Hey there
Was wondering if there were any serious research papers of discussions to really established and prove some modern art stuff was not made by AI
a non subjective way of labeling it as such, something secured or sure
For visual art, music, whatever
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s impossible to truly prove it. Especially if it was a mixed media process. For instance generating AI image and then painting over that.
And if anyone would want to they could hand paint a picture that would look like AI made.
So, no way to do it with 100% accuracy.
No there is no way to definitively say whether the image you are looking at is AI generated. There are many tells like hands, background objects bleeding into each other, lighting shadows, and a general ‘vibe check’ is often good enough. But there is no secret watermark or pattern unique to all stable diffusion generated images or anything like that.
Proof of process (e.g. a recording of you making the content) is the most reliable way. Big tech is also trying to push C2PA to mark AI made content, though that most likely will never succeed at what it is trying to accomplish.
https://hackaday.com/2023/11/27/how-do-you-prove-an-ai-didnt-make-your-art/ For digital arts, artists can share their source files to prove its theirs. Otherwise, recording the process is a pretty good option
Was just about to comment this, but you beat me to it! I’ve made it a habit of doing this with my drawings and posting the links along with the art so that people know that I made it.
Heard that AI has figured out timelapses, but yeah source files are good
That’s interesting. Kind of want to see it out of curiosity
If the artist is concerned, they can film or otherwise document their creative progress or snapshot stages of production over time.
They are also training AI with those progress videos so eventually AI can imitate it as well. Posting/sharing any content publicly is potential fuel for AI trainers.
I know you are looking for papers so it is probably yhr latter, but I started typing and refuse to stop babbling.
Are you talking about art you create or to verify works you have come across?
If you are making it, document the process. Easy to prove something when the steps are shown, like screenshots of work in progress or photos of the setup before taking a photgraph which AI can’t reliably recreate.
If it is something else, it will be like photoshop where there are or will be some telltale signs to looks out for when observing in fine enough detail. Like currently a lot of AI art has the number of fingers peoblem but also has problems with getting lighting consistent in different ways than humans tend to. A lot of written text has some telltale features as well.
But proving something is human created and definitely not AI is hard because we use a lot of tools that could be mistaken for AI if the tools have complex algorithms. Something made in photoshop bynaltering a photo by a human with intentional actions might end up looking like AI for example. Same with music.
proving something is human created and definitely not AI is hard
Is it? I thought we could just look for the soul and/or intention in the art? Because as everyone on Lemmy knows and is always saying, AI art isn’t art because it lacks both soul and intention. Therefore, it should be easy to tell it apart from real proper human art. Shouldn’t it?
Just look for the boop beeps in it, obvs.
You’re barking your sarcasm up the wrong tree
Am I, indeed? In my view, either AI art is nothing like human art in which case it’s easy to distinguish, or it’s similar enough that it’s not easy to distinguish, in which case it’s got to be at least very similar.
There’s no middle ground here, you can’t logically hold the belief they’re obviously fundamentally different but hard to distinguish from one another.
If you disagree with that and want me to agree with you, you’re gonna have to tell me why it’s wrong. Sorry, I don’t just change my mind at “nuh-uh” 🤷
Indeed, your proposed dichotomy is perfectly logical and I agree with that.
My point is that OP already stated it’s hard to tell the difference. That’s precisely why they made the post in the first place. So why are you asking all these questions about whether or not it is easy to tell apart or not? You already had your answer from the beginning.
Now, if OP had contradicted themselves at any point, saying for example “ai slop is so unlike human mediocre art, you can totally see the soul in art” or " AI can’t do anything similar to fine art" and then immediately asked “but how can you guys tell apart because it’s so difficult” then your reply would have made sense.
I hope that makes it clear.
Oh, I see, you took my comment as directed at OP. Not so. As mentioned there is a strong current of anti-AI sentiment on Lemmy, and it’s often in the vein of “there’s no soul” etc. I was taking aim at that in the context of OP’s comment (because it raises an excellent point), not OP themselves.
Ask the artist in person.
artists can lie
This is one of several recent posts meant to train AI to better hide its fingerprints.
@amid@fedia.io you then haven’t understood my question, since I’m looking for a real way to prove a work is not done by ai, not the contrary, and that makes me a bit sick that each time I ask something on lemmy people suspect me to be something I’m not, and sorry to tell you that big tech don’t care about lemmy so definitely nope, but believe what you want, I do care but I shouldn’t
This is one of several recent posts meant to train AI to better hide its fingerprints.
Check the create date
“modern work” so not a solution at all, this is what I already do but there will be art in the future too
Will there, though?
