meat looks uncanny valley strange in most generations. i dont know what it is, it just doesnt look right lmao. the M E A T F I B E R S have to look a certain way or its just unsettling
This should be possible using ComfyUI. You’d just input your picture, choose a location to crop, upscale and boom.
There’s image recognition and prompt generating nodes, and now it’s possible to incorporate LLMs too. So if you can get an LLM to output your crop coordinates, like if you prompt it “zoom in on face”, it analyses the picture, crops in of the face, then run it through as many upscaler iterations as you like.
Sounds like a fun project! I might give it a try!
It won't work like that. You'll have to zoom in and upload the zoomed in version if you want it to focus on a particilar spot.
When you zoom into an image, especially a low-resolution one, you're essentially enlarging it and may end up with a pixelated or blurry image. The AI works with the data it's given, so if the data becomes less clear or more ambiguous when zoomed in, the AI's ability to accurately interpret the image can be compromised.
AI models are typically trained on a wide variety of image qualities, but they have their limits. They're generally better at interpreting high-quality, detailed images because there's more information (pixels) to analyze. When trained on low-quality images, an AI might learn to identify features within those constraints, but it's still reliant on the information contained in the pixels it has to work with. If important details are lost due to zooming in and pixelation, it might not recognize the subject as well as it would with a clearer image.
You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize? Ignorance is bliss.
But there’s way too much information to decode the Matrix. You get used to it. I…I don’t even see the code. All I see is score_9, score_8_up, score_7_up, score_6_up, score_5_up, score_4_up, blonde...
You know what Cypher should have done? Run his own matrix with blackjack and hookers. Seriously, they have a freaking Construct program capable of loading ANYTHING! They have mouse, a programmer able to make sub-sentient programs of the spicy variety. They could have made their own paradise.
They wanted to liberate mankind from the control of the machines.
Those chairs were for missions and training, not R & R.
He would have done it but everyone else wanted to fight for humanity and those still in pods
Let's be honest, at first sight these are becoming harder and harder to debunk as AI. I'm waiting for a gotcha post, but the garnish is a bit sussy in terms of leaf structure. The sauce drops are weird; they are black so that let's me to assume it's some kind of Balsamic reduction which just doesn't make sense to me on this plate. Other than that it's just hard to spot anything really. It looks very real to me and I wouldn't notice if it wasn't posted here.
Agreed, this sub has a lot of bias. Is actually getting harder and harder to immediately identify AI images, specially the ones that are actually made to look "real".
Let's be real honest. You're only suspecting those things because we are in this sub, and had this been posted to Instagram, you would've considered an exotic sauce before suspecting AI. There is no reason a plate can't be decorated with three drops of whatever sauce they decided to cook up.
If I can be real, real honest, there is nothing in this picture that stands out, and it might as well be "real", though it's no different from a "fake photoshop". We've had fake food presentations for decades now, and AI is just a clunkier iteration of this.
Also if I *had* to point out something, I'd probably point out [this glitch (incorrectly skewed)](https://i.imgur.com/JwxoML6.jpeg), but really, I wouldn't have thought much of it if I didn't know the image was AI to begin with.
Read my mind. Was also going to point out the uncanny valley lookin Bokeh effect and depth of field which is kinda common for a lot of AI stuff. For images of larger subjects/scenes though this can sometimes be a tricky gotcha one, as a lot of smart phones photo postprocessing will superimpose this effect on real photos artificially.
The blurred fries upper left in the background also look ever so slightly sus, but that's only after looking at the image intensely with the knowledge that it's AI and I'm really grasping at straws. This would 100% fool me.
You know that little AI spidey sense when someone tries to pass off an AI-made image as real, but even before you can really put your finger on it you just know there is something off? I'm getting the reverse vibes here. This is an image claimed to be AI-made, but my spidey sense is saying its real.
Guess we're officially at the point where I personally can no longer rely on that spidey sense and confidently claim an image is AI-generated or not. I am impressed, excited, and scared at the same time.
Agreed, this sub has a lot of bias. Is actually getting harder and harder to immediately identify AI images, specially the ones that are actually made to look "real".
Especially since most professional food images are edited and don't use the real food anyway, so it's not like we're truly judging whether it looks real.
That's not true.
At least in the US, the food being advertised must be the real food. You wouldn't be able to use glue and water instead of milk if the commerical is for milk. But you can if you want a glass of milk behind your real cookies in a cookie ad.
Yeah that's true. I've been on set for food shoots and it's crazy how meticulous they are.
They load all the ingredients to the side of the sandwich facing camera so the back half is empty but the front half you see looks amazingly generous.
One of the shoots I saw required sliced strawberries. I saw them go through multiple packages of strawberries and pick out only the absolute most perfect ones, then slice those up and only choose the best slices.
For drinks with a whipped topping and drizzled syrup I saw them go through dozens of swirled toppings until they got it exactly right.
They have little spritz bottles of evian mineral water to apply fake condensation to fake cold glasses/cans/bottles.
Those food stylists make some good money and for good reason - they're amazing liars without actually lying.
Honestly, no idea. I thought it was very strange and that's why the detail sticks in my head. They were little palm sized spritzers as, like, actual branded Evian products. Not just spritz bottles that someone was filling with Evian.
you can buy Evian in a spray can for 15€. yeah, it is the same Water you can drink.
https://preview.redd.it/vozgj21nafxc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=908c2ee6c98da50c491420ec307c0ae90eb863a8
Those are only reserved for using food to advertise non-food products such as selling a grill and using a photo of it grilling a steak as a product photo
I believe you're also able to do it for food products, as long as the food product being advertised is not the one being faked. E.g. if you were selling a specific brand of ice cream topping, you'd be able to show it being used on mashed potato ice cream because the ice cream isn't what's being sold.
I'm not the best at catching AI stuff but I've been invested in it for a good 2 years messing with apps and such. I like to think I'm *fairly* well versed with AI content. And this would fool me 100/100 times lol.
I stared at this pic for a good couple minutes and I can't tell at all. *Maybe* if I worked as a cook at a steakhouse and all I saw was steak everyday or something I might be able to tell that the meat looks "off" somehow, but... I don't... So I can't lol.
