[00:02] ends of the earth to continue their facade of being a real artist? Let's delve into the situation involving a Dead by Daylight art contest, and again, involved. And also, let's not talk about this. I ended up getting a stye in my
[00:16] eye, probably from like a lot of stress, and I can't wear makeup right now, so yeah. So, Dead by Daylight have posted about this art contest that's coming up. The fog stirs for new ideas. It's a design a cosmetic contest where you can
[00:29] go and make skins for killers and survivors in the game. There are a it's a really cool fan event that's happening. And a ton of artists are gathering together to submit their submissions, and they all look so cool
[00:42] and amazing. Now, with that, other people are tossing their hat in the ring. And we have a submission from a user called Carolina Nesbitt. And again, involved. So, Carolina makes a post writing, "My submission for the
[00:55] community contest. I worked really hard to do the front and back. I hope I win." So, here we can see Carolina's submission. It is for a survivor called Sable Ward. It features Sable with a very like black aesthetic with some pops
[01:09] with streaks of fuchsia in the hair, cat ears, they're wearing a leather jacket, and then this pink and black striped top and this skirt and fishnet tights. There's already some elements of this that are looking a little funky, looking
[01:24] a little AI generated, if I may suggest. First off, they have these like cat maybe eyeliner or something. It's not the same number of cat whiskers. There's three on one side and four on the other, which I feel like if you're designing a
[01:37] the same number of cat whiskers. But beyond that, the chain on the waist is very garbled up. The little chain links are bleeding into each other. One hand has five mashed up fingers, and the other hand has four. Not to mention
[01:54] it's like a character design. And on the back view, we see the back of the hand back view, we see the back of the hand and there's 1 2 3 4 5 finger Why does it wouldn't be this high up. And then the right hand, we have a pinky, a super
[02:09] skinny ring finger, and then a couple of other fingers. And then we're back at it again with the shoelaces that are not shoelacing. There is no direction rhyme or reason for these shoelaces whatsoever. And again, of course, every
[02:21] artist draws differently. Some of these maybe it can be human error, but come on. There's a lot going on here that looks odd. And Carolina adds an earlier version where they kept Sable with their original white hair, but they said they
[02:33] people in the comments were very suspicious. This is so good, but I'm scared of it being AI. In which Carolina responds, "Do not worry. I despise AI in all forms." All right, Carolina, we will see how true this statement is. And so a
[02:48] commenter comments, "I'm sorry, but it's got all the hallmarks of AI. The five fingers on the left hand and the chain link belt are the most obvious ones." So as like a gotcha, I guess, Carolina quote retweets that person being like,
[03:00] "Nice try, but I have my progress logged." And so they show us a sketch, a really stick figure sketch where Carolina is drawn kind of with like a color pencil sketched in version of the black moto jacket, but this time the
[03:15] hair is purple. And then they don't give Sable pants. So Sable just has the top and then has a star on the hip and then fishnet tights. And I think that's a bit you're posting this as like a aha gotcha, here's my developmental sketch,
[03:30] where's the rest of the clothes, you know? But also, they gave Sable like blunt cut bangs, which isn't featured in the rest of the design. Now, I'm not sketch. A lot of people make sketches, realize they want to change something,
[03:43] design, which is totally valid. These elements to me just read a little bit suspicious alongside the fact that there's no pants, there's no hands, and it's looking a little fishy to me. And then this is the updated sketch, which
[03:56] to me looks even fishier, okay? Because now Sable has the clothing design, and flushed out. So, now Sable has the skirt, and the hair bangs actually matches the way Sable's bangs look like. But, what is odd to me is that they are
[04:12] drawing in a digital drawing program. This looks like a digital canvas in which they used a pencil brush to draw in. It doesn't look like a image that originally drawn traditional, which is
[04:25] totally fine. So, why is the updated sketch, for some reason, on a paper background with what looks like pencil graphite scribble roses, six of them in fact, in between gaps of the canvas? It's giving the look of AI trying to
[04:41] fake a pencil sketch. Except, again, it doesn't make any sense because this is a digital drawing, right? You can turn on a paper canvas. Some people like drawing on that, but then wouldn't that also be present in the very base sketch, which
[04:54] these, you know, could be personal choice, whatever. What are these pencil cloud graphite things? What are these exactly? Literally, nobody sketching digitally would draw this. And I know people get mad at me for saying, "No
[05:06] artist would do this." But, come on. What is the point of this? This would be drawing with lead on a piece of paper, and you accidentally smudge lead on the paper, you know, like from your from the palm of your hand touching the paper.
