Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
WotC Updates D&D's AI Policy After YouTuber's False Accusations
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9225366" data-attributes="member: 18"><p>Just to comment on the original claim that lead to all this, I would say you can't spot AI art on the basis of "something feeling off", because unfortunately that also applies to very stereotypical or slightly "basic berk" (euphemising) art some of the time. This is an interesting piece to accuse because to me, as someone keen on being able to spot AI art, I don't think it looks very AI-art-y. For example, selected factors that point away from AI art:</p><p></p><p>1) The perspective is exaggerated but also consistent with itself. AI art struggles with perspective somewhat, especially in complex and dynamic scenes like this one. It also struggles to do exaggerated perspectives justice particularly. This is part because the training data includes a huge amount of art by artists, who, well, aren't very good at perspective, or aren't very interested in perspective. </p><p></p><p>Nestor, on the other hand, clearly is.</p><p></p><p>(That's not to say the perspective is perfect - the shield boss is a little off - but it's a very artistic and intentional use of it.)</p><p></p><p>2) Faux depth-of-field - this is a very post-modern technique, but you can see how he's got the central figure in sharp focus to enhance the send of speed where the background is more blurry and non-specific - and again this is consistent, something AI struggles with. It's fairly easy to do this with layers in virtually any art tool, but AI art doesn't have layers in general (unless I'm out of date - I'd be unsurprised if a tool had updated to have them, I guess - but it'd a serious paid feature I'd imagine), because it'd so expensive computationally to approach it that way.</p><p></p><p>3) Consistent sense of movement through multiple parts of the art - for example the necklace flying back as the dwarf rushes forwards. Consistent direction of movement too.</p><p></p><p>4) Consistent direction of light - this is a classic one for AI and again one it hasn't entirely figured out. Here the light is consistent and coming mostly from through the hole the dwarf is rushing towards. It also looks like it's the same low-angle sunlight that's hitting the tops of the buildings. The shadow under the right boot is a bit questionable but like, is normal artistic licence.</p><p></p><p>(Part of the reason AI is kinda bad at this is indiscriminate scraping of training data - including of a lot of artists who don't really care about consistent lighting, or who are operating in stylized ways. I understand there are various programmatic attempts to get around this, but they're not there yet.)</p><p></p><p>5) Thought-through elements and interesting details - like having a bow AND arrows, not just one or the other, having more armour on the unshielded side, having extra weapons and so on. The details are also interesting - the shape of his sword and the type of armour are somewhat unusual, for example (though the axe is the most generic "post-World of Warcraft" axe imaginable)</p><p></p><p>5) Lack of malformed objects - This is still fairly common even with Dall-e 3 and so on with careful prompts - in any detailed or complex scene, there tend to be miscellaneous "objects" which aren't anything - very often backup weapons on a warrior will turn into these, just weird little unusable pieces of metal, or like, impossibly attached to the warrior. Or like, windows in buildings in dumb places.</p><p></p><p>6) Lack of weird hands and similar (yes they still do that sometimes) - indeed look at the detail - there's fingernails and everything!</p><p></p><p>Pointing towards AI art are only two things I can see:</p><p></p><p>A) The way the left arm connects to the shield. But we've all see artists struggle with this sort of thing, and sometimes if we do art ourselves, we've struggled with it - I know without a life model, I struggle with that sort of thing hugely.</p><p></p><p>B) Splodges on the face. This is one of the things AI is still, somehow, struggling with, particularly with fantasy painting-style art. So many fantasy character have tattoos, warpaint, mud, blood spatters, wild make-up and so on, on their faces that AI art just loves to put random splodges on the faces (here it seems to be intentional blood spatter). There are also a lot of other splodges in general in the piece, to illustrate speed and there's a weird streamer of blood off a spear to the side, and these are things AI art imitates a lot because they're not uncommon in the art it's being told to generate from.</p><p></p><p>What I think obvious is that this is digital art - a lot of the techniques are ones you can and would only use with digital art tools. That's probably what triggered the dude in question. But like, when I was still in high school, we were using digital art tools. It's been a quarter-century for people to get used to them!