Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Due to improving AI enhancements and alterations, this will become impossible to police.
Absolutely. It's already incredible with the latest Nano Banana, and within a year or so increasing muscles / slimming waist won't leave a single tell that G00b or anyone else will ever see.
The AI bros in India are going to make a fortune with fake American muscle girls onlyfans pages, just you wait.
I just discovered there's a "photoshopped" tag with 6 images. 4 of the 6 should be removed imho. Idk regarding the other two. In both cases, it's up to the mods, but I'm guessing these all slipped past the radar. I don't even know how appropriate the "photoshopped" tag is except to identify images that don't belong.
In these cases, I would argue that 'photoshopped' is more like 'costume,' so it is not a flag to delete. It is obvious that the tag is for certain effects that we know are not possible in reality. However, these effects are overt, not sneaky or hidden, such as an effect on the background/setting of the photo, rather than the muscularity of the model.
In these cases, I would argue that 'photoshopped' is more like 'costume,' so it is not a flag to delete. It is obvious that the tag is for certain effects that we know are not possible in reality. However, these effects are overt, not sneaky or hidden, such as an effect on the background/setting of the photo, rather than the muscularity of the model.
Noted. And fair enough. This fits with color shifted images into various monotones, or when someone tints Lili Dong green as a She-Hulk cosplay. (Make her angry, she looks good when she's angry!)
Of course, that again makes me question the recent Julia Caceres AI Lion I asked about here. That was deleted shortly after I posted about it. On the one hand, it had a "sneaky" quality to it of looking realistic enough to fool those easily fooled by AI, but on the other hand, common sense dictated that she wasn't actually posing with a real lion in a busy gym, and it didn't involve altering her physical appearance.
This is a new territory of potential gray areas. I'll report when I see uploads that are forbidden, but I don't want to pester mods by reporting images considered acceptable.
Thanks for clarifying the mod rationale of the above. What is the distinction that led to deleting the lion?
Not so much morphing, but it looks to me as if these pictures have had "extra ab definition" and sweat. Don't get me wrong, an already impressive physique. A bit of AI sizzle to sell the steak? https://www.threads.com/@laura_ashleighh
Not so much morphing, but it looks to me as if these pictures have had "extra ab definition" and sweat. Don't get me wrong, an already impressive physique. A bit of AI sizzle to sell the steak? https://www.threads.com/@laura_ashleighh
Chainer previously ruled these as "soft blacklist" fodder, though it doesn't matter what's on Threads, only that it's not uploaded to the GWM galleries and presented as "real".
This was my response to Chainer which resulted in a model getting added to the soft blacklist: "Images of the following are hidden from the main gallery: Vanilla Livitski; reason: Possible editing".
I hate needing to report this because her body (and arms) are amazing, but Yàn Hóng (love.u.4.ever) (ifbbproyanhong) is using AI Face Smoothing.
The tell is the sudden "popping" between a smooth "botox-like" complexion and her rougher actual face. It's most predictable in videos that zoom in close enough to crop her face. The AI targeting gets confused and abruptly stops when her face is obscured and starts again when enough of her face is visible.
Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
We could potentially soft-blacklist her for that, but honestly we're usually less concerned with Instagram facial smoothing filters and such (which they could mimic most of the same effect of with the right makeup anyway), than something that changes their actual muscle/body shapes.
We could potentially soft-blacklist her for that, but honestly we're usually less concerned with Instagram facial smoothing filters and such (which they could mimic most of the same effect of with the right makeup anyway), than something that changes their actual muscle/body shapes.
Now I know. If I hadn't posted about it, I wouldn't have learned that caveat.
Hint... it's not just a face filter.
I go to the Arnold and the Olympia every year. There's a decent amount of muscular women from Asia there. The same women who look absolutely superhuman in these clips and photos look totally routine in person. None of them are the size of a Hunter Henderson or Chelsea Dion. They have good physiques, but there's obviously something going on.
You can appreciate these women and find the images to be arousing, but don't - for a second - think that they are showing objective reality.
*South Korea and China have a huge “beauty filter” and body-editing culture around social media, and that absolutely includes filters and apps that can make someone look leaner, more shredded, broader-shouldered, or more muscular in both photos and videos.
A lot of these are not uniquely Korean apps, but they’re heavily used in Korean social media culture, especially around:
Some apps specifically advertise:
Examples include:
There’s also a broader Korean “camera filter” ecosystem where livestream and selfie apps automatically:
And now AI-based video retouching can apply those changes frame-by-frame, so the effect survives movement. That’s why some clips online can feel strangely “hyper-polished,” like reality passed through a chrome gym mirror from another dimension.
