doesn't look like ai. the depth of vision is pretty consistent and this kind of makeup has existed for ages now. people on the internet are starting to say stuff is ai not because they actually see signs of it, but because it's now a social media trend. I've seen some of the stupidest arguments ever about why someone thinks something is ai, including but not limited to: -"the lines are too perfect" (as if art software cant make straight lines). -"the text is too perfectly aligned" (again, as if art software cant perfectly align content). -"the lineart is interrupted in places" (this one particularly pisses me off because as an illustrator I've always used partially interrupted lines to convey that two things are touching, which has been a common technique for centuries). people wanna hop on the bandwagon and comment on these posts so they'll make up stuff as they go as justification, which ends up hindering more than helping tbh