AI-derived art in Richardson Civic Art Society regional show. Price tag? $2,750

[-]

sevenluck77@reddit (OP)

This is currently displayed on the 2nd floor of the Eisemann Center. I found it extremely disappointing to find a work of blatant AI in an art gallery, and I left feedback for the society on their site. The amount this fake artist is asking for is insane!

High quality version of the image: https://images.clubexpress.com/217023/graphics/ANDRES_INOCENCE_AMONG_BLOSSOMS_589302244.jpeg

Leave your own feedback for the society here if you're so inclined.

[-]

TakingSorryUsername@reddit

Christ I thought this was hanging at Cafe Brazil based on price tag.

[-]

lurkerlurking123@reddit

Cafe Brazil is such a shit show glad to see other people shit on it too

[-]

LittleGravitasIndeed@reddit

I kind of like the absurd price tags if it keeps art I like on the wall. I was able to sit next to a still life of purple flowers with thoughtfully depicted natural light for years before someone finally took it home.

[-]

SonderEber@reddit

How do you know it’s AI? I’ll agree, it kinda looks AI, but that’s not enough proof. Many true artists have been accused of using AI when they didn’t. People shouldn’t witch-hunt.

[-]

throwawaypato44@reddit

It’s got that style. - it has a yellowish filter to it, really common with a lot of ai generated images - the tassels don’t make sense. On the waist tie, one side is a tassels and the other has nothing - there is a patch of embroidered flowers over the waist tie on one side - the hairstyle doesn’t make sense - the eyes are weird - there’s a lot of subtle bubbly texture on the part of the sleeve that’s hanging down. Ai texture - the flowers on the dress make no sense artistically (shape, leaves, number of leaves and arrangement)

Honestly I have half a mind to go there and look at it myself.

[-]

HungryDarlingtonia@reddit

Telltale club fingers too, the hand on the viewer’s right looks very odd.

[-]

permalink_save@reddit

I wonder if that yellow filter is to try and mimic the golden hour because of all the photos marked high quality for the lighting.

[-]

pocketdebtor@reddit

100%

r/isthisAI is a subreddit that has helped me identify AI more and more, and these are the kinds of things people point out.

[-]

LasherDeviance@reddit

Look at the hands. And the signature. Dude couldn't even use a negative prompt or a LoRA to reduce that or increase the fine features around the eyes and mouth. Spend a month learning to generate AI art from scratch with Python and comfyUI or Stable Diffusion and not just GPT or claude (no I wont capitalize their names, because the aren't living beings), and you will easily be able to tell whats AI slop and what's not. I'm not which hunting because I create it too, but I dont try to oversell it and cheat people out of money.

[-]

frenchezz@reddit

It's the year of our lord 2026 and this dogshit ai can't put 5 fingers on a hand.

[-]

heyyou11@reddit

OP giving a call to arms then stepping away before giving more info or responding to reasonable questions like this is not ideal. I reverse image searched and got nothing but this post. The gallery’s website has nothing on it that I could find either. I agree with the overall opinion in here, but it’s a little too hot with not enough info.

[-]

yarmulke@reddit

Someone should put a sign next to it saying that it’s okay to replicate, because ai generated images are not subject to copyright

[-]

Mang9@reddit

If a human has edited the AI generated image, it becomes copyrightable. You are not well informed as only pure ai lacks copyright, as does pure animal photography. As soon as a human makes a significant change to the work the human can claim copyright.

[-]

yarmulke@reddit

Imagine defending ai generated images.

[-]

deleted_by_reddit@reddit

[removed]

[-]

Dallas-ModTeam@reddit

Your comment has been removed because it is a violation of Rule #3: Uncivil Behavior

Violations of this rule may result in a ban. Please review the r/Dallas rules on the sidebar before commenting or posting.

Send a message the moderators if you have any questions. Thanks!

[-]

LandscapePenguin@reddit

Imagine not understanding that someone who is explaining the legal system’s view of copyright isn’t taking a side in defense of either artists or AI.

[-]

permalink_save@reddit

You really think a human did anything to improve that image?

[-]

Mang9@reddit

I wasn’t referring to the OP image merely that saying AI generated inmates can be edited in ways that make them subject to copyright. IANAL but this is how courts have ruled. Downvotes don’t change details and facts.

[-]

Cerevox@reddit

You are eating downvotes for this, but are correct. AI may have moral/ethical issues, but downvoting you for a purely legal view is just knee jerk hive minding.

[-]

Mang9@reddit

Yep, and it’s not like I was even taking a position on the OP I was just correcting the entirely incorrect view that once something has AI in it that it cannot be copyrighted. That is ludicrous.

[-]

IAmSixNine@reddit

"significant change" is such a vague description. Add a tiny cloud - oh i significantly changed it. Bottom line. AI generated.

[-]

FondabaruCBR4_6RSAWD@reddit

Who is the “artist”?

[-]

slowro@reddit

I wish people would look into this first before jumping straight to this AI because I think it is.

