Artist STOLE 6 Winning Slots in Pokemon Art Contest

If you know who the artist is, please don't send them harassment! Sending hate and harassment is never cool
ｓｏｃｉａｌｓ
twitch: / about
instagram: / katliente.ttv
twitter: / katlienteee
tiktok: / katliente
vlog youtube: @KatherinePan
discord: discord.gg/katliente
kofi: ko-fi.com/katliente/
etsy: www.etsy.com/shop/KatlienteTw...
outro soundtrack done by @real_ImJustTy on twitter!
tags, ignore these!
twitch streamer, twitch streaming, growing on twitch, 0 viewers, twitch affiliate, streamer, twitch rivals, twitch drama, streaming setup

[@RenSugiura]

I hate how non artists are judges of this art contests, cause there's no way a artist wouldn't see it

[@ashefauxe3369]

The fact that ANY art contest would have a panel of judges without atleast ONE artist on the panel.... is genuinely depressing to me.

[@DLAXTOX]

Kids mostly buys the Pokémon cards

[@corrinflakes9659]

@@DLAXTOX and kids deserve better.

[@ARDIZsq]

That's simply not true. On their official rules page, it lists the judges for the contest. In addition to the President of TPCi and a few Directors of the TCG, there are members of the Illustration team, Art Design Team, Art Director, Senior Art Director, four names Illustrators, and a special judge, the National Craft Museum Director. To say that "non artists" are judging this contest is simply untrue, and a quick scroll through the official rules page disproves that claim.

[@ARDIZsq]

@@ashefauxe3369 Several members of the judging team are artists. Check the official rules for the contest.

[@ignightroad]

Best part is AI wasn't allowed: but non-artists judged it and couldn't tell the difference :) actual talented artists losing out to super garbage is just disgusting. I hope they reconsider and recount.

[@ShortStop_Productions1992]

Mmhm

[@spidernoir9845]

You realize that just means ai is as good or better than a lot of "artists" 😆

[@LunarRadience...]

​@spidernoir9845 no it itsnt better than a lot of artists because it still has imperfections and let's not forget ai art generators steal from other artists art😐

[@itswindyhere]

​@spidernoir9845 The whole point of competition was to create a chance for artists to have their art placed on a card. if they wanted to have just a cool artwork, they would hire an artist.

[@bupcorn4136]

@@spidernoir9845 Ummmmm probably because the system was purposefully fed the work of specific, legendary artists to mash together ? You shlt on real artists AS IF AI imagery-cobbling would even EXIST without these people who were ROBBED. Stuld sIut.

[@arkturus2567]

The fact you keep having to say you arent making fun of actual artists 😭 AI artists arent artists we should get to make fun of them unapologetically

[@katliente]

its cause of yesterdays video 😅

[@JostDraws]

TRUEEE, ai image users really should be put to shame so they stop doing these scummy practices

[@Roseberry606]

At this point making fun and roasting AI artists is an art form itself Like oh hey watch me put this AI bro to shame with professor grammar, eerily dramatic poetry and peak comedy

[@ochiin]

Yep, but ai steal arts from someone else/other artist, so technically we making fun of the original artist. How ai steal? Well Idk how to explain, but i once don't know anything about ai and i wanted to try, so i put my drawing to the ai And.... boom! Ai steals my art!

[@derpkipper]

To be fair plenty of people will just haphazardly throw out the "your art looks AI" accusation because they don't fully understand what makes it look like AI. Even then, that can be really damning for new artists. I think it's good she made sure she wasn't giving people the wrong impression. It's important to remind people to keep nuance in mind. Plus this is clearly meant to be a teaching moment, so...yeah. gotta be an effective teacher.

[@Riki_00]

Dont even call it art, its an image

[@JArt872]

Correction: Artificial Rendered Image

[@DLAXTOX]

It does look great

[@LittleParody]

@@DLAXTOX Yeah, AI generated images look "great"...until you actually look closely and realize "Hold up, some things don't look right, here"

[@DLAXTOX]

@@LittleParody that's expect if we are looking for a particular art method or style. it gets the idea across perfectly and that is, what matters🤷🏿‍♂🤷🏿‍♂

[@maxnami]

@@JArt872 AI images are Generated, not rendered. there is a huge difference between Generation and Rendering. Generated images comes from Noise and algorithms. Rendered (or image syntesis) images comes from 2d or 3D modelated simulators that turn them into photo realistic or non realistic images.

[@moonexed]

This is so disappointing. AI generated imagery shouldn't even be allowed to be referred to as "art", because it isn't. Don't let people who generate AI images refer to themselves as artists. This person is clearly cheating by means of using name variations, but also, taking good slots from more deserving ACTUAL artists.

[@dendroslime2473]

@@DLAXTOX might as well call yourself a chef when you put a frozen dinner in the microwave. Yes it's still "food" but you are no "chef" for microwaving a frozen dinner.

[@i2eptilian]

I've always been very specific in referring to AI Generated images as images or imagery, rather than as art. "AI art" is just a misleading term, It implies artistry, it assumes effort that wasn't there.

[@bnuuuyy]

​@@DLAXTOX that would've been a good comparison if you were actually cooking something. You aren't. You're making the equivalent of instant ramen or microwave hamburger. You're simply typing in words/numbers to have the machine do it for you. You would be more akin to a client than anything.

[@i2eptilian]

@@DLAXTOX The word you're looking for is "chef," and no, telling a robot to make dinner for you doesn't make you one.

[@moonexed]

​@@DLAXTOX It's not. There is no skill, effort, or talent involved in typing words into a box, nor is there anything "artistic" about a computer algorithm scumming google and other image sources, taking multiple images that it doesn't even have permission to use, and slapping pieces of them together into a soulless amalgamation of pixels to make something vaguely resembling "art". AI generated imagery is not art, and people who type words into a generator are not artists. Your comparison to cooking also falls horrendously short, as has already been pointed out.

[@uwumarii]

Digital art contests should have a requirement to send in their PSD files for proof that contestants actually drew it themselves. There’s no way that AI images can win with that. Problem solved

[@lochelcyanide639]

The thing is pokemon tcg art contest allows non digital art forms to be submitted in which psds can be impossible

[@maxixe3143]

​@@lochelcyanide639 Take progress photos then. If you are doing a painting, take a photo at the halfway mark. If you are doing a clay figure, take a photo of the base shape before you start adding details. It can be doable.

