Yikes! Did season 1 episode 6 use AI-generated art?
- Thread starter Enterprise1701
- Start date
I'll make a sincere effort to live with your shame.
And, yes, I often do. It's not always so important a matter that I make the effort. AI helps me troubleshoot things like computer problems better than any other resource I have ever used. It even helped me navigate a plumbing issue not long ago.
And I have found that AI is generally the most inaccurate when it comes to current events. More than once, I have made inquiries about recently deceased individuals only for the AI to tell me that they are alive and well, which is creepy and disturbing.
Yes because the data sets are usually several months to years old.
yes, however now they have access to the internet and can give you up to date information that way
Just curious . Do you shame me for using it as I described here:
Post in thread 'Yikes! Did season 1 episode 6 use AI-generated art?'
Yikes! Did season 1 episode 6 use AI-generated art?
The vast majority of people seriously talking about this subject seem to agree that we’ll likely see the bubble bursting, but that of course doesn’t mean AI as a technology will go away. Just the clients’ willingness to spend money on it; that will likely go away. And with it businesses that...
www.trekbbs.com
Or these folks:
Just wondering if your shame is a blanket statement to any one or all who uses it for any reason
Okay, with the risk of sounding like a complete conspiracy nut:
But my (2nd) biggest AI "tell" is that the same face, of the same character, from the same perspective, looked like two completely different art styles (different eyes, different hairline) on the same page (top right & bottom right):
There is another big "AI" giveaway in the "proof" images: AI works based on reference art. The more images as reference, the more likely the result will look like that.
That's why when you see AI generated people they often look suspiciously similar to movie stars and celebrities.
Case in point:
The sketch art are clearly unique, distinct characters, not based on known actors, but consistent across panels:
The final product however, mixes the likeness of Kirk, Sulu, McCoy up into the art:
Because the image model was trained to associate these facial features with these uniforms and visuals.
And last - the big AI give-away: Six fingers.
Whereas in the original artwork, there are... no hands drawn at all. Because they're hard as fuck.
I remain with my opinion that it wasn't entirely created by AI, but that AI was heavily involved.
However these proofs gave a much better understanding of what they actually did:
And if it weren't for the overall AI witchhunt, they probably wouldn't have a problem coming forward with this - especially since it's a really efficient way to come up with a really well produced prop in such a short time.
It's actually a perfect example of using AI in the creative process.
But my (2nd) biggest AI "tell" is that the same face, of the same character, from the same perspective, looked like two completely different art styles (different eyes, different hairline) on the same page (top right & bottom right):
And whatdayaknow - in the concept "proof" image - the art is clearly consistent. Same style for eyes, same hairline, same face.Mixing up art styles in McCoys face (but consistent in colours & uniforms):
There is another big "AI" giveaway in the "proof" images: AI works based on reference art. The more images as reference, the more likely the result will look like that.
That's why when you see AI generated people they often look suspiciously similar to movie stars and celebrities.
Case in point:
The sketch art are clearly unique, distinct characters, not based on known actors, but consistent across panels:
The final product however, mixes the likeness of Kirk, Sulu, McCoy up into the art:
Because the image model was trained to associate these facial features with these uniforms and visuals.
And last - the big AI give-away: Six fingers.
Whereas in the original artwork, there are... no hands drawn at all. Because they're hard as fuck.
I remain with my opinion that it wasn't entirely created by AI, but that AI was heavily involved.
However these proofs gave a much better understanding of what they actually did:
- An actual artist was outlining a complete comic by himself
- That was then fed into an AI algorithm to make it into a "fully produced" comic book - (which otherwise would cost dozens of man-hours, but which is were the typical AI giveaways appeared)
- The result was then corrected & touched up by the artist again (added the text & speech bubbles, insert the correct space ship model, probably correct a ton of mistakes, adjustments etc.)
And if it weren't for the overall AI witchhunt, they probably wouldn't have a problem coming forward with this - especially since it's a really efficient way to come up with a really well produced prop in such a short time.
It's actually a perfect example of using AI in the creative process.
Last edited:
No.Okay, with the risk of sounding like a complete conspiracy nut:
But my (2nd) biggest AI "tell" is that the same face, of the same character, from the same perspective, looked like two completely different art styles (different eyes, different hairline) on the same page (top right & bottom right):
And whatdayaknow - in the concept "proof" image - the art is clearly consistent. Same style for eyes, same hairline, same face.
There is another big "AI" giveaway in the "proof" images: AI works based on reference art. The more images as reference, the more likely the result will look like that.
That's why when you see AI generated people they often look suspiciously similar to movie stars and celebrities.
Case in point:
The sketch art are clearly unique, distinct characters, not based on known actors, but consistent across panels:
The final product however, mixes the likeness of Kirk, Sulu, McCoy and Sulu up into the art:
Because the image model was trained to associate these facial features with these uniforms and visuals.
And last - the big AI give-away: Six fingers.