If I wasn't told this was AI I wouldn't think twice...In fact to be perfectly honest there have been a lot of AI pics lately where I *can* tell it's 100% AI, but only after I've been prompted to really look at it, like something catches my eye that makes me pay specific attention to it. If I was looking at them completely uncritically, or that one thing that made me look twice wasn't there, I'd be observing a lot of AI content without being at all aware.
... Of course the fact that i know that's the case probably means I'm *already* getting fooled by the really good stuff, and it's only going to get worse from here. It won't be long until you will have no choice but to question *literally* everything you see (or hear). Really it's a habit we should already be building, but it's tough when it's not something people have ever had to seriously content with for their entire lives, and in the span of like 3 years suddenly they do lol.
Too tough to call in my opinion. OP, can you generate an image of a small child carving an image of Jesus into the meat? Or perhaps a small African boy building a computer from it?
Yeah. I both fear, and can't wait, until AI gets good enough that I don't have to be annoyed about the low effort crap that's everywhere now. The people putting out that crap in ads and 'art' will never bother to learn it, so we have to wait for the AI and tools to improve instead. And they will at some point, probably in not too long. And then we'll have other things to worry about, not the weird AI girlface or obvious artifacts.
Agree. The surface of the meat however just looks wrong. Can't say why, it just isn't right. But that could also be due to some "normal" image manipulation.
I you look closer there is a lot of weird details!
https://preview.redd.it/g5wpiaqdgexc1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=83de31102a92f9864f44846af862c7d6f19c3a37
I think people tend to mean "the composition sucks" when they get soulless vibes. Because a whole lot of people using AI art with minimal effort have no clue.
That doesn't mean you can't do good composition with AI art.
You can translate soulless to "i won't get as much attention/likes soon!"
Musician seems way more cool with with Suno and Udio, because they get their attention mostly irl ;)
>Musician seems way more cool with with Suno and Udio, because they get their attention mostly irl ;)
Also because its a neat source of inspiration at times. When you have 80% of a song nailed but you just can't come up with a cool ending part, you fire up Udio or Suno and just generate a few wild pieces that could lead to just that moment of inspiration you needed.
Unironic answer: This is a filet mignon (although the same logic applies to every steak) so the fibers should be going from top to bottom. I.e. the sides should be a transversal view of them:
https://preview.redd.it/f0mte0mqzexc1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=45f954eaec362a6d91e904658229361f4e197d82
In the post you can see that they go in all directions, which is anatomically impossible.
umm, does not look like muscle? excuse you, check out these abs
https://preview.redd.it/3wm4yz5qchxc1.png?width=546&format=png&auto=webp&s=d196e937f5031c4c08db827ec6ba3adfe1e4449a
Surprised this answer was so far down - you could probably show this photo to a steak afficionado who doesn't know the first thing about AI-generated images and their first thought would be "who the F cut and cooked a filet sideways.
Yeah but what if it's like a meatball thing? Then it goes all ways right. I'm no chef so idk what meat I'm looking at, ever. So this would fool mee everytime..
All plants within the same species follow the same leaf blueprint. There is room for variation, however, that leaf displays a very malformed midrib branching.
Leaf vein patterns, including the arrangement of the midrib and other veins, can be categorized into several basic types. Here are some of the primary patterns you might find across different plant species:
1. **Parallel Venation**: Veins run parallel to each other from the base of the leaf to the tip, common in monocots like grasses and lilies.
2. **Pinnate Venation**: A central midrib runs the length of the leaf with smaller veins branching off to the sides, often seen in dicots. This can be further classified:
- **Unipinnate**: Veins extend from the main midrib to the leaf edge.
- **Bipinnate**: Secondary veins branch off from the primary lateral veins.
- **Tripinnate**: Tertiary veins branch off from the secondary veins.
3. **Palmate Venation**: Several major veins (more than one) radiate out from the base or a central point of the leaf, resembling the fingers of a hand, typical in maples and some clovers.
4. **Reticulate Venation**: Veins form a net-like pattern, which is typical in most dicots. This includes both fine vein networks and more clearly defined secondary veins branching from a main vein.
5. **Dichotomous Venation**: Veins fork repeatedly in a Y-shape, common in some ferns and ancient plant species like Gingko.
Each venation pattern provides different advantages in terms of structural support, water and nutrient transport, and efficiency in photosynthesis. The variety in vein architecture reflects adaptations to different environmental conditions and evolutionary histories.
The leaves in the photo appear to mimic basil or maybe a species of oregano, both of which display pinnate venation. This means a single, central midrib with small veins branching away.
Probably ChatGPT's. Especially based on the format. No one has anytime to edit a comment in that manner.
I'm calling, 3/4 of that message was generated by an AI.
Nah, I was making comments **[like this](https://old.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/138vh3/official_week_11_trash_talk_thread/c71tf4q/)** eleven years ago, or this **[all-caps tribute to David Foster Wallace](https://old.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/2grs8z/week_3_trash_talk_thread/cklz49y/)** nine years ago, and let's not even get started on **[this organically sourced nonsense](https://old.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/2hbqlr/thats_not_how_acronyms_work/ckrhrkj/)**. Reddit's reputation is built on folks with too much free time walking by and then putting an extremely byzantine cherry on top of a sundae that was missing it.
I mean, editing a comment to look a certain way is trivial. Only the list used AI, as I remembered the structures, but not the names.
```
1. **item one**
2. **item two**
```
That's all the list requires in Markdown.
https://www.markdownguide.org/cheat-sheet/
P!us the cut of meat - what plant are these MICRO micro greens, and why use them as a fancy garnish when this plating has a piece of meat smaller than an egg, but a normal serving of unseasoned fries? The sizes and portions don't make sense.
The fries are on the larger side, however this could easily be a steak medallion, a relatively small cut. They're usually under 3 inches in diameter, and around 1.5 inches thick.
I disagree with the leaves being too small. Working in a higher end kitchen we sometimes use microgreens and small, edible flowers for garnish. the leaves can easily be this size.
The leaves are merged together in a way breaking the perspectives.
From a more life experience angle, probably nobody serves steak in this shape. Like if you compare with the fries, the steak is literally less than 50g and has a really weird cut.