[@banbanthebandit4002]

That’s the thing though, ai art can very realistically replicate progress photos now which means they’d just sneak by again anyway.

[@saix_unicorn]

conventions ask for progress pictures AND speedpaint, with also your layers to be sure it's not ai

[@TheDoomBlueShell]

​@@lochelcyanide639 is easier to prove something isn't AI when is traditional, because you can take photos of weird angles

[@toegap202]

“I want AI to do my laundry and dishes, so that I can do my art projects, not the other way around.”

[@user-yb6xh7ge9g]

Damn thats cold

[@silly_dev1025]

So real

[@chris72702]

"I want AI to do my laundry and dishes so that I can do art and writing, not for AI to do my art and writing so that I can do my laundry and dishes," ~Joanna Maciejewska

[@omicronshiri44]

Imagine if that AI artist won, and then the judges say "We wanna see how you draw your art Live, for all the Pokemon lovers out there". That AI artist is going straight downhill from there.

[@Edahs_exists]

FUK YEAH POKEMON TAKE THIS IDEA AS A DIEHARD POKEMON FAN ID PAY TO SEE THAT

[@firewolf950tfwgaming7]

Omg that actually is a really cool idea. Obviously in the context of here it’s “oh, we’re exposing “ai artists””, but it would also be a way to engage with the community more directly with a joint livestream. Maybe even go all the way and let them show up on stage with official pokemon artists and have like a joint art piece as a memorabilia of the event.

[@S4NSE]

I can see the AI user type into their programm 😂 "cute pikachu sitting on a tree" and that's it hahaha

[@dozydoe5245]

dont call them artists, call them AI Bros or AI Douchebags

[@cbbblue8348]

"nice I love the Eevee drawing you just did, now draw a hisuian zorua"

[@bearswagger150]

Can we STOP calling AI images "art". ART by definition is the following: the expression or application of HUMAN creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. Ai can NOT create art, it just imitates it. AI "artists" are not artist. They arent even innovative. They are imitators looking for an easy way out of hard work and dedication...

[@Silver77cyn]

Exactly, they are Ai images not art.

[@brony_in_the_sticks]

No we can't just because you're an abuser who believes the person using the tool is not a human who is creating art does not mean you are correct. No I will not stop calling art created by severely physically disabled people using AI not art so long as you can pretend that you calling you taking advantage of other people's programming work art Seriously you have the ability to simulate airbrushes thin brushes thick brushes layering and hair brushes Brushes that simulate the look of hair realistic and otherwise You're not doing that yourself you get to click on a brush that can do that so you're not working you're just calling someone else's labor that you are stealing work. At least the severely disabled people using AI have an excuse to be using that technique and those tools to make their life better you don't have an excuse to be using the airbrush and the other features. The shader brush or the thick brush or the thin brush you don't have an excuse to be doing that use real pen and paper or you're not making real art

[@brony_in_the_sticks]

And this is what I hate so much about this argument. You all have no problem throwing severely physically disabled people like myself under the bus. What you do isn't hard work or dedication, unless you're using the same techniques that painters from the 1500s would have used If you are using any tech at all that does those strokes and those layers and those shadings for you you're not working on anything Meanwhile people whose hands literally lock up when they try to do stuff have to tolerate you literally removing our humanity and saying that we're not making art Oh but I'm willing to bet that if you were bedridden and physically couldn't move from the neck down and society created a tool that could scan your brain you would believe you should be allowed to call the images that the machine is printing in your head art because you're creating your emotions via your mind. Oh but we shouldn't be allowed to do that using a tool bugger off

[@derpkipper]

Dont play semantics you get what they mean

[@bearswagger150]

@@derpkipper dont care.

[@X1Daring2]

Ai art should be banned for art contests

[@Ekraelum]

AI "art" should be banned everywhere

[@mysticblue108]

Ai should be banned globally and be a violation of a Geneva convention

[@June_doesarts]

@@Ekraelum yes! It’s considering bc people have died bc of Ai nude images

[@Iemonlemon]

@@June_doesarts died? tf?

[@Aceburn5]

I heard about people unaliving themselves because of this

[@xxTC-96xx]

I’m hoping enough people bring attention to that and get them disqualified

[@derpkipper]

Same

[@Stratelier]

Haven't there been retroactive disqualifications / revocations before?

[@fiskey7514]

even if it wasn’t AI simply going over the entry limit should get them disqualified at this point, thats whats really getting me even non-artist judges can look at these names an go “wait…🤨”

[@mandolyngambino9327]

True but I'm curious how many Other entries are AI. I'm thinking the only reason Vigo here was caught, was because Real artist's spotted the AI pieces and realized a Deja Vu moment multiple times with the name similarities. So there's probably other scammers on there that submitted the 3 pieces, but are actually AI pieces. Also, are Actual artist's of the PTC company analyzing over these submissions or is it Also AI "checking" the artwork/AI pieces? Like how KZbin has AI "checking" reported videos and comments and nothing Actually gets done about a problem. 😑

[@ARDIZsq]

As someone who almost entered this contest and spent a month just coming up with concepts alone, it absolutely pisses me off that this person not only very clearly broke the 3 submissions rule, but used AI slop to do it, and then managed to take top spots from legitimately talented people who are infinitely more deserving. I don't think hating on artists is ever ok, however, this person clearly isn't an artist. Call them a scammer, a grifter, whatever you want, but they are NOT an artist. It might be a bit harsh to say, but I genuinely think one of the only ways to stop this bullshit from pushing down real talented people is to relentlessly call them out for it. Never let them live this down, make them the example. EDIT: I'd like to quote a passage from the official rules page for this contest: "Any attempt, successful or otherwise, by any Entrant to obtain more than the permitted number of Submissions by using multiple and/or different identities, forms, registrations, addresses or any other method will void all of that Entrant’s Submissions and that Entrant may be disqualified at Sponsors’ reasonable discretion." This person is in clear violation, and as such ALL of their submissions should accordingly be disqualified. I'd also like to point out that this contest isn't JUST to have your art made into a real card. There are actual cash prizes for the winners, as laid out on their official rules page. Grand Prize gets $5,000, Best Standard and Best ex Illustrations get $3,000, 6 First Place Runners Up get $1,000, and 15 Judge's Award Winners get $500. So not only are they violating the rules, but they are potentially taking away real cash prizes from people actually deserving of them. Don't think this is JUST some silly card contest.