*
This is what she looks like without the filter: https://sculpted.uk/product/yan-hong-casual-a...
That was about a year ago. Maybe she grew a lot over the last year, or maybe the recent videos are morphed.
This is what she looks like without the filter: https://sculpted.uk/product/yan-hong-casual-a...
I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing there that's so wildly different from the videos above, body-wise.
It's not a problem if they just smooth their skin / enlarge their eyes, because it's the equivalent of makeup. But when they start shrinking their heads and enlarging their muscles...red lights.
Perhaps studios see the models just as the "base" and use the raw pictures for much more developed final products? Because sometimes - many times - the studio pic looks nothing like the model. Example:
Hint... it's not just a face filter.
The trouble is, I can't report speculatively.
If I can't give the mods concrete, independently verifiable evidence that I can draw their attention to either visually (by description or illustration), or with a tool like the SightEngine AI Detector, then I'm accomplishing little more than messing with their heads if they give credence to my assertions and invest the energy to look for evidence.
Yes, knowledge of the availability of manipulation tools, and recognition of cultural influence that increases the likelihood of manipulated media are important, but it's not enough to stereotype that "it's an entire culture and industry in Korea" without citing examples of supporting evidence for each model.
I'm glad that there are members like yourself that attend shows and can relay in-person impressions. I'm glad that there are members enmeshed in various cultures that can provide a deeper insight into particular cultural influences. But as woland attempted to do below, supporting evidence is still necessary.
This is what she looks like without the filter: https://sculpted.uk/product/yan-hong-casual-a...
That was about a year ago. Maybe she grew a lot over the last year, or maybe the recent videos are morphed.
This is an excellent strategy. Not merely evidence of manipulation from the content creators themselves, but third party sources.
Using the image and video at that link, to my "image manipulator's eye", it's borderline whether there's any size difference. I'm accounting for date, leanness, pump, angle, light and shadow, setting, outfits, movement, and media size/resolution.
You get the idea. Simply put, it's not enough to go on. Not even to extrapolate.
The only tangible evidence right now is the AI Face Smoothing. You can see it popping in and out, and you can see the uncanny valley at the edges of her face. For her body, I haven't *yet* seen anything I can point the mods to.
Thus far, I'm only aware of AI Image Detectors, but I don't know what tools are available for detecting AI Video manipulation. I'd say that's the smoking gun we're missing.
It's not a problem if they just smooth their skin / enlarge their eyes, because it's the equivalent of makeup. But when they start shrinking their heads and enlarging their muscles...red lights.
Perhaps studios see the models just as the "base" and use the raw pictures for much more developed final products? Because sometimes - many times - the studio pic looks nothing like the model. Example:
That second picture...
Yikes!! Epic levels of image manipulation. Head shrinking, enlarged delta, biceps, hips, contoured waste, elongated torso and arms, widening of upper body...
* "delts" not delta
You just told on an image you uploaded. Clearly you recognized that it had been manipulated, so why upload in the first place. It's good of you to have reported it though.
Heo Eun-Soo (hipboss_hes) definitely needs to be on the soft blacklist for manipulating her images. It's absolutely blatent. Particularly the "ACT I Studio" content of which there's a ton.
I agree with Muscle_Toez who accurately described the overuse of beauty filters in Asia - not restricted to South Korea but also de rigueur in China or Vietnam.
I remember that in the early years of YouTube c. 2007-2008 these so-called beauty wars broke into nationalistic/jingoistic battle of (Bad) words via back-to-back videos between South Korean and Japanese users, something that may sound like madness for anyone not aware of the ridiculous beauty standards and the politics thereof going on this part of the world.
I had the chance to see Yan Hong when she competed in London back in 2024 (Same time around she did these videos available from the link chipperpip posted above) and she didn't look... that bad, or using that much makeup.
Heo Eun-Soo (hipboss_hes) definitely needs to be on the soft blacklist for manipulating her images. It's absolutely blatent. Particularly the "ACT I Studio" content of which there's a ton.
Yeah, that's true. We can deal with a bit of retouching, but some of hers look downright silly. I confirmed that some like these were the same versions she put on her IG, and that was enough for me to add her to the soft blacklist:
Yeah, that's true. We can deal with a bit of retouching, but some of hers look downright silly. I confirmed that some like these were the same versions she put on her IG, and that was enough for me to add her to the soft blacklist:
"Images of the following are hidden from the main gallery: Heo Eun-Soo (hipboss_hes); reason: Aggressive self-morphing in pics"
...typo (missing a "g")
All of Mimi Luph's recent output seem to be retouched by AI. They are tagged as such by Mimi on her Threads accounts.