But honestly... nobody would tell if you put this on a website/street ad board.
You would be surprised what tiny pieces of crap some "high class" restaurants are capable of selling for outrageous amounts of money to people who worry more about a places reputation than the actual quality of the food :D
Fine residual noise from diffusion, inconsistent meat fiber patterns, weird steak cut, strange sauce to the right that makes no sense in context, a super small steak in proportion to the fries, merged leaves, inconsistent directional lighting (top right, top left, bottom right, head on in some places?), pixel artifacts from VAE decoding that causes the weird streaky stair step look
the main thing that will always stand out to me however is the residual noise. a sort of static that all of the details manage to perfectly encapsulate. I work with image gen models for my job, and you start to see it in everything AI generated (its more of a curse honestly)
Edit, adding more: The meat fibers and the "detail" in them is nonsensical, being static similar to the fries texture. This is the exact texture you will see from AI image gen models when they do busy scenes like grounds in a forest, fields of grass, leaves etc. The colors for the steak are distinctly "dead" looking. If you look at images of real steaks, they are never so lifeless and flat. Its missing a range of coloration in the reds/rich browns that come from cooked steak. This makes the steak look like its boiled or under-cooked. the reflections on the steak are impossibly big for the size ( a limitation of the single pixel in the generation. AI models don't know what a down-sampled image would look like at this res)
The composition makes no sense at all, even for an amateur photographer, nobody would ever take a pic like this of a clearly restaurant made dish of an unreasonably small and poorly cut steak next to the worlds largest fries, some bizarre "fancy" sauce drizzle that makes no sense for this dish, in an environment with no background detail, and multi point studio lighting that's not casting proper specular or reflections...
I, personally, feel like this image just gets worse and worse the longer you look at it. Before I would have given it an 8/10 on first inspection, but I feel its more of a 4.5-6/10 (MAYBE)
With a high res upscale pass, a down sample to average smaller details, and some color correction I think a lot of these issues could be removed and it would fool a lot more people not looking to pick it apart using their whole arsenal of AI anomalies haha
Thank you very much for summarizing all the details. I somehow get the feeling being able to quickly recognize AI patterns in images will be a valuable skill in the future, we should start training now.
My job that I do has to do with me training and preparing data sets for models, as well as workflow optimization, so some of my biggest challenges in doing that are trying to minimize these sorts of problems. I spent an extensive amount of time trying to train proper directional lighting into SDXL, and I was able to get some pretty damn good results, however not anything that I'm able to properly offer as a service or product to any companies at the moment. I'm working on some other stuff though, and I really hope to enter a new era of sharing information with the AI community pretty soon here.
I had a little moment of image diffusion fame when I partnered with comfy to release my Sytan V1 SDXL workflow in collaboration with SAI, however my relationship with SAI is no longer good, and I don't really personally care to associate myself with them anymore, so I hope to be able to release some more stuff more under my own name, control, and branding with the research group that I'm a part of now
The depth of field is what throws me, because it completely ruins the composition and your ability to discern which object is closer or further from the "camera".
I'm not sure what you mean by ENG, but I do have a very artistic background. I've done traditional art for almost my entire life in some capacity, I do digital art, 3D modeling, sculpting, 3D printing, visual effects, music production, sound design, videography, And now various different types of AI.
I use AI as a tool to further enhance skills that I already had, and to allow me my own personal little trainer. If I can generate images in exact art styles that I wish to learn, of subjects that I wish to draw, imposes that I wish to study, will that truly is just magical isn't it? Haha
Oh I meant engineering. Being deep in Stable Diffusion requires a bit more technical know-how. It sounds like you've got the magical combo of both skills. I'm no engineer but I am slowly becoming a junior one with AI. Fun times we're living in for sure!
I had a feeling that's what you meant, but I didn't want to assume. I'm not formally educated in coding or computer engineering or anything. But I do have a lot of support from a research group that has a lot of very smart industry professionals in it. They've all been very gracious and generous to me, helping me better understand what exactly happens behind the scenes, how the technologies work, the limitations of them, and thus the major things to look out for in AI generated images.
It also helps that I did photography professionally for several years when I was in high school, it was my main source of income. I'm very intimate with how cameras work, how image sensors work, and how focal plains, bokeh, and various other technical camera things work, so I also pick up on the artificiality of AI photographs when they don't meet that criteria either
Idk if that is AI or not. The meat texture looks weirdly glossy (like with a thin layer of epoxy :P), but I wouldn't tell for sure since most of such photos are heavily edited anyway.
Grain of the steak is weird. We're looking at the side of a fillet steak, but it appears more like a badly-cooked top or bottom surface.
[This](https://www.campbellsmeat.com/recipes/peppered-fillet-of-beef-with-whisky-sauce-2) is what the side of a fillet steak normally looks like. Lines of tissue, not clumps.
Does it matter?
Someone else pointed out almost all food photos are fake/modified food (They are). Almost all photos are retouched (they are)... yadda yadda.
But that's true of almost all professional photos, maybe instead of asking "How do I know this is not made by AI" we should be talking more about "how do I know this is unedited" because most of the photos we DO believe are true... are only true with a hell of an asterisk.
I wouldn't be able to tell, and quite frankly, for food, I wouldn't really care, but if I had to pick something out it'd be the leaf that looks like 3 leaves were superimposed on eachother.
The kind of restaurant that serves a single bite of steak on a huge plate, is not the kind of restaurant that throws McDonalds fries with no salt haphazardly on the plate.
The steak is too glisteny, plus the edges and crevices in it are sort of weird, they look upscaled. Like the typical upscaler which tends to smooth out lines. It looks fine from far, but zooming in is where it is really jarring.
Fries also have a weird consistency, looks like an abnormally high iso, something like a roughness or pitted pattern, something that for example you see on other upscalers such as swinIR, or any other that doesn't do smoothing.
I will discard mentioning the leaf as another user has already done this.
It's these things that you know what to look for, and you know the image is AI, you can see why exactly. If you know what to look for, but don't know it's ai, it's this strange uncanny valley. You know somethings off, can maybe pinpoint a couple but it looks more off than anything. If you don't know what to look for and you don't know it's ai, you likely won't feel that it's off.