[@katliente]

yeah ugh it's so frustrating! i showed some artists pieces and they clearly looked so thought out and detailed and must've taken so long...and then there's this guy ;-;

[@_tawagoto_]

I feel like people also don't understand that those people actually steal from others because an AI only functions with input (input from other drawings of other artists). So this person wasn't actually just violating the rules and taking away price money from actual artists, they actually scammed with stolen art which, in my opinion, is just unfair and disgusting. Use it for personal stuff, I don't care about that but don't make it commercial or call yourself an "artist" with stolen art.

[@mrs.quills7061]

I spent months as well working on stuff. I didn’t have time to finish and gave up on it, glad I didn’t waste my time and I certainly won’t enter any in the future.

[@ARDIZsq]

@@mrs.quills7061 I'd love to enter in the future, but only if TPCi acknowledges this issue and actively works to make sure it doesn't happen in the future. Which let's be real, they probably won't.

[@mech0p]

i mean if ai art is beating legit artists whenthere is so much to criticize that says alot. A good artist should have no issue creating something better than ai. Now while i agree they should be banned and ai art has no place in competitions and should be watermarked its crazy that its on top lol. While i thought the AI art did look awesome there is so much better art that didnt make it that i would vote for. Imo these contests should be voted on byy the people instead of judges and stuff like this would be spotted.

[@lotusdragonjbh]

Just another example of how the ONLY ai "artist" one can be -Is a SCAM ARTIST. Fake imagery for art thieves and wannabes. A fraudsters dream.

[@spidernoir9845]

Lmao you are just bothered that people are chosing ai art over something someone like you would make, most people wouldn't know or care that that's ai

[@swagalicious2449]

​@@spidernoir9845 skilless individual spotted

[@spidernoir9845]

@@swagalicious2449 yeah, you :p considering you are probably not good enough to be an artist, not good enough to use an ai and not even good at saying something witty 😂

[@June_doesarts]

@@spidernoir9845 okay? Man why are you even here. You don’t even draw like this is so pathetic

[@pewpewsalote8802]

@@spidernoir9845 literally anyone ever can use an AI shut the fuck up

[@eileencrys]

Not only did this person generated their entries through AI, but they circled around the "max 3 entries per person" rule by submitting with DIFFERENT NAMES that are still awfully similar so, like, I'm speechless about their level of disrespect for the whole contest and other contestants. Wtf

[@eileencrys]

Ah ALSO it's likely that "Weihang Ye"'s submissions with the sleeping pikachus are AI so it's not 6 slots being stolen but EIGHT

[@synthellaart1587]

They probably made even more accounts and submitted even more pictures under different names.

[@Vipadra]

Honestly a stupid easy way to avoid this kind of stuff in contests is to just- ask for screenshots of the layers of the art program when submitting or even the file itself? Im suprised that with the recent surge in AI stuff that isnt considered as a method to make sure people like this don't slip into spaces for ACTUAL artists (and by this, i mean people who create the work themselves. Doesnt matter how skilled you are, if youre making the work yourselves than I have a hell of a lot more respect for you than people who just plug stuff into AI to try and get undeserved rewards. o7 Good luck on your art journeys ya'll)

[@linboh2664]

That’s why some companies in Japan will ask artists for analog artworks that way they can be certain that the artist can actually draw. There are even some companies that require you to draw on spot. Same goes for art university. You are literally required to draw its part of the exam.

[@Vipadra]

@@linboh2664 Oh yeah, I know. Going to an art university right now actually! It's pretty infuriating to see some of the teachers there promoting this AI stuff

[@linboh2664]

@@Vipadra I’m in an art school as well not university but it’s a lot more tech focused with us learning 3d CG, video editing, photoshop, photography, programming, and etc. Yes teachers do encourage us to use AI but more as a tool to help us do things more efficiently helping us cut time down on unnecessary but time consuming tasks. But beyond that they don’t recommend using AI. Also AI art is pretty easy to spot for a professional artist even non artists can point out certain disfigurement like the infamous AI hands for example. I also wanted to use some artworks as reference and looked up on SNS only to find an AI illustration that literally did not make any sense anatomy wise. I tried tracing the artwork to try and figure out the logic behind it only to realize that there was none.

[@gaerekxenos]

They don't request upon submission. What they do is request when they are doing the final rounds of judging. The reason is because the working file shows a lot with process, and basically shows a lot of the "secrets" to how they work (if there are any), plus other things such as assets that can be ripped off and used elsewhere. You don't typically offer these things up without some type of an exchange/benefit. The fewer people contests do this to, the better. WiP layer screenshots are a bit more common for preliminary checks if someone is trying to lay accusations of stealing someone else's work, but that's when you get things like social media and forums for people to start flinging mud around

[@GiuseppeGaetanoSabatelli]

​@@linboh2664AI illustrations aren't discouraging for people in art school because it's used in said art school. They're discouraging for people in art school because it's basically like going to school to be a telephone operator or attendant at a full service gas station.

[@JackiesGamingArt]

OH MY HECK. thank you so much @Katliente for showing my Eevee piece!! as well as bringing attention to the issue and trying to show people what to look for with AI art!

[@3mutuv13j4]

Your eevee was so edible ngl

[@JackiesGamingArt]

Lol thanks!

[@haruka.rabuii]

I LOVED IT!!! It was so cute!!

[@Fragile_Memories]

Eevee was adorable!!

[@Marlena499]

It's beautiful! I really like how well the fuzz is drawn especially on the pillow

[@polkalamypekopeko2969]

Tbh, this competition organizer and judges are the problem here. Not apparently understanding any art is one thing, the fact they didn't vet the name, the scrutiny on the art quality and inconsistency, that is a far bigger crime

[@Gamma0_0]

No, it's worse than that. These are two symptoms of the same crime: a crime against humanity.