[-]

LittleGravitasIndeed@reddit

Do you need to clean your glasses, or are you one of those old people who falls for facebook engagement bait?

[-]

slowro@reddit

Call me crazy but I think before you attempt to get a mob of redditors to go after someone, you should probably have some type of proof its AI. Besides... its AI because I think its AI.

And that's what is happening in this post. It was made to appeal to your emotions.

Why include the price if not to only make you angry?

[-]

LittleGravitasIndeed@reddit

Well, the price is ridiculous even if it’s human art. Look at those eyes for a moment, won’t you?

I understand your urge to defend artists, but this isn’t about copying em dashes or common phrases. It has a piss filter. Look at it.

[-]

slowro@reddit

I'm not saying it isn't AI. This could be someone style and RIP to them if it is. Congrats your style has been taken over by AI and of all your work, even if painted live, is now AI slop. But it could also AI-derived art.

I would prefer OP supplying more info besides a few details and how to annoy this place and encouraging everyone to annoy this place.

[-]

YogurtSocks@reddit

It looks 100% AI. All AI art looks the exact same.

[-]

jomm69@reddit

Dumb thought but…Would be a sick/hilarious lane to carve out if an artist could hand produce work indistinguishable from AI.

[-]

myassisgrassss@reddit

I'd be very careful on how you shame legitimate artists. This style of canvas has been around forever, long before ai. Look up a bit on the style first and their previous rt work going back over 15 years. Thanks.

[-]

space2k@reddit

Exactly. Not saying it’s not AI, but a lot of digital (non-AI) art looks like this. It is shitty, though.

What does the placard say?

[-]

sevenluck77@reddit (OP)

Medium says "oils and pastels." It wasn't printed on the canvas (as for as I could tell), it was painted on which does take skill at this level of detail. It's just a shame they were using an AI-derived reference. This person could be Michelangelo and I would still shame using AI like this.

[-]

Jamieknight@reddit

I took a look at the painting when I was at the festival after seeing your post. The texture looked much different from the other oil and pastel paintings.

[-]

sevenluck77@reddit (OP)

Okay thanks for pointing this out! I really didn't get a close look.

[-]

vaelon@reddit

It's A.I.

[-]

thefinalgoat@reddit

Gross.

[-]

whriskeybizness@reddit

Boomer tax

[-]

Thinklater123@reddit

Ew

[-]

tabrizzi@reddit

What's the point of paying for it if it's AI-generated. You could just use AI to generate it yourself.

[-]

TAMUkt14@reddit

Reminds me of the NFT scams. But hey, YOU own the picture! Nobody else can own the picture, right!?

[-]

SnooHabits3911@reddit

That particular copy… no

[-]

Comet7777@reddit

Probably old people who can’t tell the difference And wouldn’t know how to do it

[-]

brentaltm@reddit

Not only that but some old people seem to think AI is the mystical art where if you use the magic combination of prompts, it takes great skill…

[-]

endisnearhere@reddit

bingo

[-]

mrossm@reddit

Ok now do NFTs

[-]

hroaks@reddit

Are they required to tell the buyer it's AI? So many buyers wouldn't be able to tell

[-]

LasherDeviance@reddit

It's not even good! I generate better stuff with that on my FLUX setup than that trash and my T-shirts only cost 9.99

[-]

retropanties@reddit

It’s also just…. Not good. There no substance or composition to it. It’s a little girl with a huge head. Even if this was hand painted this would fall under temu greeting card territory. Yikes.

[-]

Main-Ad7935@reddit

feels a bit harsh tbh. it’s not amazing, but critiques like this seem more about it being AI than the actual piece. similar traditional stuff wouldn’t get dragged this hard.

[-]

Main-Ad7935@reddit

kind of wild seeing this priced that high tbh. not even saying it’s bad art, just feels like the market is still figuring out how to value ai-generated pieces vs traditional work. like is the premium coming from the concept, the curation, or just novelty right now. feels early… wouldn’t be surprised if pricing like this either normalizes or drops once there’s way more supply everywhere

[-]

Hot_Plants@reddit

What a shame when there's true working artist in the area. Not sure if my husband applied for this but if he did and didn't get in and this did I'll be PO'd. Check out his IG or TT @scottcooperart or his website at scottcooperart.com.

[-]

Fwog_King@reddit

Should be a crime

[-]

Low-Competition3550@reddit

The frame is horrible and doesn’t fit the picture either…

[-]

MagicPigeonToes@reddit

Rich old people will buy anything

[-]

LuxMirabilis@reddit

A) what length is this child's hair supposed to be?

B) what culture's clothing is this child supposed to be wearing?

The top part is clearly supposed to be a kimono, but the bottom half looks like a lot of uninformed nonsense. I think she's supposed to be wearing hakama pants, but looking closely, it doesn't resemble hakama pants AT ALL. It looks more like a wrap skirt with some wear texture on the front edge (like canvas fabric after it's been laundered) The obijime doesn't make any sense because hakama pants are held up by a self-fabric tie and not a little cord. The odd flower patch over the top of the obijime doesn't make any sense either. It doesn't look like an obidome.

