Why do so many people conclude that the cover is made by AI? Genuine question, because I a...

That's what I was thinking??

Look at the cover and zoom in. Take in the details.

I did take in the details though, and I couldn't find anything definitively AI, other than very minor details and that unfortunately, AI does replicate this artstyle the most. Am I missing something??

Ok well for example look at the eyes. They are very muddy. The petals don't make sense. The hands are a dead giveaway. The right ones pinky is drawn wrong and the girls hand is directly sticking out of the canvas into the frame. Another dead giveaway is the details, especially on the girls dress. There's more this is off the top of my head.

Thanks for the reply!! Yeah, I'd already mentioned the hand going off frame and the embellishments being sus, so there may have been partial AI being used, but I always give the benefit of the doubt since artists make mistakes all the time.

I definitely do see the flowers on the bottom left looking weird, didn't notice that before since the ones on the right look perfectly fine. The right hand's pinky seems fine to me though? Eyes looking muddy doesn't seem that way either. They aren't particularly blurry compared to the rest of the art, and they proportional.

Either way, while I don't support entirely AI generated artwork, I do accept that artists do use them for references, for example like finding textures or lighting adjustments. It's mainly because of how fast it is, and how much it reduces work time. To me at least, this cover most probably was drawn authentically, since the characters do match the author's artstyle, but was enhanced with AI or somewhere along those lines.

Are you being fr? I get the feeling you are the one who uses AI in art , so you're here trying to excuse it lmao. In that case, I'm not even going to touch upon the ethics of ai with you. I'm more genuinely baffled by how someone could like art and not immediately tell this was ai. Even when I give concrete examples, unless it was too over the top like the hand being out of the freaking frame, you've brushed the others off(pun unintended lol).

Look ik I'm being rude and you are being polite, but. How can you look at that and not see it was ai. Maybe you're right about the drawn and enhanced part, but. Is it not abominable for the artist of a manhwa to use *AI*, something most artists are completely against, to sell a *manhwa*? Reliant on people who like art? And will see the difference ? Or most, at least.

Just. What is the reasoning here. If you want to go into the art world, do yourself a favor, and do not use AI, because you won't learn and other artists will look down on you. For patterns and stuff, there are hundreds of free resources. Yes ai is easy and faster but it's literally ART. It's meant to come out of you, by choice. Not some machine churning out distorted copies of others stolen art

I haven't touched art in ages lol, and I have no intention of using AI in the way you are refering to. I'd like to imagine that in a world with rapidly improving tech, that artists could use tools like auto colour adjustment or fill, AI background or object detection to select areas quicker, etc.

I already said that I do not support AI generated art, as well as the cover here, and I just wanted to find out why it was deemed as AI so quickly and the things you pointed out did help! But perhaps I should've made my stance clearer. What I meant was QoL tools by AI, that have existed way before it was coined the term AI, featured in many art softwares, which I don't see the problem with. AI does not only refer to generated images created from referencing millions of artwork that they do not have permission to use.

When done quite expertly, say with extensive editing to wring out the errors and some humanising, even the most seasoned artists wouldnt be able to tell if AI had a hand in assisting with an artwork. It's not all black and white here... It's not a matter of putting an artwork on an AI detector online, and proclaiming its AI, when on numerous occasions people have pointed out that its been incorrectly flagged.

It's so difficult to tell, and I just wish that more people would see that, but that's evidently not the case. People are so quick to pass judgement just because they condemn the use of AI. It's sort of a grey area to discuss.

It is AI tho, it's clear as day, and AI "assisting" in artwork was never a thing.
Someone who do art will hate AI, the people who will support AI is just lazy people who doesn't want to try art but jealous of other people's talent, which is usually, shitty people.

And you trying to defend AI this much is suspicious
People who do art will hate AI and no buts
And everyone can see which is AI slop and which are human's work

"I just don't understand how you can see it" i bet YOU can, but you refuse to admit