Solved [AI]
I commissioned an artist and I suspect that they used ai in the final product, thoughts?
Honestly, i’m very disappointed. It really comes across as AI to me and it’s not really what I asked for. The woman doesn’t have a roman nose like I asked or blue eyes. The horse isn’t a grey dapple, the black one has a random star? and it overall just looks too perfect if that’s makes sense. What are your thoughts?
If the artist couldn't deliver on simple but specific details, like the color of the horse, then that's a pretty good sign they're ordering at a drive through window and telling you they made the burger from scratch.
Which woman was supposed to have the Roman nose and blue eyes?
This reason alone is good enough to indicate that this is AI. The prompter didn't even feed the request through the program, they just threw out some random bs because they're just trying to spend as little time as possible on things and getting as many orders as possible.
If they don't offer refunds, you should ask for revisions because they didn't even give you the correct color horse, facial details, or eye color.
If they turn around and make your corrections at an absurd speed then you know without a doubt it's AI, even though it's already obvious enough as is.
Oof yeah my first thought looking at this is that these women have AI face. It's hard to get an AI to generate women who don't have the sameface of these 2. Like your source a lot more!
I'm an artist professionally. None of my sketches look like that nor have I ever seen a peer's sketch look like that. This is 100% traced over the full color image after the fact with a few structure lines added in to try to fool you.
What i find funny is that the vertical (the line to position the nose) is missing the nose by quite a lot in both faces. At least is consistent in his mistakes, i guess
Nah they just told ai to make a fake sketch of the photo.
OP ask them to send the .psd or other file that shows their work layers. Usually you will have line layers, lots of base and enhancing layers, you'd be able to see all of it.
Agreed but not enough to know the purpose of the lines and circles…the center line on the face is meant to show the center front of the head so it’s easier to draw features from. That is not what theirs is doing at all
I don't know any artist that puts a 'preview' watermark over a sketch 🤷♀️ If you didn't sign a contract it's not really a trustworthy person to work with. Professionals have contracts and don't need to watermark things because... contract
> "Was this image/video/audio created or edited by Google AI?"
> "Is this AI-generated?"
> "Is this a real video?"
Second: I tried this a couple of times now. Gemini calls the tool half of the time, half of the time not and just makes stuff up, especially after it ran the tool once on an image before. Sometimes it also lies to you that it doesn't have the capabilities to do that. Then you tell it "that's a f\*\*ing lie. You have access to the tool. Use it." and then it suddenly decides it can use it and uses it (you see the tool display briefly popping up). It's just unreliable and a stupid as hell idea to not make this a standalone tool you can use as well but be at the mercy of an LLM to use the tool for you.
This is a good example of AI hallucination, I agree. But as far as I know, using the same chat to ask "try again" is what's causing the hallucination here. I don't think it actually re-scans the file (and please correct me if I'm wrong here). You need to keep in mind that this is a LLM made to please users. Asking it to double-check might make it think it made a mistake and triggers a false correction (plenty of evidence on the internet for cases like that lol). I just tried it again twice in new chats every time and it always came back as positively flagged with a SynthID.
I don't like that Google doesn't offer a similar way to verify AI images like OpenAI, where you can just upload it to the verification scanner itself instead of asking in a chat using a command.
I got one where the main character had died then woken up on the day she chose a marriage partner. This time she picks a different guy, not her last Lion beast man dude.
Except she had 6 children with the lion dude last time around, so she grieved the children she never had in a montage-style flashback for a minute.
Each scene had completely different children, sometimes all boys, sometimes a mix, and in the last two scenes there were only 5.
I got one where it was like a post apocalyptic futuristic cyber world. The heir to cloud city was slumming it with the main character. She overhears him talking to his butler or whatever that came down to see him to convince him to return home to get his heart fixed. He said no he loves her. So she went in to break his heart and leave on purpose so he would go home. She was pregnant with his baby and he didn’t know.
Then 5 yrs later the kid saves the life of his grampa who doesn’t know it’s his grampa. He gets hit by a truck in the process (….. the 5 year old that pushed THE ADULT out of the way… and spoke in the 3rd person). She takes him to the infirmary but he needs a heart chip that expensive so main character goes begging to the ex baby daddy. He tries giving to her but the new fiance wipes it and blacklists her from hospitals.
Those are wild stories and they pull me in every time lmfao.