[@julia15206]

looking at ai images made me think now of how my math teacher would say "i want to see how you got to the answer not just the answer in itself". when i see art i dont just see the finished picture but i also try and see the steps of how it was made, ig i cant help but to do that as an artist myself xD. and so i find myself thinking when i see an odd looking picture "if i were to draw something similar would i draw it like that?". and when i see tracers who make fake sketches, im like 'but where are the guidelines?'.

[@pogpogpurinn]

exactly! I like art because theres someone behind it. It’s enjoyable to look at the art because you can actually dissect the artists choices and style, and understand why they would draw certain things a certain way. Its enjoyable because you can see and know the amount of work that goes into it. And often times they will share their work in progresses etc which i love The years of practice and observation it takes to even do a simple sketch is what makes it art Ai art is so soulless

[@Stratelier]

I also like to say that current AI algorithms don't strictly know what anything "is" so much as what it "looks like", because for the most part they are _explicitly_ getting trained on finished results.

[@zephyrias]

Exactly

[@vertraeumtemoewe]

Yep

[@udippatel6147]

just a question in this scenario : would you rather do complex math by writing out lines one by one to 'show your work', or by using a calculator that will give you a roughly correct answer in 5 seconds? I would say both, why deny the calculator? Even if you're trying to get the 'perfect answer' and can't trust the calculator, it can still be useful in the process. There seems to be a lot of misplaced hate towards the 'ai' and its users imo.

[@BurningFlamesofDivineDragon]

Can't someone report this to the judges?

[@erdnuzz8368]

Would be the best way, true! Because getting offended by this and only yell on YT about it, will not change anything

[@kyletucker3811]

I'm a digimon TCG player, don't really do Pokémon. But that first Eevee on the cushion should have made it. That is a TCG illustration if I've ever seen one. Just the thought of a Terriermon, Lopmon, maybe even a Gatomon, drawn like that for an alt art? It would be a winners prize at locals. So many of these were just amazing for card arts and it's genuinely upsetting they didn't make it. I can just imagine how awesome that first Absol would look as a foil. And the Feraligator! Alligators carry their babies in their mouths and on their heads, so it's actually putting the pokemon in a real life setting.

[@Kawaiitwo]

Agreed! I’m not super into the DCG (my only card is a Guilmon I got at a shop with my brother because it’s my favorite Digimon), but seeing adorable card art online like Meicoomon and Morphomon makes me appreciate cozier artwork. I’ve always loved the cuter looking cards, and I remember back around Gen 6, there would be cards with little charms on the side with the description at the bottom telling a little story from the Pokémon’s perspective. That Eevee should’ve gotten in! It could’ve fit with those so well (if they still do those)!

[@Kottkumgen]

I play the DCG on and off and focus on the PTCG, but the absolute quality of the card art in the DCG is insane! Pokémon sure has stepped up their game these past few years but the people at digimon are not playing. Stunning card after stunning card

[@chaoticnekomancer]

This dude also just blatantly stole some fanart of the Vaporeon in the drowning Eevee pic, people have found the original in the comments of that original twitter threat. And speaking of that AI image, why is that eevee shooting a light beam from it's paws?? lmao

[@spiritsofwolves]

There's another vaporeon that looks to be in the same style in another eevee picture that is under a different name as well

[@waterking74]

6:38 love how the A.I. is having trouble with luvdisc cause it’s confusing it for a heart doodles

[@NoirArt.]

the true ai poison

[@S4NSE]

yea it's actually pretty funny

[@defaulted9485]

Also a thing most people forget. Artist made art from a blank canvas. AI generator made art from FINISHED image. I'm pretty sure every artist I know can reverse engineer an image. Artists are just held on a wildly higher standard compared to their detractors.

[@Stratelier]

I don't believe it's accurate to claim that AI generators necessarily generate results "from" their training datasets (as in, from any _specific_ example), but due to the sheer scale of computations involved (on both the pre-training AND generative ends alike) it's almost impossible to semantically "decode" how the computational network actually generates anything specific.

[@neoqwerty]

@@Stratelier They're essentially doing advanced photobashing using points that are recognized as "eye", "nose", mouth", "hair", etc, with various tags. Imagine if I fed you a crapton of Minecraft custom item model code, and you don't get to see it in engine, I just tell you "this worked" or "this didn't work", and you basically learn from trial and error that this bit of code makes XYZ wider, that one makes it taller, this other one is a rotation point. You'll never actually know what the heck you spit out, just if someone is happy with the numbers you gave them, or which numbers they didn't want, with a huge reference of OTHER number sets that get called something like "Baglorble" and "Rirituly"-- you don't understand the language OR what your numbers look like to someone else, you just understand that when someone asks for a baglorble with a rirituly-shaped shothrat, you need to put this set of numbers on that set of numbers (after removing a few numbers that are associated with "shothrat"). That's how machine learning does image recognition and spits out more images.

[@parafuegosarchive]

​@@Stratelier that's generally, in this case they traced out a real vaporeon fanart to put in the background.

[@sweethistortea]

I would put every single piece of artwork through an Ai art check. A girl in my group submitted AI art for our project because she was too lazy to do the work herself.

[@inkdroplucid]

Those detectors are not completely accurate; in fact they're often inaccurate, and lots of real, legitimate artists have been dogpiled now because people just run a thing through Hive and go "Oh, okay, that's true then."

[@getsmoked5263]

Nah cuz I put my art through one and it said it was ai💀 those things inaccurate

[@leejames929]

Ya i have seen art i know was not ai get caught by those things and art that was ai not get caught

[@kaynebula2093]

Absolutely not, ai companies also own those.

[@ignightroad]

While I agree, I've seen actual artists put their art through AI detectors and it comes out as a positive--because people used their art to train models :') sadly it won't do much

[@lordseph]

It's insane. Would people have caught on if he hadn't used the same (or similar) name for the submissions? The fact that we need artists to tell us what's wrong and show us the telltale signs reveals how easily people can be deceived by AI art. I mean, in all honesty, those pieces look great. I am no artist, nor do I know anything about art, but my first impression was "Pretty."

[@kyogutz]

They probably still would have caught on anyway, I for one got a weird vibe from the artstyle, and that's when I typically do AI checks.

[@kyletucker3811]

I think most people can tell from a glance if something is suspicious. I'm at best an amateur artist (wouldn't even call myself that). But there is just an uncanny look to AI art.