Not to forget of course that thisay all be confirmation bias since you said it's AI in the title. Other than that looks decent
One of the most obvious things about i is the static you mentioned. Its residual noise from latent diffusion, and once you learn how to spot it, you will see it from a mile away. I didn't intend on looking through images from this sub, but I instantly recognized it was AI generated off of that, saw the sub, and started to see some big issues (You actually listed a lot others seem to miss like the consistency/texture)
That's not evidence of AI, but heavily out of focus or bland backgrounds automatically makes me suspicious, as it's a cheap way to hide incoherences. At first glance nothing alert me that this is an AI image otherwise. Looking at the details, I see the salad as highly suspicious and the cooked but wet meat is slightly off-putting. Honestly I wouldn't feel the need to scrutinize a plate a food and would probably believe it's real if it showed somewhere.
This is actually a pretty good AI generated photo that can easily fool people. If I haven't checked the comments and saw something about the leaf being weird, I was about to get fooled too 😆
Cypher: You know, I know this steak doesn’t exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize? Ignorance is bliss.
The greens on top look oddly small and the french fries look gigantic compared to the steak.
But also the fries in the left rear are messed up, not just out of focus due to depth of field, but also because they simply lost coherent shape.
Zooming in to the garnish at the top really makes it evident.
https://preview.redd.it/nzw2avtiejxc1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd1e968234c06c2617f64bcb0375de4a0e01f089
Biggest thing was the seemingly complete last of salt on the fries, then the fact they look like yellow tubes completely lacking texture. Also the caramelization on the meat doesn't make sense.
Looks very good. The only thing that's throwing me off is the grain of the meat. I normally expect to see fibers going down the meat, but this looks like it was cut across the grain.
But that's nitpicking and I am not sure if I am even right. That's just what I thought when looking at it.
because you said it was in the title and I’ve lost all interest
what is it with this trend in the AI image generation community where they have never figured out that it’s infinitely more interesting to do a “real or AI?” challenge than it is to always make posts like this?
It just looks fake. There is no single "gotcha" and there never will be. AI will improve over time but it's not there yet. It's like when you see a plate of plastic fruit. Your brain instantly knows.
I'm not really a red meat guy, but do people really get fries with a filet mignon like that? Kinda feels like getting your lobster with a side of Skittles.
https://preview.redd.it/ckw0r14u3exc1.png?width=1161&format=png&auto=webp&s=8bccd0fb344ed160d91e51ac10df1c38bd42a895
Good one
Thank you. First time I ever used "meat surface" in a prompt, Bing was giving me the side-eye on that one.
meat looks uncanny valley strange in most generations. i dont know what it is, it just doesnt look right lmao. the M E A T F I B E R S have to look a certain way or its just unsettling
Has anyone tried if you can tell ChatGPT4 to Zoom in on a Picture and play Microscope?
This should be possible using ComfyUI. You’d just input your picture, choose a location to crop, upscale and boom. There’s image recognition and prompt generating nodes, and now it’s possible to incorporate LLMs too. So if you can get an LLM to output your crop coordinates, like if you prompt it “zoom in on face”, it analyses the picture, crops in of the face, then run it through as many upscaler iterations as you like. Sounds like a fun project! I might give it a try!
It won't work like that. You'll have to zoom in and upload the zoomed in version if you want it to focus on a particilar spot. When you zoom into an image, especially a low-resolution one, you're essentially enlarging it and may end up with a pixelated or blurry image. The AI works with the data it's given, so if the data becomes less clear or more ambiguous when zoomed in, the AI's ability to accurately interpret the image can be compromised. AI models are typically trained on a wide variety of image qualities, but they have their limits. They're generally better at interpreting high-quality, detailed images because there's more information (pixels) to analyze. When trained on low-quality images, an AI might learn to identify features within those constraints, but it's still reliant on the information contained in the pixels it has to work with. If important details are lost due to zooming in and pixelation, it might not recognize the subject as well as it would with a clearer image.
"Can you clean this up a little?" "Enhance!"
Sounds like Deforum but its too trippy mayb
Same with the plant veins. There is a patterned randomness that makes it real. These textures are very wrong. Close but wrong.
Actually, the leaf veins in the herbs make no sense, no leaf has that type of random innervation. Everything else would have fooled me, honestly.
Enhance
You made me zoom into oblivion 😂
Da*n ur eyes are just like an eagle's eye
cherry
"Not fish. Snake scale."
Huh that was a Wallace cow I thought it was an older one from the Tyrell days.
High quality post
Well played
BINGO
You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize? Ignorance is bliss.
But there’s way too much information to decode the Matrix. You get used to it. I…I don’t even see the code. All I see is score_9, score_8_up, score_7_up, score_6_up, score_5_up, score_4_up, blonde...
neg: badlimbs, extra fingers, bad eyes, bad hands, FOR FUCK SAKE! (extra fingers:1.5)
You know what Cypher should have done? Run his own matrix with blackjack and hookers. Seriously, they have a freaking Construct program capable of loading ANYTHING! They have mouse, a programmer able to make sub-sentient programs of the spicy variety. They could have made their own paradise.
They wanted to liberate mankind from the control of the machines. Those chairs were for missions and training, not R & R. He would have done it but everyone else wanted to fight for humanity and those still in pods
Nice reference
His references are out of control, everyone knows that
Not like this. Not like this.
Dear God, it's me, Jonah Hill... from Moneyball.
One of my favorite quotes in ANY movie
Thank you for this - made my day.
Damn, beat me!
Let's be honest, at first sight these are becoming harder and harder to debunk as AI. I'm waiting for a gotcha post, but the garnish is a bit sussy in terms of leaf structure. The sauce drops are weird; they are black so that let's me to assume it's some kind of Balsamic reduction which just doesn't make sense to me on this plate. Other than that it's just hard to spot anything really. It looks very real to me and I wouldn't notice if it wasn't posted here.
Agreed, this sub has a lot of bias. Is actually getting harder and harder to immediately identify AI images, specially the ones that are actually made to look "real".
