Which style you prefer?

Kalliel said:

It's only right to call out what they've done wrong and give credit where credit is due. Here I have the CSP file opened: View attachment 48370

As you can see, the work time is registered as 11 hours, meaning 11 hours had been spent actively on this application. Which, if OP delibrately tried to fake it by AFK-ing on this screen for half a day, I would really do like to applaud their dedication. Not to mention the dozens of fully toggleable layers organized below. If you've worked with these kind of software before and know how AI images are generated, you'd realize that this is, in fact, drawn organically.

Which is why I said this one is legitimate. For the other one whose file is supposedly lost, however, I am not so sure. They could have used AI on that one, in which case... I don't really have anything to say. It's one thing to lie and not own up to it, but if they truly try to scam people with AI, I'd not hesitate to call them out. Whatever the case, I'm not doing the detective work here. I have other things to do, lol.

Click to expand...

Raw Sketch until getting better

Day 18 : Try hatching Fully on cyberpunk-like character manually. Holy~ Your drawings kinda look professional level my dude

www.scribblehubforum.com

Kurayami said:

I don't even think this one is legitimate either. You can generate an image and open it with Clip. And then you can spend time editing it on your own.

Click to expand...

Kalliel said:

I can tell you this: trying to reverse a fully rendered piece back to detailed layers takes a lot more work than just drawing it normally. Trust me, it is not worth the effort.

Click to expand...

Vitriol said:

Ok, but who tf uses AI to resize???

Click to expand...

AliceMoonvale said:

Level 20 to 100 in progression in a month is definitely sus.
Using Ai to resize an imagine is also sus.

Those I can speak on with pure confidence. Idk about all the clip w/e shit.
But what I do know is that if you can't resize shit using the very program you use or another one, sites like https://imageresizer.com/ exist.

I will also say, that as an avid watcher of Kitboga on youtube, someone who deals with all kinds of scammers from the typical refund scams or catfishing, to even book publishing scammers, they will go through great lengths if it means they have a chance at scamming.

Not saying OP is definitely someone like this, but the suspicion is understandable, as it's possible to put in that much time and effort. Kitboga has given scammers fake receipts for bitcoin where scammers have spent hundreds of hours on his fake crypto withdrawal customer support line.

Click to expand...

Kurayami said:

Here, this first image was posted only 50 minutes before the other one.
View attachment 48371View attachment 48372

It is worth the effort if you want to make money scamming people. Which OP has already made money by selling a cover.

Click to expand...

Kalliel said:

Again, I am not defending OP, saying they did not use AI. I merely gave my reasoning as to why I thought that specific piece is not AI-generated. Now, since you're not convinced, I'll bring up another point: this piece's linework and rendering are of distinctively lower quality than the suspected sketch and the other supposed scam cover. This both strengthens my thoughts on this piece being legitimate and makes me suspicious of other pieces.

If you're still not convinced after this, I guess you'll have no choice but to trust my experience as someone who has been drawing for a while, lol.

Click to expand...

Kurayami said:

I understand your point, but being dishonest about AI usage is cringe. At first they didn't say anything about AI, and then they admitted to resizing with it. They probably draw a rough sketch and use AI assistance. Their original art was okay, but it wasn't close to this level. No one is reaching this level in less than a month.

Click to expand...

Kalliel said:

Not owning up to it is lame, I understand. I guess I'm just too used to how internet people act nowadays that I no longer feel anything.

Click to expand...

AliceMoonvale said:

Ah, y'know what? I might not be smart about this topic, but this person's art reminds me of this user who creates similar ai art for covers.
That same like, detailed, almost too perfect to feel real type of thing. Idk, am I insane? The answer is yes, but still.

View attachment 48373

Click to expand...

Kalliel said:

Again, I am not defending OP, saying they did not use AI. I merely gave my reasoning as to why I thought that specific piece is not AI-generated. Now, since you're not convinced, I'll bring up another point: this piece's linework and rendering are of distinctively lower quality than the suspected sketch and the other supposed scam cover. This both strengthens my thoughts on this piece being legitimate and makes me suspicious of other pieces.

If you're still not convinced after this, I guess you'll have no choice but to trust my experience as someone who has been drawing for a while, lol.

Click to expand...

RepresentingWrath said:

I think this person actually knows how to draw and simply uses AI assistance in some of his pieces. So it is not this particular art but the fact OP doesn't disclose he uses AI assistance.

It's like authors that write but use AI generation here and there, yet they still claim it's 100% written by them. Nah bruv, it's one thing checking grammar, another to ask AI to rewrite multiple paragraphs. Though, if they come clean and say it upfront from the get go I personally won't have any beef with them.

Click to expand...

Makimaam said:

Prove it?

I had attached SynthID stats for you. The false positive rate is 2%. Let me put it in a language you can understand: On average, 2 out of every 100 images could be incorrectly flagged.

I tried four. Look. All four had SynthID all over them. Please, discredit the statistics. Gemini doesn’t look at your supposed work by visual cues but by pixel watermarks.

Just showing a list of “grouped” layers doesn’t prove a fucking thing. They all look transparent to me. I have worked with Photoshop for decades.

And I worked with Gemini Banana Pro, which you also use, the week it was released. It is a powerful tool. It can keep an image consistent. Your scam is sophisticated. You polished your art layer by layer. There’s amateur linework mixed with a polished AI version.

How did I manage to tell? I looked first. Then, I checked your art history. Someone who draws such amateur linework on paper can in no way produce something this polished, this uniform. And really…


You use Photoshop.

Why the fuck did you resize on Gemini?

Click to expand...

Makimaam said:

Prove it?

I had attached SynthID stats for you. The false positive rate is 2%. Let me put it in a language you can understand: On average, 2 out of every 100 images could be incorrectly flagged.

I tried four. Look. All four had SynthID all over them. Please, discredit the statistics. Gemini doesn’t look at your supposed work by visual cues but by pixel watermarks.

Just showing a list of “grouped” layers doesn’t prove a fucking thing. They all look transparent to me. I have worked with Photoshop for decades.

And I worked with Gemini Banana Pro, which you also use, the week it was released. It is a powerful tool. It can keep an image consistent. Your scam is sophisticated. You polished your art layer by layer. There’s amateur linework mixed with a polished AI version.

How did I manage to tell? I looked first. Then, I checked your art history. Someone who draws such amateur linework on paper can in no way produce something this polished, this uniform. And really…


You use Photoshop.

Why the fuck did you resize on Gemini?

Click to expand...

Kurayami said:

What OP Should do now is post an AI generated timelapse. That would be peak content.

Click to expand...