[@KeiMidori_]

these would definitely have been caught, they just look too ai, but unfortunately, even now i’m wondering if other ai arts under a different name made it in 🥲 the ones ive looked at look amazing and very human at least!

[@defaulted9485]

For a layman, there are lot of ways to prove an AI. - Check if the fingers digits are correct - Check if there are obviously disjointed lineart somewhere despite the level of polish of the image - Check if some parts melds or melts into each other like hair or clothes. - Check for pattern seizures, where repeated patterns forced to places it shouldn't belong - Check for pixelated artifacts, artists tends to use the same tool and method across an image so it shouldn't have weird QR codes or mosaic censors over a gradient - Check if the formatting is weird. I spotted a japanese artist where they did well on the image photobashing but screwed making a rectangular magazine format where it blends and diffuses as AI does it - Check for patterns and it's center of mass/vocal point. I seen AI did well on mimicking floral patterns but failed on structuring it like a flower should, having a flower core and petal convergence. - Check for composition. An artist took creative liberties but not to an extent making it literally practically impossible to mimic. One example from the famous Willy Wonka scam House of Illuminati, the banquets in their reference are physically impossible to navigate or to enjoy or to physiologically imagine to attend. - Check for background character anatomy. Artist do skip these because it's not an object of focus, but not to a degree it's monstrously anatomically incorrect. - Check for periphery objects. Outside object of focus, AI tried to mimic how Artists reduces or mutes the side objects, but it comes with the expense of diffusing the vocal point and destroyed gradation. - The easiest of all is their background check. If they appear out of nowhere and have no credit or signs of throwaway account, it's AI. If they do have credits or referrals or backlog of links to their portfolio including their previously bad drawings, it's and Artist. Artists watches each others back. Words spread. It's something AI bros never understand or willing to accept with their "DiSrUpT ThE MaRkEt" agenda. I seen it myself during my IT university years. It's revolting.

[@Ekaroth]

@@defaulted9485 make this person check every art contest please

[@Pocket_of_Explosives]

I only accept ai art the same way I accept game modding: personal use only that doesn't affect ANYONE. I draw the line at using it to compete with actual artists through commissions or contests

[@williamdrum9899]

It's like using steroids in sports or a motorcycle in the tour de france

[@luvbug2079]

yep. ai is fun to screw around with. sometimes it’s funny. but when you use it to scam and deceive people, you’re straight up just a loser.

[@eileencrys]

Problem is that using ai image generators even for personal use still harms artists and enables art and image theft and copyright infringement. You're still telling the developers you want to use their image generation service and therefore you're okay with them wasting water, stealing images and ignoring copyright laws "because ai fun hehe" (it's literally their argument in court, while people are losing their jobs and scammers are thriving)

[@luvbug2079]

@@eileencrys shit you’re right. honestly i was kinda only thinking about the realistic looking ai stuff

[@RedHatGuyYT]

​@@eileencrysokay but idc about this shitshow enough to stop generating images of mario in the mafia, sorry

[@keo549]

The biggest issue with those contests is how it's all about the flashiest visuals rather than the general feel of the art. That circle absol that didn't make it looks *insane* and reminds me a lot of some of my favorite cards to collect (there's a super fuzzy and stylized absol and I love it so much) so many of the "losing" entries have so much going for it, but the AI messes have the most flair at a glance I'm so happy you uploaded this and talked about other entries as well!

[@knoginator]

this person probably snuck in even more entries before they picked the 300 entries, they just picked 6 out of who knows how many. it not only sucks that they were picked and other artists weren't, but any tcg art contests going forward, there are going to be artists who will be skeptical on how much time/consideration/discernment each entry gets or if the judges even care. I understand that they get flooded with entries, but they also had months to go through them

[@RobertStoll]

I'm leery of AI checkers because they aren't accurate a concerning amount of the time. We really need a way that isn't machine learning itself to test for machine learning.

[@lit_kzh]

i agree, but i think the content of this video (and her other videos) are very accurate. as a professional artist, she has a lot of experience that is helpful in spotting ai, *AND* she emphasizes that only with multiple examples of ai-esque mistakes or tells are you able to say with certainty that an image is ai generated. duchess celestia has a great video (how to spot ai art) about this that i think you might be interested in

[@Yokolite94]

When submitting work ppl need to start including wips, ai can’t replicate the stages in a way that makes sense

[@RobertStoll]

@@lit_kzh Ya I think at best these are edge cases of either assisted works or works from popularly sampled artists. I myself am okay at identifying faked images but I also don't put much stock into it unless there's meta evidence (multiple works, past history, no history, etc.) And worst comes to worst I as a casual observer can just block anything that even remotely seems like it was fake and move on.

[@RobertStoll]

@@Yokolite94 Nah they can fake those too. You can directly generate (either officially in Adobe or unofficially in other products) and save as a workfile or just keep the generation to the invisible planning stages. That's honestly the worst part of this all. Not only is it antithetical to the creative process, but you can camo it in so many ways that this is going to be a new entry in the tech sector Whack-a-mole-a-thon.

[@lit_kzh]

@@RobertStoll ai art generation is so disappointing. on one hand, i'm excited to see it grow and become more accurate, more useful to artists, more fun, etc. on the other hand, i detest its affect on literally everything it touched after the first dall-e demos, and i hate that its profitable and is both devaluing artists and taking away their opportunities. overall i think its a huge net negative to human creativity and it seems to only get worse, i can only hope for a better future

[@fourleafisland]

thank you so much for featuring my card artworks!! i did the eevee with the croissant/flygon with the clover/magician absol!! one of my followers let me know i was in your video, this was such a lovely treat to see. you are very well spoken and kind ^_^

[@kalc8707]

That Vaporeon in the "Eevee underwater" pic is so out of place with the rest of the picture. It's in a completely different style.