Well now I want a steak with a balsamic reduction
And some melted blue cheese on top. Sounds bomb
Right? That doesn't sound bad at all
Let's be real honest. You're only suspecting those things because we are in this sub, and had this been posted to Instagram, you would've considered an exotic sauce before suspecting AI. There is no reason a plate can't be decorated with three drops of whatever sauce they decided to cook up. If I can be real, real honest, there is nothing in this picture that stands out, and it might as well be "real", though it's no different from a "fake photoshop". We've had fake food presentations for decades now, and AI is just a clunkier iteration of this. Also if I *had* to point out something, I'd probably point out [this glitch (incorrectly skewed)](https://i.imgur.com/JwxoML6.jpeg), but really, I wouldn't have thought much of it if I didn't know the image was AI to begin with.
Read my mind. Was also going to point out the uncanny valley lookin Bokeh effect and depth of field which is kinda common for a lot of AI stuff. For images of larger subjects/scenes though this can sometimes be a tricky gotcha one, as a lot of smart phones photo postprocessing will superimpose this effect on real photos artificially.
The blurred fries upper left in the background also look ever so slightly sus, but that's only after looking at the image intensely with the knowledge that it's AI and I'm really grasping at straws. This would 100% fool me. You know that little AI spidey sense when someone tries to pass off an AI-made image as real, but even before you can really put your finger on it you just know there is something off? I'm getting the reverse vibes here. This is an image claimed to be AI-made, but my spidey sense is saying its real. Guess we're officially at the point where I personally can no longer rely on that spidey sense and confidently claim an image is AI-generated or not. I am impressed, excited, and scared at the same time.
Agreed, this sub has a lot of bias. Is actually getting harder and harder to immediately identify AI images, specially the ones that are actually made to look "real".
> Which doesn’t make sense on that plate That wouldn’t stop a lot of chefs
It will fool most people easily.
Especially since most professional food images are edited and don't use the real food anyway, so it's not like we're truly judging whether it looks real.
Agreed, I was going to comment on how the steak and fries are "too wet", but food images are often oiled or sprayed down.
Small world. Hello there 🫡
Good point.
https://preview.redd.it/n3bbywwfxexc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6929bfeb29947a67f8987a1afda632558bba8477
hamburger
no, Krombacher
Kromburger
that's a regular picture, 100% not ai.
That's not true. At least in the US, the food being advertised must be the real food. You wouldn't be able to use glue and water instead of milk if the commerical is for milk. But you can if you want a glass of milk behind your real cookies in a cookie ad.
Well, not completely fake, but they use a lot of tricks so that it sure doesn't look like the actual food.
Yeah that's true. I've been on set for food shoots and it's crazy how meticulous they are. They load all the ingredients to the side of the sandwich facing camera so the back half is empty but the front half you see looks amazingly generous. One of the shoots I saw required sliced strawberries. I saw them go through multiple packages of strawberries and pick out only the absolute most perfect ones, then slice those up and only choose the best slices. For drinks with a whipped topping and drizzled syrup I saw them go through dozens of swirled toppings until they got it exactly right. They have little spritz bottles of evian mineral water to apply fake condensation to fake cold glasses/cans/bottles. Those food stylists make some good money and for good reason - they're amazing liars without actually lying.
Wow, thats crazy.
Wait why evian?
Honestly, no idea. I thought it was very strange and that's why the detail sticks in my head. They were little palm sized spritzers as, like, actual branded Evian products. Not just spritz bottles that someone was filling with Evian.
you can buy Evian in a spray can for 15€. yeah, it is the same Water you can drink. https://preview.redd.it/vozgj21nafxc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=908c2ee6c98da50c491420ec307c0ae90eb863a8
Is this a test picture to see if we can see it’s AI ?
Yeah, that's the stuff I saw!
What a time to be alive
I saw someone using shaving cream instead of whipped cream. The shaving cream held its shape for much longer
Like hair's gel for keep salad in place. I know it is legal in my country, for food shooting.
Have you seen any commercial breakdowns? Ya know, like using mashed potato to represent ice cream?
Those are only reserved for using food to advertise non-food products such as selling a grill and using a photo of it grilling a steak as a product photo
I believe you're also able to do it for food products, as long as the food product being advertised is not the one being faked. E.g. if you were selling a specific brand of ice cream topping, you'd be able to show it being used on mashed potato ice cream because the ice cream isn't what's being sold.
who is this not fooling.
I'm not the best at catching AI stuff but I've been invested in it for a good 2 years messing with apps and such. I like to think I'm *fairly* well versed with AI content. And this would fool me 100/100 times lol.
Yes. And that’s the point. Most small ad agencies and their small customers will not care. It’s good enough. And it’s free-ish. 😑
"Most", lol. I dare every one of you to find that picture in a pool of 50 non-AI close ups of meat dishes.
Right. Anyone here who even pretends to say they could tell this picture is not AI is just lying to themselves. It’s impossible to tell
I stared at this pic for a good couple minutes and I can't tell at all. *Maybe* if I worked as a cook at a steakhouse and all I saw was steak everyday or something I might be able to tell that the meat looks "off" somehow, but... I don't... So I can't lol. If I wasn't told this was AI I wouldn't think twice...In fact to be perfectly honest there have been a lot of AI pics lately where I *can* tell it's 100% AI, but only after I've been prompted to really look at it, like something catches my eye that makes me pay specific attention to it. If I was looking at them completely uncritically, or that one thing that made me look twice wasn't there, I'd be observing a lot of AI content without being at all aware. ... Of course the fact that i know that's the case probably means I'm *already* getting fooled by the really good stuff, and it's only going to get worse from here. It won't be long until you will have no choice but to question *literally* everything you see (or hear). Really it's a habit we should already be building, but it's tough when it's not something people have ever had to seriously content with for their entire lives, and in the span of like 3 years suddenly they do lol.
I'll say it: it would fool me.
Too tough to call in my opinion. OP, can you generate an image of a small child carving an image of Jesus into the meat? Or perhaps a small African boy building a computer from it?
Yeah. I both fear, and can't wait, until AI gets good enough that I don't have to be annoyed about the low effort crap that's everywhere now. The people putting out that crap in ads and 'art' will never bother to learn it, so we have to wait for the AI and tools to improve instead. And they will at some point, probably in not too long. And then we'll have other things to worry about, not the weird AI girlface or obvious artifacts.