It looks like someone generated an AI image and then directly reproduced it by hand on canvas. Garbage.

[-]

pocketdebtor@reddit

100%

r/isthisAI is a subreddit that has helped me identify AI more and more, and these are the kinds of things people point out.

[-]

comfortcrowd@reddit

what a joke, i would rather a 5 y/o’s terrible drawing being $2k than this

[-]

RLSLLS@reddit

Where’s the evidence that it is AI art?

[-]

Ok-Goal-8767@reddit

Anyone else notice that a lot of scumbags and scammers gravitate towards being “Artists”? That shit is infuriating

[-]

LandscapePenguin@reddit

Do y’all just look for things to get upset about or do you just find them naturally? I feel like this sub has become so negative lately.

[-]

Icuras1701@reddit

They just find stuff to complain about. Like the whale mural, I bet alot of the people mad about it were mad when it originally went up because whales have nothing to do with Dallas. Some people arent capable of being happy. And the comments section fails. Theres no indication this is AI. These same people only want oil on canvas as art. Anything digital is "not art" even if its an original creation. And those saying its sucks, well art is subjective but it doesnt mean its not art. I don't like classical music but I don't go around saying its not music.

[-]

katie4@reddit

It is her birthday no one showed and she sewed her outfit herself but no one cared can you please like and share and pay $2,750 amen 🙏

[-]

DecentPrintworks@reddit

That is….. so bad

[-]

jollytoes@reddit

It will look good right next to somebody's NFT

[-]

OmenQtx@reddit

I wouldn't pay more than $27.50 for AI generated prints. This is a huge problem in the art world already, and it's only getting worse.

[-]

Blablabla_1985_@reddit

Just like any kind of art available in the world.

It’s worth is what someone is willing to pay.

[-]

Aggravating_Image999@reddit

Fair enough

But I don’t think a gallery should bother exhibiting it on principle

[-]

vivalakellye@reddit

AI art isn’t addressed in the exhibition prospectus, so it’s not surprising this was admitted. I wonder if they’ll update their requirements for 2027.

[-]

Aggravating_Image999@reddit

I think it should be addressed

full AI renders should not be excepted in an exhibition. I feel artists must stand together on this or else we’re doomed

[-]

biaggio@reddit

You could buy something like this in Target for $19.95.

[-]

Aggravating_Image999@reddit

And Hobby Lobby has it marked down

$14.99!

[-]

secretgaythoughts@reddit

Terrible. I can’t believe that got admitted.

[-]

Aggravating_Image999@reddit

It’s so discouraging

Real artists being sidelined for AI mess

[-]

jgm1023@reddit

and when you call them out they’ll either apologize or make up some excuse saying it’s actually art because it makes you “feel something”

[-]

Pecan_Artist@reddit

Gross, I only collect art made by artist.

[-]

number231@reddit

I ran this through chat and Gemini, asking to sus out what it saw. Both said the same thing. That there are a lot AI markers. But nothing that specifically is a red flag. This was my thoughts before also. Lots of little clues but nothing conclusive.
This where I am fearful. That AI art is already affecting styles made by humans. Creating this homogenizing style loop.
There should be a way to prove originality. Comps. Early sketches and file layers with time stamps in the meta data. It’s lame you’d have to do that now I guess. Stealing ideas is nothing new in art. Taking changing one idea, manipulating it and changing it yourself is in itself into another is to many, ART in the purist definition.
It’s probably more likely that the organization is too understaffed and underfunded to check every submission. And just rely on artist honesty and integrity.
As a working artist, I see AI used at all levels. It’s a tool that can be used or abused. People used stock images and elements before AI and now use AI ti make custom stock images. All the major stock image providers have huge AI generated libraries that you can go in and have edited on site.
What I fear is, eventually no matter is made from now on, someone out there is going to accuse it of being AI or fake. I watched a YouTube creator discussing the same phenomenon recently and how her comment section is filled with comments accusing her of being AI or fake. This shit is going to get a lot worse. at least I have decades of prior artwork that I made before AI that I can show to at least prove I know what I’m doing.
It would suck to be an up-and-coming artist nowadays. Or an up-and-coming anything it seems.

[-]

hello350ph@reddit

Hey it's cheaper than shit in a canvas

[-]

big_ringer@reddit

CHECK THE FINGERS!

[-]

Penguins_in_new_york@reddit

Hear me out:

This would be worth something IF the artist took it an extra step. What if they decided to take a similar photo? Or paint something similar? Or draw something similar? Hell a whole exhibit could be done on “AI INSPIRED art” but nobody has done it yet. They’ve just hit post and left it alone and that’s boring and lame.

I’m against the laziness in AI art, it has so much potential in theory but nobody wants to do the actual work.

[-]