Banning AI Art

BASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED!!!!

Great news! It feels like AI "art" is taking over everywhere and I can't stand it.

Well, that's great.

With regard to making the site more attractive. It would be interesting to add some blur effects. A few changes to the CSS should be enough. It would also be great to add more interactions. In particular, I think it would be interesting to add a timeline of all the wallpapers viewed. That way, it would be possible to implement the recommendation of similar wallpapers.

It would also be possible to view NSFW images just by hovering over them. I use the blocked image, but when I click to see similar ones, I want to see the images without having to go to the whole page.

I've created an extension that saves the timeline of the wallpapers viewed, but I can't see that same timeline on another PC because it's saved in the browser's IndexedDB...

The blur effect I added was in the “#searchbar” and I also want it to hide automatically.

In general I agree that AI is often low quality content. Personally, I've never intentionally looked for AI art.

I'm also looking for ideas to make the site more attractive to artists in general.

I'm not an artist, but I'm sure that newbies who come from Google often don't understand where to find a link to the original source.

Just look at how invisible the link to the original source is: https://files.catbox.moe/rzbfj4.png (top left, I even highlighted). And nowhere is it clearly indicated that this is a link to a source.

I think a more visible link to the original source would be beneficial to artists. For example, adding the text "Source" or even making the link a button. A very rough sketch to illustrate an idea:

https://files.catbox.moe/f2znpm.png - noticeable button at the top left (probably even too noticeable) https://files.catbox.moe/j8uq59.png - link at the bottom left (expected position - a link to the original source is always expected somewhere at the bottom)

Initially, I also wanted to suggest visually highlighting the artist's hashtag (with an icon or color), but after thinking about it, I decided that I like current simple universal hashtags better.

While I understand & respect your desire to preserve the spirit of the "old internet" & protect a community of human artists, I think banning AI art outright is a short-sighted move that may ultimately limit the richness of creative expression rather than protect it.

First, AI art is not inherently antithetical to human creativity, it is a tool, much like Photoshop, digital brushes or 3D modeling software once were. Behind every AI generated image is a human making choices: about prompts, composition, curation, iteration & intent. To suggest otherwise is to deny the existence of hybrid creativity, which is where the future of art undeniably lies. You say you want to fight "enshittification," but censoring innovation because it challenges a traditional workflow could just as easily be seen as another form of cultural regression.

Second, banning AI art sends an exclusionary message to a growing wave of digital creatives who are embracing new tools not to replace artistry, but to amplify it. Some of these people are artists who can no longer hold a stylus due to disability. Some are storytellers using visual tools to explore new worlds. Others are experimenting in ways traditional tools simply don't allow. You’re shutting the door on them without distinguishing between spam & sincere expression.

Finally, there’s a practical danger in drawing a hard line here: the definition of “AI art” is already murky. Should it include pieces where AI was used in composition but finished by hand? Or where an AI helped conceptualize a sketch later turned into a painting? The line is blurrier than your policy admits, & enforcement risks being both inconsistent & unjust.

Rather than banning a medium, why not foster curation & transparency? Let users tag, filter, and follow what they want. Build tools to spotlight human created content without erasing everything else. Respect your users by giving them choice, don’t make that choice for them.

In the name of preserving the “old internet,” we should be cautious not to revive its worst tendencies: fear of change, knee-jerk gatekeeping, & elitism masquerading as authenticity.

You don't need to like AI art... but banning it altogether risks alienating people who are using it ethically, creatively & with heart.

Been a user here for years and years (actually 10 years, just checked) and never once even considered looking at the forums or any portion of interacting with any other user on this site. not what i'm here for and not what it should be for. but i'm here to comment that this is fucking awesome and i just looked for a patreon or donation link. didn't find one, but if one exists i will 100% donate to it after this post. thank you for remembering what the internet was.