Whereas in the original artwork, there are... no hands drawn all all. Because they're hard as fuck.
I remain with my opinion that it wasn't entirely created by AI, but that AI was heavily involved.
However these proofs gave a much better understanding of what they actually did:
And I don't blame them. It's the most effective & reasonable thing to do to produce such high quality output for such a bit part.
- An actual artist was outlining a complete comic by himself
- That was then fed into an AI algorithm to make it into a "fully produced" comic book - (which otherwise would cost dozens of man-hours, but which is were the typical AI giveaways appeared)
- The result was then corrected & touched up by the artist again (insert the correct space ship model, probably correct a ton of mistakes, adjustments etc.)
And if it weren't for the overall AI witchhunt, they probably wouldn't have a problem coming forward with this - especially since it's a really efficient way to come up with a really well produced prop in such a short time.
It's actually a perfect example of using AI in the creative process.
You can also see a married celebrity enter a hotel with a woman whos not his wife and assume there's an afair is happening .Okay, with the risk of sounding like a complete conspiracy nut:
But my (2nd) biggest AI "tell" is that the same face, of the same character, from the same perspective, looked like two completely different art styles (different eyes, different hairline) on the same page (top right & bottom right):
And whatdayaknow - in the concept "proof" image - the art is clearly consistent. Same style for eyes, same hairline, same face.
There is another big "AI" giveaway in the "proof" images: AI works based on reference art. The more images as reference, the more likely the result will look like that.
That's why when you see AI generated people they often look suspiciously similar to movie stars and celebrities.
Case in point:
The sketch art are clearly unique, distinct characters, not based on known actors, but consistent across panels:
The final product however, mixes the likeness of Kirk, Sulu, McCoy up into the art:
Because the image model was trained to associate these facial features with these uniforms and visuals.
And last - the big AI give-away: Six fingers.
Whereas in the original artwork, there are... no hands drawn at all. Because they're hard as fuck.
I remain with my opinion that it wasn't entirely created by AI, but that AI was heavily involved.
However these proofs gave a much better understanding of what they actually did:
And I don't blame them. It's the most effective & reasonable thing to do to produce such high quality output for such a bit part.
- An actual artist was outlining a complete comic by himself
- That was then fed into an AI algorithm to make it into a "fully produced" comic book - (which otherwise would cost dozens of man-hours, but which is were the typical AI giveaways appeared)
- The result was then corrected & touched up by the artist again (insert the correct space ship model, probably correct a ton of mistakes, adjustments etc.)
And if it weren't for the overall AI witchhunt, they probably wouldn't have a problem coming forward with this - especially since it's a really efficient way to come up with a really well produced prop in such a short time.
It's actually a perfect example of using AI in the creative process.
Point is there's no real proof. Feel free to still challenge the studio coming out and saying it wasnt A.I. officially and suggesting the artis is now lying/covering up.
Without proof I chose to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Phil Murphy ( see original post) was one of the first to suspect A.I has come out and said the same.
Erm. The most direct statement Jörg Hillebrand said is this:
And that is completely true!
Stu DID pit a ton of work & creative effort in. The thing isn't just" generative AI. And they need to protect their artist.
However - they also don't say generative AI wasn't involved at all.
This is very carefully worded damage control.
Yes.
Did anyone get any confirmation on why the uniforms look 23th century? The theory the story was changed for some reason and the ship was meant to be much older makes a lot of sense to me.
I expect that was the inker/colorist.
There is no inker or colourist.
They credited only one guy.
This is not a fully produced, real comicbook.
It's a prop.
Last edited:
But a lot of times it will be BAD or INCORRECT data that the A.I. collates.
^^^
And this is especially true on IT subjects if you're looking for info and I can say that with decades of experience in IT and computers. I NEVER trust the collated summaries to have valid info and turn it off where possible.
With the links you can see the source and make a better judgement where possible.
As already said: current AI give you the link to the sources beside each statement, they’re no different than a google search in this.
But they are able to put sources together in a way that would take hours to a normal human. See my example above about repairing unusual stuff.
The comic Last Starship show the uniform at point of Burn resemble those in TOS. That's as good a reason as we need.
Interesting, thanks.
Yeah, looks like the base comic was drawn by a person, and then put through AI to finish it.
bsky.app
bsky.app
Lumi .𖥔 ݁ ˖ (@superluminous.bsky.social)
As an artist, I can tell you two things: 1. These are very easy to "reverse engineer" from AI stuff. I'll look for a video demonstration when I have the time 2. It's possible he drew the outline, colored some of it but did the rest via AI. AI can "finish" artwork, too, btw!
bsky.app
Lumi .𖥔 ݁ ˖ (@superluminous.bsky.social)
Here's a breakdown of a specific artist's very likely traced AI that showcases how that can even be done on video to fool people https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIoB6OaSMxc
bsky.app
There's a hand in the image you posted lol. Holding the binoculars.
Last edited:
Similar threads