[@zoruasnivy]

There's also a very good chance it's traced, the artist whose art was traced posted their Vaporeon art and the AI one is near identical in pose and linework (but worse looking)

[@iswearimcoolguys]

⁠@@zoruasnivy I saw that post yeah! It was near identical to their work, really disheartening to see because their Vaporeon art is really cute :(

[@viiranen]

i dont know how plausible this would be, ive never been in art competitions. but if/when someone makes it to the semi finals/finals; i think we should start asking the artists to hand over their project files for competition entries. it's literally the only way i can think of how to check if the art is AI generated. like i doubt AI scammers would bother making like photoshop or clip studio files for any reason

[@Stratelier]

There are definitely cases where it's not plausible. For certain physical competitions you can make a physical print of the digital artwork, much like how with online competitions you _necessarily_ must submit a digital copy (scan/photo) of an otherwise physical artwork.

[@saskia8018]

Fakers will fake that as well, I've seen everything. (Scams have been an issue before AI, too.) We should just judge the art based on genuine artistic criteria and have good artists in the jury. Then actual quality will win.

[@tempuradraws]

I hate this because I participated in the event and didn’t even make it but to see the AI in the top 300 just broke a part of my spirit

[@Junpei_Is_Tired]

Don’t. Think of it as a horrible human being. You are a creative human being and you are better than them.

[@twilightmoon96]

I wager that Rob Liefeld is a good example for great rendering and horrific anatomy made by a human artist. Funny part is that he illustrated for Marvel, so he achieved what AI artists can't: actual financial success and artistic recognition.

[@humblemarty]

The AI Art Companies need to do their own watermark to show off the handiwork of the AI Art AND make the watermark as hard to edit out as possible. A photo won an AI Art contest before it got disqualified for being too real. So, ideas are possible.

[@Vini-sy6rs]

The problem is, there isn't just one program that makes AI images, there are many, and they would hardly do that, and it's very unlikely that any big AI company will do that either, they end up losing customers

[@greenteai6029]

We should really start calling ai “art” ai images it doesn’t do justice to actual artists

[@elinamauno8833]

What astounds me is that they most likely had 4 accounts sending things, so 12 entries… And still none of it was caught. Am also disappointed there hasn’t been a proper statement on this…

[@sylvienyas]

Can we stop calling those people "artists"? thanks :3

[@sc0tty_dog.]

I mean the ai kinda ate 😭not the cheater

[@Cuyite]

​@@sc0tty_dog.The way it didnt

[@princeapoopoo5787]

​@@sc0tty_dog.The ai ate what? Shit?

[@sc0tty_dog.]

@@Cuyite can y’all relax 💀 it’s not perfect drawings but I didn’t realise I was in the presence of an art master cause If you think some of the flaws it made was bad try looking at regular people’s art like 💀

[@sc0tty_dog.]

@@princeapoopoo5787 can y’all relax 💀 it’s not perfect drawings but I didn’t realise I was in the presence of an art master cause If you think some of the flaws it made was bad try looking at regular people’s art like 💀

[@zoruasnivy]

The amount of people in the comments trying to defend this AI sham is concerning, the evidence is pretty damning to anyone trained in art

[@xxAryAryxx]

Honestly I'm appaled these ""artworks"" were approved, because even pretending they're real art, they still don't fit the requirement for the portrayed Pokemon to be completely compliant with the canon design. As you pointed out, Eevee doesn't have the right amoung of spikes on the inside of one ear in the cherry blossoms pic, and the spike on the bottom part of its ears in the mountains picture also are a big mistake that makes it look more like a Jolteon. I'm shook they'd approve artworks that aren't fit for one of the rules they themselves established for entries.

[@KRIMSONNE]

14:22 "Pikachu with one nut." IM HOLLERINGG😭😭

[@miuki2721]

Barbie doll anatomy

[@MothyBea]

they are not artists just call them frauds

[@ashefauxe3369]

Not me noticing that 'Khachadoorian' is the same name as a character from 'most popular girls in school' LMAO Ashley , what are you doing submitting AI pokemon art to a contest?? You're supposed to be watching the door!!

[@MsTreevious]

I was hoping to find this in the comments😂

[@Indie_Calls]

Ashley Khachadoorian: I was at Pearl Harbor Trisha: Your AI images gave everyone a Pearl Harbor!

[@iceebear-fi3mj]

Yo I immediately saw that

[@F1areon]

She's a pencil! She's a Swizzle Stick! You can use her as a pool noodle! And now I'm holding up her arms!! ARMS!!!

[@SleepyRulu]

I hate ai bros

[@p4rm3s34n]

Fire them into the sun.

[@riesonomura]

honestly? this fiasco may be my push to finally learn drawing, primarily cuz I've wanted to do it for a while, but now more than ever with an added layer of spite for AI art bros

[@L0rdOfThePies]

Art is so fun :-) if you do give it a go i hope you enjoy it

[@stargateMimhi]

The barely different, vaguely Russian sounding pen names are also a pretty big giveaway. I bet those were AI generated too. Probably ran a bot to generate all of it and enter automatically.

[@eunaosei4187]

19:26 a real artist most likely would make a big c shape, then cut with the eraser, why would you take the effort to make then separatedly? like it makes no sense

[@katliente]

exactly!! its just a ton of extra work

[@Alkazair]

Artists are deliberate. Someone who's spent any time making backgrounds, excessively render, master line work and compose a shot in fish eye - every single stroke, the artist would be aware of - especially if they're in a HUGE contest with a massive sample size. Every stroke of a brush is made and the artist has to make effort to put pen on paper. Someone who's making a 'deeper meaning' art piece would have drawn more attention to the person that's up in the rafters, if they were the trainer.. they'd make it clear.

[@BurningFlamesofDivineDragon]

I said it once and I'll repeat it. Can't someone report this to the judges?

[@Cheremia]

For the one with the Auroras, some of them literally come out of the ground, too On the left, theres light coming from the ground, lmao

[@ItsAllPainNoGain]

Supreme court ruled that you cannot copyright ai art because there isn't enough human input behind it to be man-made

[@akunbora]

I assumed the person was skilled enough to edit some parts to fix the obvious errors, especially for an intermediate eye, but no matter how much they try, the overall image and those similar names just sus

[@transjeffdr]

AI ""artists"" taking away opportunities from the same people who drew to power the algorithms that make their images in the first place is so upsetting and disappointing. Unfortunately many non-artists aren't as critical of shit like this bc they don't know what to look for or what distinguishes computer slop from digital artwork 💔

[@transjeffdr]

the luvdisc trying to kts was pretty funny tho

[@gabbo13]

This problem reminds me of an interview of a CEO of a educational platform told that the people saying that AI is gonna take your job, are those who didn't care about learning but found the holy grail or something. The same issue happens with the beginners and junior programmers and developers who are constantly scared that AI will change the way on how it works.

