10 out of 10. AI still can’t nail details in clothing, wood, lettering, human extremities, and almost always still has a plasticky sheen to everything.
9 out 10 for me because Ben Affleck looked like a mannequin! But yes. Everything looks like highly skilled fondant sculptures at a resort hotel bakery. The pile of eyeless babies around the creepy robot soldier was believed on Facebook?
The one I was iffy on was the DC actors pic, mainly because the JPEG was several generations old and the repeated compression was messing up hands and fingers, not to mention the digital sharpening and associated haloing.
Though i dod pretty good, what this revealed to me is that images that are very compressed and blurry are harder to determine (the first one looks like it had messed up hands but it's compression; the last is so blurry you'd have to know it's fake only from the implausible content)
8/10
The gal Godot one got me, and I thought the 12 angry men one was a double-bluff. A movie where they used a weird optical effect to deliberately distort peoples faces and make the film look eerie and unsettling. Nope, just AI.
I think other responders are missing the point. We knew this would happen. But what's being done to ensure people don't get convicted due to faked images and videos, which will be almost certain to convince jurors in the near future? The answer is: nothing.
9/10 here...AI at still just has a feel to it? The interior one got me, maybe because so many real estate photos these days are shot with weird perspective and HDR? (The use of real people's faces seems to be expanding tho, which is disconcerting at best.)
I did the same mistake for the exact same reason. And I feel like it was the least important error because I care much more about potential fake news based on (real) people than about fake interiors
10/10. Check hands/fingers, check writing. There are more tricks for actual tougher to tell pictures (weird fractal bleeding, inconsitent light sources.
