I think if at all possible, you could try sharing the work you did on the things being accused as AI generated.

Presumably you work with layers for different elements and effects, showing that aspect of the work would be an effective tool at dispelling any clam of you utilizing AI generation to produce your work.

Hopefully this is a helpful comment, sorry to hear you're going through this. But you do very much do good work, so don't be disheartened.

I did send the project file to FA yeah. The file is layered, it contains only translucent brush strokes.

Then they have no excuse.

that's disappointing.

They're more accusing it as a trace by the sounds anyway. They changed the accusation to AI generated to "partial" or "traced".
Considering AI steals from artists, saying that art looks like AI and not the other way around makes no sense.
Like say how can they determine if someone traced what the AI stole from? It's a false claim to say AI is an author of a style and not humans it takes from.
So tracing AI is a moot point because that'd just be indirectly tracing existing art, and then it'd make it doesn't look like "AI" but rather like, well, art but someone else's.
Still waiting for them to show what exactly I'm supposed to have "traced". Because surely they should be able to get AI to reproduce the same style and effects they're accusing me of... taking from an AI? Also what's wilder is how "realistic" some of my other drawings on my non-furry acc are that they were accused of AI. I guess AI owns the rights to real objects, humans and animals, too, according to these people?

Record your process and post it to YouTube or tiktok.

I often do, I put stuff on my Twitter I tried a full timelapse with my last painting's drawing inclusive.
Issue atm I have is that my PC freezes the pen when I draw timelapses when the art is of a certain resolution and brush size. It makes drawing very annoying.

Plus having to draw in vectors then fix them like 100 times over because when I upscale the vector they are go all wonky and off-closure. That makes me spend 100x more time on the lines than I usually do. I've been looking into other vector software like Moho but honestly it makes drawing even slower (though my reason was to get into 2D rigging).
Example vid (NSFW): https://twitter.com/InafoxAD/status.....75020268834887
It's probably not very clear because of how fast the CSP timelapse is, but you'll notice I have to transform the line curve a lot because of how bad CSP's vector system is.

Of course I could just draw at 1k and upscale the lines but then they'll all be pixelated/blurry and too thick for the paint work. Making a CSP timelapse at 16k, the resolution I have to be working at worked up to almost 2GB:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachme.....8da4f22eef&;

The last few inkings were `lower res (1k-2k) than my usual art as they were done on CSP mobile, mostly when I was in hospital (yes I drew yiff in hospital :P).
I don't even think my portable tablet would be able to handle it.
If people want to send me better hardware equipment that's better at recording, I don't mind that, but yeah not everyone has the best PC or lots of money.

The WIPs I've been currently posting on Twitter, etc, are because of this. I just never figured someone would call a ink drawing AI. It's a base in itself.
But overall FA seems to be accusing me of tracing judging from their last message, so they don't seem to even care about timelapses or layered files in general.

So I don't think in this case showing drawing ink drawings is very good proofing. I will though show WIPs for my paintings on Twitter, for exposure rather than "proofing".
I know that there's very advanced forms of tracing. Linear art is the easiest to fake as someone can literally just animate drawing lines by de-erasing them and moving them about, even on a single layer. Or using a tablet driver in-betweener with a vectorised line trace. So not only can people "trace" they can even fake the whole process of tracing.
There's also software that can "pretend" to stroke paint any given image, with layers even, so as long as it is separated ahead of time. These softwares are called autopainters, they're not even AI they use vectorised attention. It's only a matter of time before vector AI exists, however, that is completely indistinguishable from an artist painting to the non-artist eye.

It's been plenty done before the whole AI thing. See mods keep moving goalposts, on other sites I've been told my timelapses etc aren't enough. Accusing tracing without even showing what's allegedly being traced.
So yeah they're blaming my design as being "stolen" from an AI, not my artistic process. There's no way for any artist to "prove" they didn't fake art based on the various methods out there. Since FA aren't talking about the process nor its falsifiability, but rather the origin of the composition.