[@rwild9356]

Another sad element of this is all the artists who spent hundreds and thousands of hours learning how to draw, that these AI submissions are stealing elements from without crediting those artists. The submissions you showed that didn't get in are far more full of life and character than the generic AI images

[@spidernoir9845]

They wouldn't if those artists were good, the only people that are bothered about ai are the ones that are mediocre and try to feel better by saying they put "effort" on their art

[@twist_ending7545]

​@@spidernoir9845 what?

[@spidernoir9845]

@@twist_ending7545 it's very easy to get what I said :p just put some of the effort that you don't use on your bad art and you'll be able :)

[@DeadVoxel]

@@spidernoir9845 and are you trying to feel better by calling them mediocre and bringing people down?

[@Mazwun]

They should make it a requirement to submit a video of your workflow progress along with your art pieces to prove authenticity. I love that procreate has the Timelapse feature

[@dynamicsketch]

Even if the judges couldn't tell if the entries were AI or not, they could at least tell that there were a number of other violations. For one, anyone could submit a limited number of entries, and the same Pokemon could not be used in multiple entries of the card format. You could however have an entry for the regular card and Pokemon ex card format using the same Pokemon. Other Pokemon could not be present with the Pokemon that is the main focus of the artwork.

[@Wurmze]

The one that broke my heart was the artist that fully needle felted the pokemon and made a background set for a flygon card art submission and it was GORGEOUS

[@JRL-8]

AI art on a fucking pokémon card is demented

[@f0kes32]

art is to be witnessed, not to be drawn. no one cares if you lose job

[@theawsomehawk2749]

@@f0kes32 and no one will care if you lose yours either

[@f0kes32]

@@theawsomehawk2749 i know

[@JRL-8]

@@f0kes32 you mad weird lmaooo saying you basically want artists to lose ur job cuz u have no skills

[@Papitasma]

​@@f0kes32 who says no one cares? they are a lot of artists an other people that care a lot and are exposing people who abuses the use of ai and making tools of recognition of ai art and to protect artist drawings from it. Also why being rude with people that are doing nothing wrong?

[@xxAryAryxx]

Art Contests should now require to submit the recording of at least a part of the working process, or the picture at each stage of the workflow to make sure it isn't AI generated. (Yes you can generate unfinished art but it'd be almost impossible to generate an entire workflow without contradictions between stages)

[@valentinechoco6917]

6:10 something I noticed about this piece in particular is how the tail looks like it's not even attached to the body 😭

[@katliente]

wait that's so true omg T_T

[@Kinkin326]

None of the ones that didn't get picked were bad😟 they were all so beautiful! It's sucks they didn't get picked but now I have a few more artists to fellow😊

[@TBG1]

The thing is, human art has a soul. You can see that there's emotion behind it. Ai art is just so,so wrong. It's dead, empty, uncanny valley vibe. Even the mistakes in human art are human. Like, they make sense! The mistakes in ai don't. Ai art makes me feel sad :(

[@DuboDuboLubo]

I wouldnt wanna call it "ai art" its missing the soul that actual artists put into their drawings, in all reality they should be referred to as "Ai imagery"

[@NoirArt.]

"But what if it's a begin-" no. stop defending yourself. this took me literally half a second to identify as ai.

[@blumae1170]

I think art contests nowadays (especially for digital art) should require their wip images or some sort of proof that they actually did it. My art prof always reminds us to send her the final image with the raw files since she wants to know who actually does the art and who is just using ai to create in our class.

[@theseamonstersknit]

Update - The Pokemon Company just released a statement that confirms that some entries violated the contest rules and will be disqualifying them. They have not yet specified who will be removed from the top 300 and the alleged artwork is still on the contest website. But at least the company is moving forward with finding real artists to replace the AI entries.

[@usel3ssliqu1d81]

I think many people tend to forget the biggest problem with AI generated images, and that's that they're often trained with stolen art. People's art is taken by so many platforms against their will, and used to train these generators, which is the biggest problem for artists.

[@RebelliousRobot]

On surface level, they look fine. But looking at the finer details, the details being problematic. It’s entirely obvious someone just let an AI make this, and did nothing with it. That’s my problem with it. Using it as a substitute rather than a tool.

[@f0kes32]

Based take

[@EeveeFlipnoteStudios]

I kept hearing people say "AI art has no soul" and I did not quite understand what they meant by "soul." But this video helped me understand. When art has soul, it's about how each element in the piece has intent behind it, how someone added an element in the piece to communicate additional meaning-- thusly creating a dialogue between the artist and the viewer. The AI art might look pretty on the surface, but, especially in the background elements, items are added in without the intent to convey an idea. Like you pointed out, what is the point in adding the drowning Luvdisc? The random person in the lights? These details add nothing to the piece, or even muddle the effect of the final piece. Contrast that to the backgrounds in all the other human-made art you shared, the sleeping Eevee is by a sun-dappled window with a gently flowing curtain to convey the comfortable environment. The snow in the Absol piece was deliberately drawn in a circular pattern to add motion that communicates the dynamic movements of Absol's swipe. Appreciate this video for providing a definition to the word "soul" in terms of art. It gave me a lot to think about, as an artist myself.

[@marcelathacat2739]

For the record AI “art” isn’t art, it’s image generation, and the people who “make” it aren’t artists, they’re idiots

[@yekimart]

My art wasn't that good for the contest but man... WTF? I hate ppl like that.

[@6lolwutlolwut9]

artists are consistent and this guy is very consistent at being inconsistent

[@autumncats]

I didn't make the top 300, but I sure as heck worked really hard on my art. To know that so much ai art got into the top 300 is just...it makes me sad and disappointed.

[@milktea0021]

I got so triggered whenever i heard "AI artist" lmfao

[@Rpgotoko]

They should just allow entry with video of the work job done so they can check later for proof.

[@Beeeeeewwwww]

Yeah but there have also been a rise in AI art speed painting programs that are looking more accurate to real speed paints(there's still some noticable differences though)

[@williamdrum9899]

Or they could just make all entries be traditional media. But then you screw over digital artists in the process.

