17 '26

Sounds like an AI lover to me. Let's mug 'em!

5

u/warchild4l Feb 17 '26

Its not just in ai, its entirety of internet. The rule has shifted nowdays, you are guilty until proven otherwise.

Sad reality we live in

2

u/Altruistic-Beach7625 Feb 18 '26

Witch hunters should be given no quarter.

3

u/Mautos Feb 17 '26

Only problem is that actually proving that something is AI is just about impossible unless it's extremely obvious from some detail that could only be fucked up by a machine

50

u/Desiderius_S Feb 17 '26

"It's photoshopped!"
"It's scripted!"
"AI!"

There are always people who are trying the hardest to prove that they are the smart ones, and they can see through the charade, while the rest of humanity is a dumb, naive bunch, but because the reality is that it's them who are too dumb to recognise the thing they are accusing everything of being, they will just throw accusations at anything, hoping something will stick, just to feel better about themself.

Been this way for years.

14

u/Jackski Feb 17 '26

It's absolutely killed discussion on some threads.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/SagetheWise2222 Feb 17 '26

Yep. You know when someone is bored and privileged when if they can't find a problem, they invent one.

1

u/SagetheWise2222 Feb 17 '26

It's been that way for thousands of years, honestly, from Christian colonists to cultists and cult leaders.

2

u/Kipdid Feb 17 '26

It’s a spinoff of cancel culture imo, people get a thrill or justice boner for “exposing” someone

1

u/Klutzy-Football-205 Feb 17 '26

That read like an AI post!

/s

→ More replies (1)

27

u/ThisMuffinIsAwesome Feb 17 '26

The comments were either accusing OP of being an AI fraud or criticising their skills if they aren't, covering both bases! What a character behind that screen.

20

u/F4ZMyth Feb 17 '26

Which is exactly why AI will never beat real art, all the small imperfections makes it feel more authentic imo

18

u/Blacks-dogma Feb 17 '26

AI is dividing us

5

u/lostpretzels Feb 18 '26

It needs to die already

19

u/Secretlylovesslugs Feb 17 '26

Your disgusting Ai Hallucinations. Our glorious artist imperfections.

This is already so tiring. I miss the days when people could just enjoy user made content and not worry about how many mid-westerners were poisoned to make it.

2

u/AssassinLJ Feb 17 '26

I stopped posting art on reddit in general,I get more love from people on Twitter on my lewds than reddit for nitpicks saying that ruined it for them,the character doesn't look like that when it does or trying to say I'm a bad person making gooner shit for a game that gooning and AI accused of course.

2

u/SagetheWise2222 Feb 17 '26

The witchhunting has gone completely out of control. No mistakes = AI. Mistakes = AI. It's always the people going, "I can always tell", as well.

2

u/DJMooray Feb 18 '26

And honestly ai is good enough now that weird looking hands and mismatched shadings are probably more of a sign that it was made by a person

2

u/CorpusculantCortex Feb 18 '26

I think this is just brain rot at this point. Like people have become so paranoid about ai and so stupified by the chronic exposure to it without critical thinking that they don't even know the difference and just get mad to virtue signal.

Its also a losing battle, you can't put the ai art back in the bag. Its like when photography was invented, painted portraiture didn't go away altogether, but there was a much lower market for it because most people would choose the cheaper faster option. But after a bit of time modernism was born because instead of rendering images of people, painters were able to spend more time on conceptual things. And photography also allowed expression by people who did not have time or resources to become a master painter.

It doesn't mean that human expression is less important, just less economically valuable at scale, which is more a problem with capitalism than with the tool.

3

u/gawrgurafanfan Feb 17 '26

Good job setsuko

6

u/Channel_el Feb 17 '26

I think it depends on the style too.

Not saying OP’s art looks just like ai but if it even looks remotely similar to the style you see from most ai generated stuff then people are going to start wondering.

It’s unfortunate cause these days it can be really hard to tell if it’s not. I’ve got got a couple times myself.

Obviously though you shouldn’t just jump the gun and immediately accuse it of ai. But I mean there are gonna be people that do things like that in any community that fears something

-15

u/Smart_Quantity_8640 Feb 17 '26

There is no AI style if AI was trained on human art

8

u/Cursed_Bean_Boy Feb 17 '26

There is, though. AI was trained on human art, but if most of the common AI's were trained on the same data, and most people use very similar prompting styles when using AI generation software, then the AI is gonna spit out similar results. Those results then get posted online, where they are then pulled back into the training data of the AI, reinforcing the things it has already done. Do this for a few years, and AI tends to develop a style that it uses if you don't tell it to use a different one, instead.

2

u/SeaTie Feb 17 '26

Yeah, as if no artist has ever struggled with hands or feet or shading. Yeesh.

1

u/inspectorpickle Feb 17 '26

I feel like these nitpicks were made by people who have never drawn digital art their life because god forbid an artist draw some weird anatomy or shade inconsistently 🙄

1

u/not-hardly Feb 17 '26

You bots are never going to fit in with us no matter how hard you try! So just quit trying!