It's just literally impossible to prove anything under this moderation system, it's entirely based on ridicule of artistic design and quality.
FA mods seem to be experiencing the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon, where they are over-assessing things they usually wouldn't, but given a test where they had to evaluate AI images and non-AI images, they'd surely fail. Online tests have proven that, no one can "tell" if an image is AI if it's well done, and that's one excuse as to why C2PA exists to prevent AI fake news.

I'm not the only one, and it's not just FA:
https://twitter.com/search?q=accuse.....ick&f=live
That said, plenty of anti-AI sites don't have this problem. e621 was reasonable, Weasyl was, Side7, etc.

So yeah if they can randomly choose not accept WIPs or timelapses and just accuse my style preferences as looking like AI, what am I supposed to do?
They can't even point out what looks like AI. I could redraw the whole thing, but then they can just say I re-traced it. Since after all they're accusing me of tracing/partial edits.

I found this profile after seeing the following comment left under another artist's picture;
'This piece of furry artwork is definitely eye-catching with its vibrant colours and detailed animation. It seems to capture the playful and sensual nature of foxes in a unique way that is both entertaining and erotic. The artist has done an excellent job of creating a fun and flirtatious atmosphere that draws the viewer into the action. Overall, this piece of digital art is a great example of high-quality furry content.'
Do you happen to talk like ChatGPT along with drawing like midjourney?

No, and this is a common attack on autistic people that we talk like robots. I encourage you don't say such in future.
AI models mimicking art critics is a very recent thing. GPT copies humans, just like AI art models. Just because you are not cerebral doesn't mean that there aren't humans that are, it is typist and ableist.
I offer critique in various servers on Discord and have helped many artists. I am most definitely not a bot.
There are various videos of my art-making process and CSP files on my Patreon.
I feel artists are under-appreciated for what they do, especially since AI. They deserve to be invested with interest.

I should add my social media often has WIPs as well. As I understand not everyone has access to my Patreon.
Nonetheless, it's vital for artists to project their project files from, say, AI and plagiarists in general. But admittedly the AI issue has made me post less due to depression from my art which takes months a time to make to be labelled slanderously as AI. This doesn't mean I'm not making more art just because I'm not posting, I have been working extensively in Blender, which accusers simply cannot call AI as there simply is no such thing as 3D AI (except perhaps hideous low-poly NeRFs).
I don't charge anything for my art, and Patreon is just where I charge for projects as I don't believe others should profit from the bulk of my hard work for free, even as a hobbyist. If you would like me to start posting more regularly, it would be interesting to here from you what kind of stuff you feel doesn't look like AI.

Dude, I'm autistic - I don't type exactly like chatgpt summarisation and nobody else I know does. This is an extremely distinctive kind of phrasing, and denying it is just you embarrassing yourself. You didn't even check it for accuracy, it says the static image you left it under has 'detailed animation'.

Animation doesn't inherently mean a serial/moving picture.
Animation refers to illusion of movement in images in general.
Text can also be described as possessing animation.

I am not embarrassing myself, and I do not see your point other than to criticise my communication style.
According to Google, ChatGPT's image to text function was released in late September-November 2023, meaning those comments were made prior to such technology. However these models cost a lot of money and there is no reason for me of all people to use them to appreciate and encourage artists, though it would be a nice gesture to use AI to encourage artists, it would be unauthentic.

You misunderstand what the term "animated" means in art.
Animeshon (anime) is also inclusive of static art, pre-dating motion pictures and refers to art that possesses which in asia is referred to as qi yun (animated movement).

For example in classical art:
"Old Peasant Dance," crafted by Peter Paul Rubens around 1636, is a genre painting embodying the Baroque movement. Executed in oil on board and measuring 73 x 106 cm, the artwork is currently housed in the Museo del Prado in Madrid. The artwork captures an animated rural scene where villagers are engaged in a lively dance, set against a backdrop of lush greenery and a rustic edifice, enmeshing the viewer in the exuberance and life of the period.
https://artchive.com/paintings-by-a.....er-paul-rubens

I hope this helps and I encourage you to not harass random users as libel/slander is both illegal and against the site's terms of service.

Cohost is a wonderful place for artists.

Interesting :3 Do you know if they allow furry NSFW, particularly feral?
And hopefully they ban AI but don't falsely accuse of it.