[@pikafanone]

Calling them an artist in the title is being very generous considering it’s the program doing all the work.

[@g.p.r.5502]

15:18 That random person is literally the meme Juan xd

[@dudeman1983]

Generative Image AI is, in my opinion, best used as a way to generate ideas. I used the old Wombo Dream thing a long time ago for design inspiration. Because AI doesn't care about underlying structure or continuity and mainly reads how frequently pixels in images from a certain data set are particular colors, you can get some really weird, unique, and out there designs that you can then bring to life with a little human retooling. But the push for AI to be style-adherent, realistic, and on-model means we loose a lot of the strangeness that made AI an actually useful tool, because the people training these things want to replace artists instead of help them. Case in point: this pokemon AI debacle.

[@kiru_exe]

I appreciate you for speaking out about ai usage. Especially in art.

[@an0bserver2000]

spending some time at the end to look at art by actual artists was so refreshing. brings to mind that one quote that goes something like "i didnt believe in human souls until i saw art made without one"

[@100SeaGrapes]

I actually hate ai art

[@rwild9356]

You can also tell it's AI because AI images tend to have a specific style, and these images are all similar enough to each other to be from the same source but have inconsistencies (like proportions or exactly how the eyes and ears are rendered) that they are very unlikely to come from the same human artist. Eevee's head fur is different in each piece, sometimes two different paws will look like they're different styles from each other... and in the fourth eevee piece, vaporeon in the background looks like it's done by a COMPLETELY different audience than eevee in the foreground

[@dulceratoncita7139]

As impressive as AI "art" might look at first, it can't fake proper fundamentals. No matter how much people will try, proper art has structure, even if you're a beginner artist that's still something you will have no matter how you approach your art

[@VincentVeak]

I just wanted to say thanks for making this video. I am not an artist and I stumbled across this topic/controversy and this really explained it thoroughly without being too disparaging and added a real "human" element to the artist's perspective. Excellent work

[@frigginresulrum]

Remember kids, AI images can't be copyrighted in the US, so feel free to print out and sell your own pages of VK's entries!

[@misswaffies2719]

that "artist" isn't the only one either

[@ThRealBuddy]

I think the biggest giveaway that it's ai art is it's so insanely "polished". The one thing that makes me instantly detect something as ai art is when there's this full insanely skillful rendered artwork and then there's little random art mistakes on the hands, eyes, tail, etc. Yes, artists can get lazy and mess up. But someone who can show THAT much skill 4 times in a row isn't going to blob up humans and mess up pikachu's 4 fingered hand.

[@miuki2721]

Moral of the story: if you have no skills, don't use AI. Learn about art.

[@Blueshark8O9]

AI generator is not an artist.

[@GeckoDraws]

A great suggestion is to stop calling it "AI Art" because you're just validating it as being art. Call it "Computer Rendered Artificial Pictures" (CRAP) instead :)

[@RacieB]

Thank you for the shoutout! You may have seen it already since this was posted 4 days ago, but the Vaporeon in the underwater piece was also confirmed to have been poorly traced from another artist, so the Vaporeon and Luvdisc show the actual illustration skill level of "VK" at play here. I really hope TPCi addresses this sooner rather than later and fills all of the offending slots with runner up submissions.

[@kdk8728]

As much as I want it to, I don’t think AI is ever going away, so if they want to compete, they need to compete in separate in separate competitions or categories.

[@AdarableKitten]

I hope he gets disqualified!

[@ZebraLuv]

AI checkers aren't reliable and we cannot reasonably assume that every mistake a natural artist makes automatically makes their art AI. The only viable solution is to have contest winners (and other commercial art) submit watermarked rough drafts. Otherwise all digital art will soon lose acceptance.

[@TitorJaraba]

This could be one idea, but it is pretty easy to fake drafts anymore.

[@imaSeraphRBX]

In competitions such as these, I feel like a requirement for providing some type of documentation alongside the art piece (such as a video, art file, or collection of screenshots, etc) in which the process of the artwork can be seen as it is being worked on, would help cut down on the amount of AI Imagery quite a bit.

[@nathanpark]

I'm glad someone else noticed this. Never did I think I would feel the directly threatening effects of AI until now. I entered the contest and spent a good 16 hours on my piece. While I didn't make the final cut, I'm proud of my efforts. :) Seeing Vigo K's name pop up in six different spots immediately felt fishy to me.

[@wajmgirl]

Just saw an update that those artists were banned and they’ll be selecting new ones.

[@princembat]

no hate toward you or most people this applies to but like, i know its been said before but really my biggest thing is i really dont like how everyone has caught onto calling it "ai art", i refuse to call it that without basically typing it like ai "art" because... it really doesnt deserve to even be put on the same level as art at all. ive spent years of my life drawing and so many hours staring at all the little details of my drawings, trying to get them just right, pouring my heart and soul into things that dont even get a fraction of that love back, and these people just type a few words and dont even fix the sometimes extremely glaring mistakes, post them with lazy captions or even nothing at all and people scrolling by will be like 'wow, thats beautiful!' and like it or retweet/reblog/whatever it and its like... it just hurts. i know the big issues that people have is that the programs running these steal art, and they hurt the environment, and they run a real risk of making people lose their jobs, not to mention every website stuffing it in our face even though its far from ready for any of that, and EVEN MORE reasons... but im just so caught up on the lack of humanity of it all. theres no love or care in it, theres no passion, no one spent their time and effort on it, no one sat there trying not to give themself carpal tunnel because they HAVE to finish it now or itll never get done!... they want the glory (not that being an artist is exactly glorious) without earning it. im not discounting those previous reasons by the way, OF COURSE theyre valid and true! but multiple things can coexist. all these reasons can, and do, exist simultaneously. also, i ABSOLUTELY will say this every time this topic comes up because its so true, but as others have said, why should i care to behold something no one cared enough to actually make?

[@Schmoltis]

This proves the judges aren't qualified and the competition has lost all legitimacy. Why should I have to slave for hours to impress a judge this stupid. I will never enter another art competition.

[@p4rm3s34n]

Don't be a doomer. We still need art. Just because these "art judges" are morons doesn't mean all of them are.