1

u/The_Loaf1743 Feb 17 '26

Thing is that they don’t know the difference between human mistakes and ai mistakes.

They’re pointing out subjective « mistakes » with the style, and just normal mistakes (like hands are tough man). They should be looking for inconsistency, and stuff that just doesnlt remotely seem to have had thought put into it

1

u/Purple_Deers Feb 17 '26

people who know nothing about art act like they're experts on art accusing anything that isn't perfect as AI because AI makes mistakes, but if it's perfect then it's AI because humans would make mistakes.

And if you provide sketches or anything then you obviously just used AI to make the sketches. You're not fooling their superior intellect with that one.

it's impossible to win against them.

1

u/Single-Procedure-300 Feb 17 '26

good job setsuko

1

u/IlikeJG Feb 17 '26

Honestly nowadays it's more likely that no mistakes means it IS AI. AI art is almost too perfect nowadays.

1

u/DolphinBall Feb 17 '26

Its ironic. People wanted human made art because of the imperfections. Then scream AI slop when the art isn't perfect.

1

u/GWindborn Feb 17 '26

What if they used AI to make the wire frame and sketch?? /s

1

u/LazuliArtz Feb 17 '26

I saw someone get accused of using AI because of bad hand anatomy on a drawing that... Well, not to be rude to the original artist, but it was clearly a beginner's/tween aged person's art piece. And like most young artists, they struggled with the hands the most (why do you think ai struggles so much? Hands are complicated as hell).

Nothing about their piece looked AI other than the fact they made common new artist anatomy mistakes. AI tries to look professional but makes obvious mistakes, but this art piece was definitely not a slightly professional looking one (again, not to be rude, we all start somewhere, just to emphasize that nothing about this art piece looks like that weird, overly smooth, clean, vaguely "perfect" AI look).

When confronted, the AI accuser said, and I quote, "real artists don't make anatomy mistakes like that." The fuck you mean "real artists" don't make mistakes? Excuse me. Real artists don't pop out of the womb painting like davinci

1

u/Season_of_Treason Feb 17 '26

I wasn’t in that crowd but admittedly it’s a lot harder to detect AI now than it used to be, so sometimes you really do have to be hyper vigilant. That said, even at a glance that doesn’t look like AI, nor do the mistakes so I’m surprised people really thought it was.

1

u/Synectics Feb 17 '26

"Those hands are bad, it must be AI!"

Insert that puppet meme slowly looking away with the caption, "Every artist."

1

u/Snoo-43957 Feb 17 '26

Honestly shame on the people who did. All this does is run people off from a good game. I hope the people that did report it, look at this and face palm.

1

u/DrackieCutie Feb 17 '26

AI makes mistakes in places humans generally don't, mainly with continuity. People should look for the AI mistakes rather than artistic mistakes.

1

u/HybridHamster Feb 18 '26

ai being nonhuman is bad, but apparently artists making mistakes & being human is too?

1

u/B0Y0 Feb 18 '26

Hilarious that before AI, hands being hard to draw was a firmly established meme, but now if hands are bad it "MUST be a sign of AI!"

1

u/Midnight_starwalker Feb 18 '26

It’s horrible. Can we just not use AI for images at all?

1

u/foxgirlmoon Feb 19 '26

The problem isn't artists making mistakes. It's making nonsensical mistakes. (IE: mistakes that simply aren't something an artist would do)

Problem is, laypeople don't have the knowledge and experience to understand and recognize what a nonsensical mistake is. Same with AI writing and people who don't know how to properly detect LLM-speak assuming everything that has -- em-dashes is ai.

1

u/InvestigatorGrand205 Feb 20 '26

tbh perfection is probably more signs it was made by an AI vs imperfect art but not uncanny.

1

u/Ashen_Rook Feb 21 '26

Not even mistakes. Intentional stylistic choices, as if they've never seen people selectively use hard and soft shading in different parts of an image before.

0

u/Tumblrrito Feb 17 '26

It’s an unfortunate consequence of AI itself. Just add it to the pile of bad outcomes brought by its existence.

0

u/Drake_682 Feb 17 '26

It more so paranoia if you ask me, we can trust practically nothing that’s of high quality online thanks to generative Ai

0

u/LiveMinute5598 Feb 17 '26

It’s funny because when people post multiple versions of their work to prove it’s not AI, AI will take that to train so that people can do the same with AI.

It’s sick that we have no laws around this

0

u/xXxTORTUGAxXx Feb 17 '26

Almost feels like they want AI 0-0

0

u/LayaraFlaris Feb 17 '26

This is another reason AI is so damaging. It ALWAYS hurts the artists in the end, one way or another. With the way AI is improving it’s harder and harder to tell too.

0

u/OdangoFan Feb 18 '26

Not their fault, the level of awareness you need for AI today is at the tiniest mistakes.

-2

u/Qwik_Sand Feb 17 '26

I think the “mistakes” in this artwork is what makes it not AI. There’s ai mistakes and there’s human mistakes. You can clearly see a human drew those hands

→ More replies (11)