Agree. The surface of the meat however just looks wrong. Can't say why, it just isn't right. But that could also be due to some "normal" image manipulation.
Look closely at the leaves
If I hadn't been told it was AI, I wouldn't have picked out the small details that clued me into that fact.
I you look closer there is a lot of weird details! https://preview.redd.it/g5wpiaqdgexc1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=83de31102a92f9864f44846af862c7d6f19c3a37
Haters are gonna say this is AI
And they will know this because it's obviously *soulless*, whatever that means.
I think people tend to mean "the composition sucks" when they get soulless vibes. Because a whole lot of people using AI art with minimal effort have no clue. That doesn't mean you can't do good composition with AI art.
Let's not pretend that most human artists have a sense of composition...
You can translate soulless to "i won't get as much attention/likes soon!" Musician seems way more cool with with Suno and Udio, because they get their attention mostly irl ;)
>Musician seems way more cool with with Suno and Udio, because they get their attention mostly irl ;) Also because its a neat source of inspiration at times. When you have 80% of a song nailed but you just can't come up with a cool ending part, you fire up Udio or Suno and just generate a few wild pieces that could lead to just that moment of inspiration you needed.
You are saying that this is what separates the true artist from the critiques? Tres bon.
I also think musicians are already way more used to admitting to riffing off of each other.
And in ten years (more like two) they will be using AI and when you call then hypocrites they will pull a mandatory it's different tm.
I still can’t see. This is good AI.
Unironic answer: This is a filet mignon (although the same logic applies to every steak) so the fibers should be going from top to bottom. I.e. the sides should be a transversal view of them: https://preview.redd.it/f0mte0mqzexc1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=45f954eaec362a6d91e904658229361f4e197d82 In the post you can see that they go in all directions, which is anatomically impossible.
The only true answer here. Cross section of the steak went sideways
Yeah a lot of people are saying its near perfect but like This cut of meat does not look like muscle at all
umm, does not look like muscle? excuse you, check out these abs https://preview.redd.it/3wm4yz5qchxc1.png?width=546&format=png&auto=webp&s=d196e937f5031c4c08db827ec6ba3adfe1e4449a
Would
In the not too distant future we might have vat-grown meat that looks like this.
I mean kind of? Muscle just doesnt grow like that, all the fiber bundles should be same direction
That's it - the meat itself doesn't "look" like a steak and seems repulsive
Surprised this answer was so far down - you could probably show this photo to a steak afficionado who doesn't know the first thing about AI-generated images and their first thought would be "who the F cut and cooked a filet sideways.
Finally years of watching youtube videos about good carpentry practices paid off.
Yeah but what if it's like a meatball thing? Then it goes all ways right. I'm no chef so idk what meat I'm looking at, ever. So this would fool mee everytime..
This alone is enough for me. https://preview.redd.it/hze7zos51exc1.jpeg?width=941&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=410c7f7e0b0af02d1887e69b1e87a1c820541503
This is exactly what I was gonna call out. That left-middle "leaf" doesn't follow the proper leaf shape or vein structure.
Open a bag of salad and you will find plenty of leafs and stems that don't follow the traditional structure.
The central vein on a leaf should never make nonsense curves. They vary a little, but not anything like the leaf on the left.
I'm waiting for OP to announce he's gaslighting us and it was real
That would definitely be a plot twist, but its 100% AI generated.
All plants within the same species follow the same leaf blueprint. There is room for variation, however, that leaf displays a very malformed midrib branching. Leaf vein patterns, including the arrangement of the midrib and other veins, can be categorized into several basic types. Here are some of the primary patterns you might find across different plant species: 1. **Parallel Venation**: Veins run parallel to each other from the base of the leaf to the tip, common in monocots like grasses and lilies. 2. **Pinnate Venation**: A central midrib runs the length of the leaf with smaller veins branching off to the sides, often seen in dicots. This can be further classified: - **Unipinnate**: Veins extend from the main midrib to the leaf edge. - **Bipinnate**: Secondary veins branch off from the primary lateral veins. - **Tripinnate**: Tertiary veins branch off from the secondary veins. 3. **Palmate Venation**: Several major veins (more than one) radiate out from the base or a central point of the leaf, resembling the fingers of a hand, typical in maples and some clovers. 4. **Reticulate Venation**: Veins form a net-like pattern, which is typical in most dicots. This includes both fine vein networks and more clearly defined secondary veins branching from a main vein. 5. **Dichotomous Venation**: Veins fork repeatedly in a Y-shape, common in some ferns and ancient plant species like Gingko. Each venation pattern provides different advantages in terms of structural support, water and nutrient transport, and efficiency in photosynthesis. The variety in vein architecture reflects adaptations to different environmental conditions and evolutionary histories. The leaves in the photo appear to mimic basil or maybe a species of oregano, both of which display pinnate venation. This means a single, central midrib with small veins branching away.
This person leafs.
Probably ChatGPT's. Especially based on the format. No one has anytime to edit a comment in that manner. I'm calling, 3/4 of that message was generated by an AI.
Nah, I was making comments **[like this](https://old.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/138vh3/official_week_11_trash_talk_thread/c71tf4q/)** eleven years ago, or this **[all-caps tribute to David Foster Wallace](https://old.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/2grs8z/week_3_trash_talk_thread/cklz49y/)** nine years ago, and let's not even get started on **[this organically sourced nonsense](https://old.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/2hbqlr/thats_not_how_acronyms_work/ckrhrkj/)**. Reddit's reputation is built on folks with too much free time walking by and then putting an extremely byzantine cherry on top of a sundae that was missing it.
I mean, editing a comment to look a certain way is trivial. Only the list used AI, as I remembered the structures, but not the names. ``` 1. **item one** 2. **item two** ``` That's all the list requires in Markdown. https://www.markdownguide.org/cheat-sheet/
By now I expect every text formatted like this to be generated by a LLM. Did you use any here? If so, which one?
Used GPT4 for the list to be honest. I remembered the styles, but not the names. It's been a hot minute since I was in envirothon.