Added 4 minutes after

hitagi said:

As an artist (I'm not doing it to make a living right now, it's more of a hobby) I welcome this change for the reason where it aims to channel the old internet vibe I know this will anger some people but there's other sources online keeping a community of human based artists is the way to go I'm excited to see more creative content that's not been generated how AI is going to be moderated we'll see it could be very time consuming but at least the word is out there and people will respect this decision.

how did you get old enough to use the computer without a parent over your shoulder but not know how to use punctuation

Added 8 minutes after

NINGNEKO6875248 said:

I myself have experience creating both images and videos using ComfyUI. I can tell you that generating a good image with AI is not easy at all. The process requires a significant amount of time spent tweaking and fine-tuning various parameters. What needs adjustment also varies drastically depending on the specific AI model used. Ultimately, it demands a substantial investment of time and dedication.

However, I also believe too many people are using AI to produce low-quality content and uploading it everywhere. This has led to the widespread perception that AI equals low quality.

Therefore, regarding AI-generated images, I think it requires joint effort from both the website and its users to filter and manage them effectively. While exploring wallpapers, I've also come across quite a few AI-generated images that go unnoticed (or: that people don't spot).

this is insane and is the kind of justification that people who produce ai slop spout. you can spend a full 40hr week working on tweaking your prompts and the end result is still ai-slop, no matter how proud you are of "your" "work". please get the fuck out of artistic spaces, you are not welcome.

gmikhail said:

In general I agree that AI is often low quality content. Personally, I've never intentionally looked for AI art.

I'm also looking for ideas to make the site more attractive to artists in general.

I'm not an artist, but I'm sure that newbies who come from Google often don't understand where to find a link to the original source.

Just look at how invisible the link to the original source is: https://files.catbox.moe/rzbfj4.png (top left, I even highlighted). And nowhere is it clearly indicated that this is a link to a source.

I think a more visible link to the original source would be beneficial to artists. For example, adding the text "Source" or even making the link a button. A very rough sketch to illustrate an idea:

https://files.catbox.moe/f2znpm.png - noticeable button at the top left (probably even too noticeable) https://files.catbox.moe/j8uq59.png - link at the bottom left (expected position - a link to the original source is always expected somewhere at the bottom)

Initially, I also wanted to suggest visually highlighting the artist's hashtag (with an icon or color), but after thinking about it, I decided that I like current simple universal hashtags better.

Hmm, you made a fair point. I actually like this "idea" that you provide a link - https://files.catbox.moe/f2znpm.png

The link you provided is quite engaging and can assist the community in locating sources more effectively, eliminating any confusion caused by the title "Search for Similar."

galloughs said:

Been a user here for years and years (actually 10 years, just checked) and never once even considered looking at the forums or any portion of interacting with any other user on this site. not what i'm here for and not what it should be for. but i'm here to comment that this is fucking awesome and i just looked for a patreon or donation link. didn't find one, but if one exists i will 100% donate to it after this post. thank you for remembering what the internet was.

Added 4 minutes after

hitagi said:

As an artist (I'm not doing it to make a living right now, it's more of a hobby) I welcome this change for the reason where it aims to channel the old internet vibe I know this will anger some people but there's other sources online keeping a community of human based artists is the way to go I'm excited to see more creative content that's not been generated how AI is going to be moderated we'll see it could be very time consuming but at least the word is out there and people will respect this decision.

how did you get old enough to use the computer without a parent over your shoulder but not know how to use punctuation

Added 8 minutes after

NINGNEKO6875248 said:

I myself have experience creating both images and videos using ComfyUI. I can tell you that generating a good image with AI is not easy at all. The process requires a significant amount of time spent tweaking and fine-tuning various parameters. What needs adjustment also varies drastically depending on the specific AI model used. Ultimately, it demands a substantial investment of time and dedication.

However, I also believe too many people are using AI to produce low-quality content and uploading it everywhere. This has led to the widespread perception that AI equals low quality.

