News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Turds in AI Generated Art by andybak on Tuesday May 30, 2023 @05:27PM (#36131108)
I don't think you can tell AI generated images from real images anywhere near as much as you think you can.

I'd bet good money you couldn't achieve more than say 60% in a properly controlled test

Re:Turds in AI Generated Art by __loam on Tuesday May 30, 2023 @05:32PM (#36131167)
It's usually pretty obvious.
Re:Turds in AI Generated Art by andybak on Tuesday May 30, 2023 @07:43PM (#36132702)
It's often most definitely not.
Re:Turds in AI Generated Art by joe_the_user on Tuesday May 30, 2023 @10:44PM (#36133895)
I think you're missing the direction this AI stuff is going.

I would claim to be able to tell an AI-generated image from illustration hand-draw by a person if that illustration had roughly the characteristics of standard AI-generated images. IE, sort of curvilinear magic realism feel, crude knowledge of anatomy and perspective, uniform soft lighting etc. And there are quite a few artists out like that and I shudder for their careers.

The problem is the value of things that look like AI has been reduced because they're everywhere - and that include a fair number of non-AI-generated stuff, sure.

Re:Turds in AI Generated Art by andybak on Wednesday May 31, 2023 @01:59AM (#36135000)
It's trivially easy to generate ai images that aren't "curvilinear magic realism" etc

I can't help but feel you're just betraying your limited exposure to what's currently possible.

You're confusing "what lots of people seem to want to generate" with "what the models are capable of"