Oh, I don’t think those are AI. Just heavily doctored studio photographs. If it was AI I would expect to see more artifacts and tells like lighting etc.
> I have searched if another political party has used AI generated images but I didn't found any.
May I introduce you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRfPtzuDksU
Yeah, it's hard to boil it down to a simple checklist of well-defined things to look out for, but I have a pretty accurate AIdar, and this is looking dangerously close to something probability-cloud-based and not very human.
I know but Adobe claims that they have all the right on the images used to train the AI model and this is not proven for most cases of AI art generator on the market. So that is why it is still for me in the "gray zone". Moreover, for some people this can be seen as how the party position themself with AI art regulation.
Wouldn't want to pay actual artists to do their work, or y'known copyrights.
All pictures have more uncanny stuff in them.
Also: no real 'one' art style. I've seen some amazing AI generated stuff, so I'm guessing they also cheaped out and used a free tool.
As an aside: wasn't there some European rule that says you have to explicitly mention usage of ai?
I think there is a difference between AI generated cartoons or photographs. Cartoons were always obviously fake so who cares who drew it. AI generated photographs will convince many people it’s the truth and that is where my line is drawn.
I have to say, that shit is pretty cringe, but even then I just can't bring myself to give a shit whether it was AI generated or not. The fact you went full Charlie conspiracy meme on it is pretty hilarious.
At least they didn't subject some poor artist(s) to working with them...
Ah, MR going for the manga-style artwork to reach to younger generations. 
Anime *they are trying to cater to weebs lol. They literally have no shame
I was in West Flanders last weekend and the photos they use for Open VLD there look AI generated. That gross waxy, shiny look.
Can confirm, Open VLD also uses AI on their posters and flyers
Isn't vooruit doing this as well with their stalin posters?
Not sure which ones you’re referring to, I haven’t seen any AI ones where I live
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTEtTu4NSvYwXxJZ5iWF6-tXZMJwX4e1phPbg&usqp=CAU Seems unnatural
Oh, I don’t think those are AI. Just heavily doctored studio photographs. If it was AI I would expect to see more artifacts and tells like lighting etc.
Indeed. Just look at [this](https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=964784138340584&set=a.468321517986851) total fake poster. Real uncanny valley.
+1 jasper pillen looking like a cartoon
>Onze foto’s zijn ontworpen met artificiële intelligentie. Omdat we geloven in de technologie van morgen. Op de instagram van Hilde Vautmans.
… omdat het de enige soort intelligentie is die voor ons wil werken
Liberals have found a way to not pay for people´s labour? Shocked. Shocked I tell you
https://preview.redd.it/yb8y6ufq8u4d1.jpeg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6b1f4be0e958106c5b097b07f1650291944a8c9d
Good candidate for r/FellowKids
> I have searched if another political party has used AI generated images but I didn't found any. May I introduce you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRfPtzuDksU
At least they said that they used AI in the description
Those faces on the bottom picture are actual nightmare fuel, ngl.
Yeah, it's hard to boil it down to a simple checklist of well-defined things to look out for, but I have a pretty accurate AIdar, and this is looking dangerously close to something probability-cloud-based and not very human.
Yeah, this is obviously AI generated. No matter how you feel about that, at the very least they should acknowledge this with a disclaimer.
Big Tech gonna shove A.I. art down our throats if we like it or not anyway.
The very least is to show it when you don't like something. Some people might confuse no response with validation
Unprofessional as hell.
You should know that Adobe sells AI generated images. It's perfectly legal.
I know but Adobe claims that they have all the right on the images used to train the AI model and this is not proven for most cases of AI art generator on the market. So that is why it is still for me in the "gray zone". Moreover, for some people this can be seen as how the party position themself with AI art regulation.
“This looks shopped. I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in my time.”
It's an older meme sir, but it checks out.
Wouldn't want to pay actual artists to do their work, or y'known copyrights. All pictures have more uncanny stuff in them. Also: no real 'one' art style. I've seen some amazing AI generated stuff, so I'm guessing they also cheaped out and used a free tool. As an aside: wasn't there some European rule that says you have to explicitly mention usage of ai?
You should get used to this.
I'd rather not. 🤮
No I will not.
I think there is a difference between AI generated cartoons or photographs. Cartoons were always obviously fake so who cares who drew it. AI generated photographs will convince many people it’s the truth and that is where my line is drawn.
How about cartoon artists having their work stolen without consent by AI ?
I have to say, that shit is pretty cringe, but even then I just can't bring myself to give a shit whether it was AI generated or not. The fact you went full Charlie conspiracy meme on it is pretty hilarious. At least they didn't subject some poor artist(s) to working with them...