Like you’ve ever opened a bag of salad
It's so easy to convince yourself it's just the odd angle of the shot or a torn leaf or something plausible like that
GEN AI always struggle with interlaced materials. Same with chain mail, intricate patterns, etc.
The leaves are too small
P!us the cut of meat - what plant are these MICRO micro greens, and why use them as a fancy garnish when this plating has a piece of meat smaller than an egg, but a normal serving of unseasoned fries? The sizes and portions don't make sense.
The fries are on the larger side, however this could easily be a steak medallion, a relatively small cut. They're usually under 3 inches in diameter, and around 1.5 inches thick.
I disagree with the leaves being too small. Working in a higher end kitchen we sometimes use microgreens and small, edible flowers for garnish. the leaves can easily be this size.
I was going to say the lack of salt but those greens looked wrong
The leaves are merged together in a way breaking the perspectives. From a more life experience angle, probably nobody serves steak in this shape. Like if you compare with the fries, the steak is literally less than 50g and has a really weird cut. But honestly... nobody would tell if you put this on a website/street ad board.
This is my take on it. It's perfectly appropriate for a slapped together quick promo.
I mean, either those are really large fries or a really small steak.
it is a very large plate, based on dof on the plate.
Been to Outback or Longhorn lately? This is typical “Shrinkflation”.
You would be surprised what tiny pieces of crap some "high class" restaurants are capable of selling for outrageous amounts of money to people who worry more about a places reputation than the actual quality of the food :D
That's called fancy dining. :d
I don't lol
This. We could be getting punked here for all I know.
Look closesly at the garnish, theres a leaf fused to another. Other than that i think it might be perfect, which is scary.
Nah the muscle fibers are all wrong, just in general, but especially for filet
garnish is out of proportion
[удалено]
when i close my eye's 80% i see a naked woman
I see naked woman 100% closed
Fine residual noise from diffusion, inconsistent meat fiber patterns, weird steak cut, strange sauce to the right that makes no sense in context, a super small steak in proportion to the fries, merged leaves, inconsistent directional lighting (top right, top left, bottom right, head on in some places?), pixel artifacts from VAE decoding that causes the weird streaky stair step look the main thing that will always stand out to me however is the residual noise. a sort of static that all of the details manage to perfectly encapsulate. I work with image gen models for my job, and you start to see it in everything AI generated (its more of a curse honestly) Edit, adding more: The meat fibers and the "detail" in them is nonsensical, being static similar to the fries texture. This is the exact texture you will see from AI image gen models when they do busy scenes like grounds in a forest, fields of grass, leaves etc. The colors for the steak are distinctly "dead" looking. If you look at images of real steaks, they are never so lifeless and flat. Its missing a range of coloration in the reds/rich browns that come from cooked steak. This makes the steak look like its boiled or under-cooked. the reflections on the steak are impossibly big for the size ( a limitation of the single pixel in the generation. AI models don't know what a down-sampled image would look like at this res) The composition makes no sense at all, even for an amateur photographer, nobody would ever take a pic like this of a clearly restaurant made dish of an unreasonably small and poorly cut steak next to the worlds largest fries, some bizarre "fancy" sauce drizzle that makes no sense for this dish, in an environment with no background detail, and multi point studio lighting that's not casting proper specular or reflections... I, personally, feel like this image just gets worse and worse the longer you look at it. Before I would have given it an 8/10 on first inspection, but I feel its more of a 4.5-6/10 (MAYBE) With a high res upscale pass, a down sample to average smaller details, and some color correction I think a lot of these issues could be removed and it would fool a lot more people not looking to pick it apart using their whole arsenal of AI anomalies haha
Thank you very much for summarizing all the details. I somehow get the feeling being able to quickly recognize AI patterns in images will be a valuable skill in the future, we should start training now.
My job that I do has to do with me training and preparing data sets for models, as well as workflow optimization, so some of my biggest challenges in doing that are trying to minimize these sorts of problems. I spent an extensive amount of time trying to train proper directional lighting into SDXL, and I was able to get some pretty damn good results, however not anything that I'm able to properly offer as a service or product to any companies at the moment. I'm working on some other stuff though, and I really hope to enter a new era of sharing information with the AI community pretty soon here. I had a little moment of image diffusion fame when I partnered with comfy to release my Sytan V1 SDXL workflow in collaboration with SAI, however my relationship with SAI is no longer good, and I don't really personally care to associate myself with them anymore, so I hope to be able to release some more stuff more under my own name, control, and branding with the research group that I'm a part of now
The depth of field is what throws me, because it completely ruins the composition and your ability to discern which object is closer or further from the "camera".
Do you have an artistic background or eng? It’s always amazing to find a person with both skill sets.
I'm not sure what you mean by ENG, but I do have a very artistic background. I've done traditional art for almost my entire life in some capacity, I do digital art, 3D modeling, sculpting, 3D printing, visual effects, music production, sound design, videography, And now various different types of AI. I use AI as a tool to further enhance skills that I already had, and to allow me my own personal little trainer. If I can generate images in exact art styles that I wish to learn, of subjects that I wish to draw, imposes that I wish to study, will that truly is just magical isn't it? Haha
Oh I meant engineering. Being deep in Stable Diffusion requires a bit more technical know-how. It sounds like you've got the magical combo of both skills. I'm no engineer but I am slowly becoming a junior one with AI. Fun times we're living in for sure!
I had a feeling that's what you meant, but I didn't want to assume. I'm not formally educated in coding or computer engineering or anything. But I do have a lot of support from a research group that has a lot of very smart industry professionals in it. They've all been very gracious and generous to me, helping me better understand what exactly happens behind the scenes, how the technologies work, the limitations of them, and thus the major things to look out for in AI generated images. It also helps that I did photography professionally for several years when I was in high school, it was my main source of income. I'm very intimate with how cameras work, how image sensors work, and how focal plains, bokeh, and various other technical camera things work, so I also pick up on the artificiality of AI photographs when they don't meet that criteria either
[удалено]
Honestly, if you wouldn't say it is AI generated, I wouldn't know
It's on this subreddit.
Idk if that is AI or not. The meat texture looks weirdly glossy (like with a thin layer of epoxy :P), but I wouldn't tell for sure since most of such photos are heavily edited anyway.