Therefore, regarding AI-generated images, I think it requires joint effort from both the website and its users to filter and manage them effectively. While exploring wallpapers, I've also come across quite a few AI-generated images that go unnoticed (or: that people don't spot).

this is insane and is the kind of justification that people who produce ai slop spout. you can spend a full 40hr week working on tweaking your prompts and the end result is still ai-slop, no matter how proud you are of "your" "work". please get the fuck out of artistic spaces, you are not welcome.

There is no fixed form for artistic expression. Value is given by people. And your reading comprehension seems to be a bit problematic.

find the AI works I uploaded. If you can't, shut your fuck up. use you fucking dog eyes look at what I said and think carefully with your fucking dog brain

Its your site, do whatever you want with it, but I feel the day is fast approaching when AI is going to be so good you wont be able to tell the difference and then it will devolve into arguments of whats real and whats AI created.

What about if some people just tagging things AI art and it's not? Like someone tagged my wallpaper with AI. This is an official poster art from the Resident Evil movie and not AI art lol. https://wallhaven.cc/w/yqjdm7 and here's the poster version https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/residentevil/images/e/e8/WTRC_-_Official_American_poster_type_1.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/1000?cb=20211007153854

lakku said:

What about if some people just tagging things AI art and it's not? Like someone tagged my wallpaper with AI. This is an official poster art from the Resident Evil movie and not AI art lol. https://wallhaven.cc/w/yqjdm7 and here's the poster version https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/residentevil/images/e/e8/WTRC_-_Official_American_poster_type_1.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/1000?cb=20211007153854

Sorry, dude, the link you provided is indeed an AI Art.

The concrete sign beneath the neon R.P.D. sign reads "Raccoon Polio," but it appears quite blurry instead of clear. Additionally, the two fences feature two spikes each, rather than just one. Observing the background, particularly the fences and trees, gives an impression of incompleteness and a lack of clarity.

khyden It may be real picture, but upscaled.

THANK YOU I've been here since wallbase day, and im greatful that ai is being banned!

Most detectors consider https://wallhaven.cc/w/yqjdm7 to have around 5% chance of being AI art. Wallpapers will not be deleted simply because someone tags it with AI art. They will be judged individually, like all the other rules.

khyden said:

lakku said:

What about if some people just tagging things AI art and it's not? Like someone tagged my wallpaper with AI. This is an official poster art from the Resident Evil movie and not AI art lol. https://wallhaven.cc/w/yqjdm7 and here's the poster version https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/residentevil/images/e/e8/WTRC_-_Official_American_poster_type_1.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/1000?cb=20211007153854

Sorry, dude, the link you provided is indeed an AI Art.

The concrete sign beneath the neon R.P.D. sign reads "Raccoon Polio," but it appears quite blurry instead of clear. Additionally, the two fences feature two spikes each, rather than just one. Observing the background, particularly the fences and trees, gives an impression of incompleteness and a lack of clarity.

This is in all off the official posters, I zoomed and checked. Either in Hollywood they started to use AI few years ago or it's just incredibly blurry and can't be recognized lol. This art is on official Blu-Ray Steelbook release too which would blow my mind. Admins can decide if this will be deleted or not. :) I don't mind.

Most detectors consider https://wallhaven.cc/w/yqjdm7 to have around 5% chance of being AI art.

Huh, for some reason I've never considered that there are AI detectors available. TIL :D

PS: I've tried a few of them and they agree with me that this front page image is AI (with 99% confidence): https://wallhaven.cc/w/2yp6gg

lakku said:

khyden said:

lakku said:

What about if some people just tagging things AI art and it's not? Like someone tagged my wallpaper with AI. This is an official poster art from the Resident Evil movie and not AI art lol. https://wallhaven.cc/w/yqjdm7 and here's the poster version https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/residentevil/images/e/e8/WTRC_-_Official_American_poster_type_1.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/1000?cb=20211007153854

Sorry, dude, the link you provided is indeed an AI Art.

The concrete sign beneath the neon R.P.D. sign reads "Raccoon Polio," but it appears quite blurry instead of clear. Additionally, the two fences feature two spikes each, rather than just one. Observing the background, particularly the fences and trees, gives an impression of incompleteness and a lack of clarity.