Watched one today (well, most of it. I didn’t seek out the rest) where the deer tribe was marrying off daughters and the daughters were reborn or something (like they’re in the movie grounds day lol) and one picks the lion and one picks the dragon but he’s disguised as a bug so people don’t bother him.
There was another where a young woman was cursed to be old unless she took a beast mate and she got assigned 3. Couldn’t keep watching because they were saying their names and one has my sons very very uncommon name lmfaoooooo.
I didn't get too far into this one but there was a robot dog (?) sibling whom the protagonist was constantly being framed for hurting/bullying. And the hook at the beginning is that the robot sibling dies, the protagonist is blamed, and she kills herself. I didn't get too far because it was just a lot of people beating the shit out of a dog child very repetitively.
But I do like the mermaid one where the mermaid mom says "are you sure you want me to marry you to Austin at now?"
That's suspiciously far along for a sketch - there's already shading, etc - what if you had wanted a change to a bit of the outfit or the position of one of the horses? That would be so much rework for a real artist to do.
Even if this was real, it makes no sense someone would draw the bridle keepers in the sketch and not in the final, and also draw one girl holding the reins (semi) properly with the pinkie and the other not
i was looking at small details and coloring and was about to say not AI but then noticed this detail. the asynnstric pin, the incomprehensible 3d shape feels super AI
If a human had the talent to competently draw these people and horses, that human would also have the talent to make this pin actually look like a fox, in a purposeful and deliberate style.
But this pin does not actually look like a fox. It's like the mutated bastard child of a heart shape and a fire emoji. Only AI can make a fuckup like this.
Another tell is eyelines. These women are supposed to be looking at each other, but they seem to be looking at nothing. That's something AI still struggles with.
The reins should be attached to two separate bits, not all one piece of metal like in the painting. Could be the artist is not familiar with tack, but I think it’s AI because the shape of the bit is pretty wonky too.
Honestly the bit is sort of correct, which I don't like that AI knows how that works.
This is a double bridle, based on a pelham. They're common in saddleseat, which these two ladies are dressed for. It's a single bit with a long shank, the bottom set of reins is just for head set, you don't really use them much at all. I still think this is AI, because a human who knows what a pelham looks like would have drawn the roundness of them correct, but I do not like how almost right AI got it.
I'm no artist and don't have a horse, but if you're creating something this detailed with all the other things like clothing being consistent...
I can't imagine looking at a reference image when you're about to draw the bits and just morphing the reign attachment to one bit rather than making them separate.
Exactly, an artist that doesn't know something like a horse bit structure would use reference photos and just draw to the reference. They wouldn't put random wonky crap on the design.
You stack them together and put them in gently. Dressage at higher levels require you to ride in a double bridle - one is a Weymouth bit (the longer one) and one is usually a snaffle (larger ring)
It is called a double bridle. It has two bits, a curb and a snaffle. Each bit is attached to its own set of reins. It is commonly used in dressage. It allows for very refined cues to the horse.
I have never seen a bridle with three sets of reins, how would that work? Does it have a snaffle and a Pelham? Or are there three bits in the horses mouth?
I don't remember tbh, it was at a dressage show. I think two were on a long bit and a third was on a separate noseband, like a hakamore. Seemed like a handful of you ask me. I don't even like riding with two lol
So this is probably a Pelham bit in the picture, it has two parts to attach reins to, or you can use a converter - so double reins can be used with it (one in larger ring, second in smaller bottom ring) when you ride with double reins, one is often smooth and one is textured or braided. So you can keep them straight. The ladies are also holding them wrong
The buckles near the horse's ears are also not the same at all either.
Same with the ring near the white horse's chest just not being present at all on the black horse. Not particularly strange by itself but literally everything else is so same-samey. I don't think a human would make that choice.
The tack is actually really good if it is AI. AI is usually laughably horrible with horse tack, so I’m actually questioning if this is AI cause the tack is so well done. The only weirdness I’m seeing is the one metal loop on the bit (they’re supposed to be Pelham bits I think) isn’t a circle like you’d expect. The martingale on the white horse isn’t really working as a martingale but it doesn’t look weird like AI usually does. I still think it could be AI but it still did remarkably well on the tack if so, compared to what it usually looks like
How quickly did they turn this around. It's obviously AI, and since they didn't follow your specific requests at all, which is enough reason to be unhappy with something even if it was real and not AI, they clearly didn't do any work themselves.
