Remix.run Logo
ARandumGuy 3 days ago

The cat picture really shows the "noisy detail" problem with AI art. There's a lot going on on the area directly above the cat with a crown, as well as on the armrests and the upper areas of the wall background. But it's all random noise, which makes it both exhausting and distracting. A human artist would probably either make those areas less detailed, or give a more consistent pattern. Both would let those parts fade into the background, which would help draw our focus to the cats and the person.

There's other, more general issues too. The front paw on the big cat on the left is twisting unnaturally. The cat on the right with the pendant thing looks like it only has one front paw. The throne looks more like a canopy bed then a throne, with the curtains and the weird top area. The woman's face is oddly de-emphasized, despite being near the center of the piece.

Most of these things are subtle, and can be hard to articulate if you aren't looking closely. But the picture reeks of AI art, and it doesn't surprise me that the author was able to identify it as such right away.

ffsm8 2 days ago | parent [-]

Reading this comment chain is kinda confusing to me. Y'all really not aware that there are countless works of art that predate AI art that look literally just the same?

Missing symmetry is super frequent in hand drawn art, and overusing/adding too much detail that ultimately detract from the art is something any aspiring artist has done at some point.

I get that you don't like to look at pictures like that, but it's really not unique to AI art.

ARandumGuy 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

My point wasn't that you can't find art made by a human that has the characteristics of AI art. My point was more that it's just bad art.

numpad0 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Asking LLM for thought processes only generate hallucinations. Spotting AI images are same. Those subtleties are justifications ex post facto, not necessarily the actual cues that trip BS detectors.