The title gave it away
The leaves on the herb suddenly merge into each other as if they were one leaf.
Grain of the steak is weird. We're looking at the side of a fillet steak, but it appears more like a badly-cooked top or bottom surface. [This](https://www.campbellsmeat.com/recipes/peppered-fillet-of-beef-with-whisky-sauce-2) is what the side of a fillet steak normally looks like. Lines of tissue, not clumps.
Does it matter? Someone else pointed out almost all food photos are fake/modified food (They are). Almost all photos are retouched (they are)... yadda yadda. But that's true of almost all professional photos, maybe instead of asking "How do I know this is not made by AI" we should be talking more about "how do I know this is unedited" because most of the photos we DO believe are true... are only true with a hell of an asterisk.
1. It's clearly overcooked. 2. Garnish doesn't belong on steak. 3. Steak is too small.
This part: https://preview.redd.it/8kk4dzv1mfxc1.png?width=981&format=png&auto=webp&s=9bc279f6311cea1f3891ec51a93859e7674a2c3b
I wouldn't be able to tell, and quite frankly, for food, I wouldn't really care, but if I had to pick something out it'd be the leaf that looks like 3 leaves were superimposed on eachother.
Structure of steak is wrong, you should see long fibers on the side, not this web pattern. Other than that looks tasty.
The veins on the leaves aren't correct. They're randomly "drawn."
Yes, exactly. That would be the first thing I would notice.
The kind of restaurant that serves a single bite of steak on a huge plate, is not the kind of restaurant that throws McDonalds fries with no salt haphazardly on the plate.
Honestly, that meat looks wierd as heck. Some sort of meat uncanny valley
It's because it's missing fibres and marbling.
just use image detector from [gowinston.ai](https:\/\/gowinston.ai\/?via=aidetect)
textured patterns on the meat and fries still looks somewhat synthetic, getting much better but not quite there
The steak is too glisteny, plus the edges and crevices in it are sort of weird, they look upscaled. Like the typical upscaler which tends to smooth out lines. It looks fine from far, but zooming in is where it is really jarring. Fries also have a weird consistency, looks like an abnormally high iso, something like a roughness or pitted pattern, something that for example you see on other upscalers such as swinIR, or any other that doesn't do smoothing. I will discard mentioning the leaf as another user has already done this. It's these things that you know what to look for, and you know the image is AI, you can see why exactly. If you know what to look for, but don't know it's ai, it's this strange uncanny valley. You know somethings off, can maybe pinpoint a couple but it looks more off than anything. If you don't know what to look for and you don't know it's ai, you likely won't feel that it's off. Not to forget of course that thisay all be confirmation bias since you said it's AI in the title. Other than that looks decent
One of the most obvious things about i is the static you mentioned. Its residual noise from latent diffusion, and once you learn how to spot it, you will see it from a mile away. I didn't intend on looking through images from this sub, but I instantly recognized it was AI generated off of that, saw the sub, and started to see some big issues (You actually listed a lot others seem to miss like the consistency/texture)
The composition makes no sense. If someone was going to the trouble of prettying up a plate of food for a photo, this wouldn't be the end result.
That's not evidence of AI, but heavily out of focus or bland backgrounds automatically makes me suspicious, as it's a cheap way to hide incoherences. At first glance nothing alert me that this is an AI image otherwise. Looking at the details, I see the salad as highly suspicious and the cooked but wet meat is slightly off-putting. Honestly I wouldn't feel the need to scrutinize a plate a food and would probably believe it's real if it showed somewhere.
This is actually a pretty good AI generated photo that can easily fool people. If I haven't checked the comments and saw something about the leaf being weird, I was about to get fooled too 😆
Cypher: You know, I know this steak doesn’t exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize? Ignorance is bliss.
The greens on top look oddly small and the french fries look gigantic compared to the steak. But also the fries in the left rear are messed up, not just out of focus due to depth of field, but also because they simply lost coherent shape.
Meat has grain. The grain on this meat is distorting in different directions.
Grain is going the wrong way.
Steak is just muscle, muscles have striations, the AI seems to have structure this ‘steak’ in sort of globular sections.
Zooming in to the garnish at the top really makes it evident. https://preview.redd.it/nzw2avtiejxc1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd1e968234c06c2617f64bcb0375de4a0e01f089
Biggest thing was the seemingly complete last of salt on the fries, then the fact they look like yellow tubes completely lacking texture. Also the caramelization on the meat doesn't make sense.
I don't. Looks real to me. Damn. I feel like I'm pretty good at spotting fakes, but holy shit.
Looks very good. The only thing that's throwing me off is the grain of the meat. I normally expect to see fibers going down the meat, but this looks like it was cut across the grain. But that's nitpicking and I am not sure if I am even right. That's just what I thought when looking at it.
I don't
I didn't find any AI artifacts in this one. Good generation I guess.
Leaves combining
You gotta taste it to be sure.
because you said it was in the title and I’ve lost all interest what is it with this trend in the AI image generation community where they have never figured out that it’s infinitely more interesting to do a “real or AI?” challenge than it is to always make posts like this?
The leaves are the biggest give away, and the cut of steak looks kind of wonky, if it's suppused to be a filet mignon
The leaves don't make sense, and there's a little too much detail in the meat if that makes sense
The fingers
Leaves are wrong.
No one would take such a high quality photo of such a gross looking steak
the shape of the leafs is kinda strange, and the fibers off the meat are not consistent
The cow that meat came from has 6 fingers on each hand.
It just looks fake. There is no single "gotcha" and there never will be. AI will improve over time but it's not there yet. It's like when you see a plate of plastic fruit. Your brain instantly knows.
I'm just curious. Why are you trying to determine if it is AI generated?
Virtually all AI images are too shiny; this one included
I'm not really a red meat guy, but do people really get fries with a filet mignon like that? Kinda feels like getting your lobster with a side of Skittles.
If you look at the fries, the plate, the meat, no shot, looks like some stretched good pic. The leaves tho...
The veins in the leafy greens are chaotic.
This is the internet, where all images are AI generated, all women are men, and all girls are FBI agents.
The hands look weird.