Site to tell you whether an image was "AI"-generated - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 02:32:06 am
content: https://wasitai.comOnly works with images, not videos (at least not yet).Seems legit.

author: Whales
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 04:28:38 am
content: AI image detection can be done in a few ways:(1) Metadata checks.(2) Fine detail/artefact checks.(3) Review with a human.(4) Review with an AI model.All of these methods are fallible in different ways. The first two items are automatically invalidated on many websites as they strip & re-encode images automatically (even here on the EEVblog forums). The last two items are an arms race that keeps changing.Even if this website has high accuracy now, it won't soon as people will train models adversarially against it. Any "detection" mechanism is perfect food for further model training to work around it.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 04:01:20 pm
content: Seems to be accurate so far.

author: radiolistener
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 04:24:48 pm
content: it appears that it don't works at allIt’s likely that the service relies on markers indicating that an image was generated by AI. If such markers are missing, it assumes the image is authentic. This approach is problematic - in the absence of explicit AI-generated metadata, the service treats the image as real, even when it is visually obvious that it is synthetic.tested picture:https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/why-is-sd3-so-bad-at-generating-girls-lying-on-the-grass-v0-1h9gq9v9n56d1.jpg

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 04:42:48 pm
content: Interesting, I don't know what it is, but it's not just metadata. I tried with a few AI-generated images stripped of any metadata and it did spot them as AI-generated. I tried with a few genuine photos, and it spotted them as genuine.If it looks for "markers", that's not directly metadata. Maybe something embedded in the image itself?

author: radiolistener
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 04:47:18 pm
content: another example:original image

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 04:59:36 pm
content: I did a quick test to confirm what I was suspecting. Not related to metadata. Not *that* stupid. But too easy to fool.Took your first image, submitted it, and got the same result as you.Then opened it in GIMP, looked at its histogram to get some clues. After that, I added some noise filtering, saved the result, and resubmitted it. It spotted it as 100% AI.I'm pretty sure they use clues such as histograms and noise distribution. Nothing much more than this. So it "kind of" works, because AI-generated images tend to have significant differences with how noise appears in the images compared to genuine photos, and they may have otherwise added a number of other metrics, but it seems easy to fool.It's obvious that it's unable to determine if the image makes any sense, it's just a few metrics. Just like "AI" is unable to determine that whatever it generates makes any sense.So, you can try for yourself, take some images, play with filters, submit, and you'll see.

author: radiolistener
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2025, 05:19:23 pm
content: Another example, real HDR photo identified as 100% AI generatedOriginal image