</p><p></p><p>(Again it's obviously very easy for the relevant artist to prove that it isn't too - because real art always takes time to compose - for example Nestor shows his stages here: <a href="https://www.artstation.com/artwork/04qgD8" target="_blank">https://www.artstation.com/artwork/04qgD8</a> - scroll down to see them)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 9225366, member: 18"] Just to comment on the original claim that lead to all this, I would say you can't spot AI art on the basis of "something feeling off", because unfortunately that also applies to very stereotypical or slightly "basic berk" (euphemising) art some of the time. This is an interesting piece to accuse because to me, as someone keen on being able to spot AI art, I don't think it looks very AI-art-y. For example, selected factors that point away from AI art: 1) The perspective is exaggerated but also consistent with itself. AI art struggles with perspective somewhat, especially in complex and dynamic scenes like this one. It also struggles to do exaggerated perspectives justice particularly. This is part because the training data includes a huge amount of art by artists, who, well, aren't very good at perspective, or aren't very interested in perspective. Nestor, on the other hand, clearly is. (That's not to say the perspective is perfect - the shield boss is a little off - but it's a very artistic and intentional use of it.) 2) Faux depth-of-field - this is a very post-modern technique, but you can see how he's got the central figure in sharp focus to enhance the send of speed where the background is more blurry and non-specific - and again this is consistent, something AI struggles with. It's fairly easy to do this with layers in virtually any art tool, but AI art doesn't have layers in general (unless I'm out of date - I'd be unsurprised if a tool had updated to have them, I guess - but it'd a serious paid feature I'd imagine), because it'd so expensive computationally to approach it that way. 3) Consistent sense of movement through multiple parts of the art - for example the necklace flying back as the dwarf rushes forwards. Consistent direction of movement too. 4) Consistent direction of light - this is a classic one for AI and again one it hasn't entirely figured out. Here the light is consistent and coming mostly from through the hole the dwarf is rushing towards. It also looks like it's the same low-angle sunlight that's hitting the tops of the buildings. The shadow under the right boot is a bit questionable but like, is normal artistic licence. (Part of the reason AI is kinda bad at this is indiscriminate scraping of training data - including of a lot of artists who don't really care about consistent lighting, or who are operating in stylized ways. I understand there are various programmatic attempts to get around this, but they're not there yet.) 5) Thought-through elements and interesting details - like having a bow AND arrows, not just one or the other, having more armour on the unshielded side, having extra weapons and so on. The details are also interesting - the shape of his sword and the type of armour are somewhat unusual, for example (though the axe is the most generic "post-World of Warcraft" axe imaginable) 5) Lack of malformed objects - This is still fairly common even with Dall-e 3 and so on with careful prompts - in any detailed or complex scene, there tend to be miscellaneous "objects" which aren't anything - very often backup weapons on a warrior will turn into these, just weird little unusable pieces of metal, or like, impossibly attached to the warrior. Or like, windows in buildings in dumb places. 6) Lack of weird hands and similar (yes they still do that sometimes) - indeed look at the detail - there's fingernails and everything! Pointing towards AI art are only two things I can see: A) The way the left arm connects to the shield. But we've all see artists struggle with this sort of thing, and sometimes if we do art ourselves, we've struggled with it - I know without a life model, I struggle with that sort of thing hugely. B) Splodges on the face. This is one of the things AI is still, somehow, struggling with, particularly with fantasy painting-style art. So many fantasy character have tattoos, warpaint, mud, blood spatters, wild make-up and so on, on their faces that AI art just loves to put random splodges on the faces (here it seems to be intentional blood spatter). There are also a lot of other splodges in general in the piece, to illustrate speed and there's a weird streamer of blood off a spear to the side, and these are things AI art imitates a lot because they're not uncommon in the art it's being told to generate from. What I think obvious is that this is digital art - a lot of the techniques are ones you can and would only use with digital art tools. That's probably what triggered the dude in question. But like, when I was still in high school, we were using digital art tools. It's been a quarter-century for people to get used to them! (Again it's obviously very easy for the relevant artist to prove that it isn't too - because real art always takes time to compose - for example Nestor shows his stages here: [URL]https://www.artstation.com/artwork/04qgD8[/URL] - scroll down to see them) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
WotC Updates D&D's AI Policy After YouTuber's False Accusations
Top