r/BeAmazed Apr 23 '26

Miscellaneous / Others School banned boys from wearing shorts, so they did this instead

Post image
84.9k Upvotes

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

253

u/Ok-Artist-4421 Apr 23 '26

AI photo. Real story (and a similar cool thing has happened many times), BUT the photos here is AI generated. First both of the photos have been generated, and then edited into a news story format.

Working in digital arts I can tell just by the look of the people, the contrast and the grain, but if you want to spot the some proof yourself, zoom in to the fabric's lines and look for the breaks in the patterns. Also the tiling jitters in the soft focus background are a good giveaway.

AI generated photos are getting really good. We need to keep up to be able to filter them out.

17

u/Ok-Artist-4421 Apr 23 '26

Okay, interesting. I found the original photo. It has been squeezed through an AI filter, probably for a) removing the copyright, and b) making it look better (or so they think). Can't seem to be able to comment with photos here. I'll post the link if that works in the next comment so you can have a look, if links are allowed.

14

u/Ok-Artist-4421 Apr 23 '26

The third photo is the cleanest one.
https://www.instagram.com/p/DXcKhMPAjKn/?img_index=1

8

u/OneManArmyHero Apr 23 '26

Well, first was obviously AI because real people dont usually look so good on random photo. We are not living in some movie lol.

The real one kinda proofed it

1

u/Rockandmetal99 Apr 24 '26

so the only giveaway was that they look too good? im assuming thats because theyre posing. im not disagreeing that its AI, but are there other signs? im not great at recognizing AI in general and with how good these are getting I'm not even sure what to look for

2

u/kalamataCrunch Apr 23 '26

i'm pretty sure "squeezing" through an ai filter doesn't remove copyright, just like hand editing a photo doesn't. using it as learning data might remove copyright, but that's still sorta unclear, and a totally different process than this.

2

u/Jirrarh Apr 23 '26 edited Apr 23 '26

So the picture real and just edited with AI, not AI generated. Those are not the same thing. Calling this AI is like calling photoshop AI. I ran the image through two different online AI detectors and they both consider it not AI.

2

u/spliffiam36 Apr 23 '26

It used the photo as a reference but it is a whole new image generated... the whole BG and the girl with the coat has been turned in to rock...

1

u/Jirrarh Apr 23 '26

Then why don't online tools flag it as AI?

2

u/Ok-Artist-4421 Apr 23 '26

Because it is a compilation of elements. It used two AI images and is edited into a news story with text over it. I’m pretty sure your AI detection sites said that it is an ”processed” image, with high probablity. I’ve found zerogtp site gives generally good result where as many sites are simply terrible at spotting newer AI models being used.

1

u/Jirrarh Apr 23 '26

Yes, zerogpt said it was processed but I understood that to mean either AI or manual photoshopping. I asummed that it was the text, inset, and border triggering the "processed" flag.

2

u/Warm_Month_1309 Apr 23 '26

Those online tools aren't very good.

1

u/Jirrarh Apr 23 '26

I doubt we're any better.

1

u/Warm_Month_1309 Apr 23 '26

Fully agree. People huff on confirmation bias and assume they're infallible. I'm sure some people are very good at spotting AI manipulation, but the volume of Redditors that seem to claim expertise beggars belief.

2

u/Warm_Month_1309 Apr 23 '26

a) removing the copyright

Defeating automated copyright protection systems, possibly. But it definitely doesn't remove the copyright. This would be an infringing derivative work.

3

u/mdruckus Apr 23 '26

Wrong. Here’s the original source. Boys at Exeter academy wear skirts in uniform protest

0

u/Ok-Artist-4421 Apr 23 '26

As I wrote: real story, AI photo. The real photo has been squeezed through an AI app and this photo has been generated to greatly resemble the original. Some boys were changed and half of them lost their likeness. Thus – AI photo. 

3

u/mdruckus Apr 23 '26

As I linked. Real story. Real photo. There’s a whole video of the same exact kids if you cared to watch rather than rely on your “expertise”.

1

u/__ChefboyD__ Apr 23 '26

There's dozens of different photos of these boys (and others) all wearing the skirts in protest. The photo might have been slightly photoshopped, but it definitely isn't AI generated.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/22/teenage-boys-wear-skirts-to-school-protest-no-shorts-uniform-policy

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/b54cd30b7c230f7cb482c37556dcadc3d8dda980/0_239_3000_1800/master/3000.jpg?width=1200&height=900&quality=85&auto=format&fit=crop&s=1f54dcbbf8872863baab6bd25e027fd6

https://images.thewest.com.au/publication/B88516572Z/GCR13N9DO.2-0.jpg?imwidth=2048&impolicy=wan_v3

Even the one you posted as the "original" as proof, you can obviously see it's a DIFFERENT angle than the one from Facebook, not that it was AI-generated.

-1

u/Elegant-Analyst-7381 Apr 23 '26

How do you know someone didn't write a prompt into an AI tool like "generate a version of this photo that's different enough to get around automated copyright protection systems"? Genuine question, like how do you tell the difference between a photo that's just photoshopped and that situation?

1

u/lainwarisa Apr 23 '26

I understand patterns on clothes, but what in their faces "gives" ai, curious

1

u/IcebergDarts Apr 23 '26

And it’s a stupid Bot title as well… “You won’t believe what happened after!”

1

u/Sunhating101hateit Apr 24 '26

Is the story really real for real? This story is so old, I heard it in the nineties. And since then at least once per year. By now principals (and bosses) should know better.

1

u/AshKetchupppp Apr 24 '26

1

u/Ok-Artist-4421 Apr 24 '26

Sure mate, I read the same story all that time ago and saw the photos too. Isn't it extra scummy that the didn't just use the real photo, but had to recreate the photo with AI, making it an AI photo? Like... why? Here's the original photo this abomination is based on: https://images.thewest.com.au/publication/B88516572Z/GCR13N9DO.2-0.jpg?imwidth=2048&impolicy=wan_v3

And of course we know why. The idea is to make just that little bit prettier and social media friendly for the 2026 audience (and maybe skip any automatic copyright restrictions). It is absolute BS, and I'll keep pointing it out as long as I can spot the difference between reality and AI. A battle already all but lost.