This is in all off the official posters, I zoomed and checked. Either in Hollywood they started to use AI few years ago or it's just incredibly blurry and can't be recognized lol. This art is on official Blu-Ray Steelbook release too which would blow my mind. Admins can decide if this will be deleted or not. :) I don't mind.

I see your point; the poster's background does appear a bit blurry when you zoom in, which initially made me wonder if it was created by AI. I tested it with a few AI art detectors, but the results were inconsistent. One flagged it as AI-generated, while another did not, leaving me doubtful about their reliability.

I also took some time to dig deeper online and even consulted Grok for assistance, but I couldn't locate a credited artist for the Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City posters. There is a mention of Daniel Carrasco being involved in concept art for the film's creatures, but there's no solid proof that he contributed to the posters themselves.

Considering the film's budget was slashed from $40 million to $25 million, it’s plausible that the quality of the poster reflects those financial limitations. The absence of artist credits might be because the production company, either Constantin Film or Davis Raccoon Films, holds the rights. I don't believe it's fan art, as these posters are official, including the Blu-ray Steelbook edition.

I don't want your image to be removed because I like it, and it looks cool, so it should stay.

AksumkA Hey thank you so much for creating and making this fantastic, one of kind site available to the masses. This site is an absolute oasis from the rest of the Internet. Back when Wallbase bit the dust, I was broken hearted, I thought of creating my own version of it to replace it, but you filled that void quickly with Wallhaven and made it even better.

I wanted to encourage you to rethink this decision. In the next 1-5 years, it may be hard to even know if an image is real or generated, what will you do then? I suggest that instead of pursing abstinence with AI generated art, that you restructure your site to include it as another category, like with Anime. It can become the dumping ground for all AI generated art instead of it being tagged as that. This way, it’s easy for those who could care less about it, to never see it, and those who enjoy it, to enjoy it on this platform.

Example: I really have zero interest in 99% of the Anime art on Wallhaven. I’ve seen some cool stuff, but honestly, if you removed that category, I would be like, “thumbs up”, “great decision”, because I have zero interest in that material. But, oddly, I really like the AI art and amazed at how it is progressing over the last 2 years, and seeing that transformation at Wallhaven has really opened my eyes to the potential that is there. In fact, I even enjoy much of the realistic “Anime” style AI art, more so than that on the Anime art category.

I think making this decision now to ban all AI art from henceforth, is just going to cause problems down the road, that you will surely face, like people trying to upload stuff as being real even if it is AI generated. Giving them an avenue to upload it into the correct category, seems like it would be a lot easier on the mods to deal with it, because those uploads will likely continue, from here to the site shutdown or is given to someone else. AI art is here to stay, it's not going anywhere.

Help lead us into the next generation of art vs telling us to go elsewhere to find a replacement for user curated AI art. I’d much rather enjoy that here.

Thank you and regardless of your decision, I’ll still be here. :)

At first I didn't know what to feel. And then it felt weirdly safe and liberated.

Yup. I decieded. I am FOR it.

This is great news. Calling AI imagery "art" is an insult to real artists out there who put in years of work and learning to become as talented with art as they are.

I can't stand the AI art as well. At least in its current state. So I think it's a good decision. But I think we'll quickly get to the point where the AI art will no longer be recognizable. but then it's a different story

TheQwertiest said:

PS: I've tried a few of them and they agree with me that this front page image is AI (with 99% confidence): https://wallhaven.cc/w/2yp6gg

Indeed. Removed from front page and tagged.

zippzap said:

In the next 1-5 years, it may be hard to even know if an image is real or generated

Do you really believe that?

zippzap said:

In the next 1-5 years, it may be hard to even know if an image is real or generated lumberjacck said: Do you really believe that?

I never imagined 2 years ago that AI could do what it's doing now, beyond my imagination. I suspect that while it seems difficult to think it could get that way, I honestly believe it will.

Many believe that and I... think it's possible as well.