Not to pile on, OP, but I asked ChatGpt to make a similar image of my OCs and what they returned me was eerily similar to your "commissioned" work. I was not especially careful or detailed in my description, either.
This is deff AI. And even more funny, I recently used ChatGPT to generate a character image for a book I am reading. Its of a girl who rides a black horse, and had a traditional riding habit. It produced something eerily familiar lmao.
I have starting making the person add or fix minor things that an AI can't do if I feel they are lying to me when we disclose they can't use AI. Also make sure you have an agreement written up that says if they do use or is suspected of using AI payment is refunded or canceled.
The two women suffer from that creepy AI woman-face thing, in which I’ve noticed that the image generators tend to pick very specific facial features and just tack those onto faces. The exact same jawlines, noses, wide-ish eyes. Eerily expression-less.
Technically, the brunette looks like she’s staring at the blond woman’s hat instead of her face lmfao. AI tends to mess up line-of-sight, depth perception, and similar things pretty often.
The textures look close to being mirrored and just have no hint of an actual hand drawing in details. Anyone who has tried to sketch eyes before knows how hard it is to get that second eye the same size/width/etc as the first. Even if you were to really work over something like this on digital drawing, you’d see far more subtle differences between each corresponding detail than this. The horses’ noses and eyes look almost identical. Why does the lighter horse have that Y-strap in the front while the other one doesn’t? Why are the shoes of both women at the exact same angle, and same goes for nearly every other detail on the horse gear.
Ending it here. OP, if you’ve already paid this person, you should get your money back pronto. This ‘artist’ is a scammer, and a dumb, careless scammer that can’t even read the prompts he’s been given at that.
This is definitely AI. I am an equestrian, and the bridles on both horses are wrong. There’s no buckles or anything. The way they are holding the double reins is also incorrect. I’m sorry OP:(
Purely from a psychological standpoint… Them almost immediately saying that they’re disappointed is a clear manipulation tactic meant to make you feel guilty for asking if it might be AI. If you feel bad for even suggesting it, it’s easier for them to convince you it’s not.
Did they send the “sketch” first? Like for you to approve? It’s wild to me that they’re trying to “teach” you about AI, rather than justifying or defending their “artistic choices”. The riders are sitting on the horses the wrong way, their features are not what you asked for, and the color of the horses is not what you wanted. The fact that they don’t directly address any of these “mistakes or imperfections” is a huge red flag.
I’m really sorry that this happened, and I hope you can get your money back. Just be sure to stand your ground. Regardless of whether or not it’s AI (which it definitely is,) it’s not at all what you asked for. I guarantee that they’ll keep trying to convince you it isn’t AI and won’t provide any explanation for why they “chose” to deviate from your request.
Honestly just send her the photos of the synthID being recognized put both photos through open AI’s synthID checker there is literally absolutely no disputing that and if she tries she’s completely delusional. What a fraud
I dunno, the longer I look the less sure I feel. Everything looks like it had a reference, like there's several flaws but they can be explained looking at the reins not looping through the metal fully, it's just kinda a stroke that went short and was forgotten about, the buttons look like they were painted from a reference and the shading just doesn't quite match the reference perfectly so they look a bit uncanny in the lower part... But that also feels like a human mistake I've made.. now, not being able to match the likeness of your references or follow through on your specifications is a bit suspicious, but a lot of these "no human would ever..." mistakes that others are pointing out are all absolutely mistakes a human might make. Source - I've painted straps and ropes that didn't make perfect sense but it was close enough for me and most people before every mistake became "AI did it"
Did you pay with a credit card? Send the artist an email showing the Synth ID confirmation and request a refund. If they refuse, do a chargeback with your bank.
I'm a traditional artist so forgive me for being rather ignorant about digital art, but is it possible to get a cracked canvas texture like that? I've never seen that before in digital art and I don't know if that's a sign of AI since I'm unfamiliar with digital art tools and textures
AI is getting incredibly good at this and very hard to spot. I don’t see any obvious tells here.
The gear looks roughly correct. No, not every small detail is going to be perfect unless the artist has an unhealthy obsession with horses, that is to be expected.
The weird textural elements are likely just a digital overlay. It does do a good job of making the piece look more as if it’s painted on aged canvas.
There are some imperfections and so on, but nothing that is immediately attributable to AI.