[05:20] appear. It doesn't happen digitally because you're drawing digitally. It's just so odd. And the commenter that originally put that comment replies, you. I'm telling you what I see, and what the AI generated detector is
[05:33] saying. Unfortunately, rough sketches don't prove you didn't use AI in the final design," which I agree. "In fact, in this case, it makes it look more like you did." And Carolina responds, "Those are my rough sketches. I can't submit
[05:45] those." Again, to me, these look extremely AI. And it also has a little AI yellow slot piss filter thing going on with it. Nobody in the comments, by says, "Do you think we're stupid?" Somebody says, "Drop the speed paint
[05:58] you can't since it's AI. If you're going to use that lazy tool, then at least don't try to act like you're drawing it. It's not fooling anybody no matter what you say." And then Carolina gives us the gotcha, writing, "I don't blame you for
[06:11] doubting me. AI is so prevalent in this contest, which is a shame. But I hate AI in all forms of the matter. Hearts. Please think before making baseless accusations. It's stressing people out who aren't actually using AI." Now,
[06:24] let's take a look at Carolina's speed paint. Sorry. Sorry. I just I have to put this on replay because in the era of everybody and their mom faking speed paints, this is hilarious. This is ChatGPT, take this
[06:40] AI-generated image and give me a fake speed paint in Procreate. Once again, we have the fake Procreate UI. Look at the top. I sometimes draw in Procreate. This is what Procreate's UI looks like, okay? It says gallery. The [ __ ] is this? Blah
[06:55] Then we have a wrench. That looks like the letter Y. This is supposed to be the magic wand tool with two sparkles. Why does your magic wand tool have one? Now we have the infamous lasso tool that AI always [ __ ] up. What is this? Somehow
[07:09] the S got stepped on in the top. And their arrow for the pointer is not even straight. And then, well, I don't even know what's happening over here. We got some crappy attempts at making some other UI elements. Not to mention just
[07:23] the speed paint. Like, look, somehow Carolina has a magical brush in Procreate that none of us has ever seen before. Where when you apply that brush on your canvas, it somehow magically makes an art piece appear. And it can
[07:36] also apply color, shading, highlights, rendering, and act as a liquify brush all in one. This is the fakest speed every single time, but this is a shitty attempt at making a speed paint. Like
[07:49] what? You're going to tell me that you drew the line art from head, shoulders, That's not what they taught us in school. Where did the rest of the legs this? Come on. What what is that by the
[08:02] knee? All right, then we got the rest of the legs. More globular things appearing by the legs. And then somehow it went up here. What is that? we got some hands. Do you see all the artifacts appearing? This isn't even a star. It was supposed
[08:14] to be a star. The skirt is also warping somehow. And then boom, the magical rendering brush that instantly renders the piece as you draw it across your the piece as you draw it across your canvas.
[08:29] people are stupid? And also how come the chain is correct now? This also is not somehow the chain is correct in this art piece, which it wasn't earlier. And then it got community noted. And it reads, "The video transitions abruptly from
[08:43] sketch to a complete image. This matches the output of tools that generate time lapse videos from AI art." So in the comments, nobody believes Carolina, you know, shows the speed paint says, "That's not how art works. All the time
[08:56] your AI slop is real art, you could have been improving your actual drawing detector, which isn't always accurate, right? It says the image is likely created by AI, 70% false." Another person said, "All of that in a single
[09:10] layer? And not once did you move or manipulate the canvas or try to erase or change anything? Almost as if this was generated by AI. At least try to be subtle, you effing cheat." And then Carolina replied with a post that she
[09:23] had made, writing, "Just because you or artists you watch erase lines constantly doesn't mean all artists do. No offense, it's not a bad thing. I just didn't need to erase a line." Literally absurd, by the way. You're telling me that you're
[09:36] an artist, and you never in that entire fully rendered art piece. If it was a simple, I believe you obviously, right? But a fully rendered art piece with a front and back view of a person with full shading, everything in a different
[09:50] designed from scratch, you didn't have to erase a single line? That is like an author who wrote a 400-page novel telling me that they never had to correct a single sentence they wrote. I'm personally not believing you. What
[10:03] do you mean not a single erased line? Not a single one? So Carolina adds, people get it, some people don't. But yes, join the angry mob and attack me with lies of AI generation. I give proof, which I was asked for. Give it
[10:17] from start to finish and still be lambasted." What does that mean? >> Is this a word? By the community. Jealousy it must be. If this is a word, my life. And the comments once again are clowning on this person. And this just
[10:31] made me laugh because there was this quote retweet from this user >> [laughter] >> who is doing exactly what this person, Carolina, thinks they're getting away with. The magical eraser render liquify
[10:44] brush. And Carolina's doubling down writing, "There's nothing more sad and trying to make it in life. It wouldn't be so bad if they didn't drag talented people down with them. Lies and sabotage at a desperate attempt to make having
[10:58] zero talent seem excusable." And I mean again, the biggest one, if you're not artwork the artist posts, everything on their page is giving AI. They have this bone-chilled Jason design they've been thinking of, and this is their version
[11:12] yellow paper slot background, which hey, no shade, no tea, if you like using a paper background and a digital canvas, you know. But like the whole art piece, their piece has this like yellow tint to it. It's very faint, but it does. Once
[11:24] number of fingers. Jason has five fingers on Jason's right hand, and on Jason's left, or our right, Jason's got four. Hmm, wonder what happened there. Also, basically multiple times per hour. As you can see, 2 hours ago, 2 hours
[11:38] ago. Pearlyna keeps taking artist work who have submitted their skin submission who have submitted their skin submission to this contest, and she keeps saying, "Oh my god, I love your design so much. I had to whip it up in Blender." And
[11:51] yes, the design by the original artist is really cute, but this is not Blender. She took the artist artwork and fed it into AI to go make AI 3D versions of it. And she's been doing this for multiple artists. This person is obviously rage
[12:03] Twitter Blue, so they're just trying to farm impressions by pissing off a bunch of people. Their profile photo looks very AI generated. They claim to be a eight, but they talk as if they're 14 years old. So, believe what you want at
[12:16] the end of the day. Don't send hate to any parties involved, but this person is thought it was funny, the quote retweet that is, of the person erasing the person's doing." So, I wanted to share it with you guys. But yeah, if you like
[12:28] like and subscribe. Let's ignore what's going on here, because I have some grandmother's ill, but she's stable now, so, you know, we're just hoping for a in my eye, so I can't wear eye makeup right now, which is why I have no makeup
[12:42] on. Yeah. But yeah, check me out on Etsy or on coffee, and I also stream on Saturdays at 6:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time, and Thursdays at 7:30, where I do catch y'all there or in another video. Peace.