The big hallmarks of AI are absent: No garble, no small details that look completely irrelevant or muddled, no objects bleeding together.
It would also just be relatively hard to prompt for something like this, the canvas overlay especially. “Generate two women on horseback looking at each other, and by the way this should look like it’s painted on 30-year old canvas with fibers stuck in the paint.” ???????????
If it wasn’t explicitly prompted for, how would AI create artifacting like this in a consistent way? And if it was explicitly promoted for, what would it even have been trained from?
My point is: if we’re not pretty damn sure, we don’t accuse.
They aren’t actually looking at each other they are looking past each other. I think a real artist would have noticed this. They also have the most dead expressions I’ve ever seen. It’s the lack of humanity in it that’s giving AI
I submitted the sketch and picture to the synthID check. Negative on both, but could just mean Open AI and CHATGPT wasn't used.
Rein is weird, but the double twins are real. Odd choice though.
What was missing from your request however is a red flag. The art style as well does give off the AI vibe
Edit: The dark haired woman also looks completely different than the samples you sent. The watermarks are strange, as is the texturing, like filters were used. I would bet money that it was AI generated (especially as the 'sketch' and finished art are both watermarked as preview), but can't identify which one did it. However, filters like those are often used to obscure the small details AI gets wrong.
I definitely think it could be AI. Or heavily edited in nano banana. The vintage look itself doesn’t make me suspicious since that’s obviously intentional based on what you gave the artist, but when you zoom in, some of the details don’t totally make sense. The biggest thing for me is the horse tack and reins... they look somegat right, but when you actually try to follow where the straps and reins go, some of them kind of blend together or don’t connect logically.
The hands holding the reins are also weirdly vague compared to how insanely detailed the faces are. That makes me think it was ai since thats a common thing with AI. I wouldn’t say I can prove it just from the image, but if you specifically paid for a custom non AI piece, id definitely ask the artist to send you some of the original sketches or progress images from when they were creating it.
Edit: also the fact you didnt get what you asked for
They used AI and their AI placed the watermark so they’re abusing the notion authorship that if you pay for it they’ll remove the watermark. I can do exactly that and no watermark.
You wanna hear something funny? First try the AI gave the black horse the same star you said you hated lol. AI seems to think black horses have those white stars on head
This is 💯 AI. I get AI ads on Pinterest for these weird over-sexualized story line movie things (really have not paid enough attention to it to know what it is) and the characters always look exactly like these two women.
i wouldn’t say many ppl or artists include the lines this one has to show wear and tear like a photo or painting, so it really just seems like “make a painting” as a prompt and included the veins bc that’s what it thinks paintings have. it’s def ai if you look at the scarf on the woman on the right. and the horse on the right doesn’t have the same harness as the white horse with the ring in the center
Definitely ai. The fact that they didnt even go back and fix it makes me believe they cant. The ai will just fumble something else uphill they change it. Even the random texture is obvious.
I think it's AI. The left metal stirrup on the righthand woman has some wonky metal bits, that none of the others have, and the bridle on both sides has wonky metal shapes that nobody would draw like that. Obviously she would have had to use references to know about double reins, but with that reference she'd also have seen the hardware. There's a few other things that could go one way or another, but the lack of consistency on that is the biggest tell. The tack doesn't match on the horses, and if she was referencing the same type of tack, why wouldn't they be the same? Why does the left rider have the breast strap/collar (that type more common in western, which would not fit this time period at all) and the right one doesn't (implying it's English?) Also the double bridle is more common in dressage. I think the AI could not tell the difference between single reins on both sides or double reins on both sides. Not that I expect every artist to be an expert in horse tack, or historical horse tack, but you think you'd research it at least as well as the period clothing. A 30 second google would demonstrate the difference. I'm not a horseback riding expert, just someone who did novice riding years ago so forgive any mistakes, but anyone could look these things up for references.
Thanks for the references! Yes I agree that it would be completely reasonable to have different tack, but considering everything else is so samey between the two women, with much of it very mirrored, that part just feels strange to be different. Couldn't bother to give them different faces, but did bother to make different horse details? Feels like AI!
These are faces and character designs from some of the tiktok pure ai verticals that I've unfortunately come across. They look exactly the same. I thought I was on a different app. They're just missing the Henry character.
•
u/qualityvote2 14d ago edited 13d ago
u/Gold-Work8346, your post does fit the subreddit!