Artist: gravydood (locked)

Staff members involved: Lafcadio, spe
This artist was brought to attention by Lafcadio on 2025-06-06 handling some hanging flags, noting near-daily output, some existing timelapses that were generated in such a way that AI generations could be traced without actually being included in the video, and certain details in non-furry works that were never uploaded to e621. No action was taken at the time, as Lafcadio sought to give other staff a chance to follow up on his thoughts about Gravydood and the other flagged posts.

Come 2026-01-30, Lafcadio caught a Gravydood post as it was uploaded, and brought up the prior discussion, resolving to add it to the list of suspects warranting further documentation. Posts were deleted a little later at 2026-02-12. Among other pieces of evidence, a few details included incorrect generation of elements such as the "Hidden Leaf" symbol from the Naruto series, certain technical tells that arose from them trying to make imagesets with related posts, and other tells that made the use of very similar AI prompts extremely likely.

2026-02-26, Rainbow Dash received an appeal via email offering timelapses, showing Usagi Tsukino in a witch costume, Rarity as a humanoid, Neferpitou, humanoid Fluttershy in a maid costume, humanoid Fluttershy again, Coco Bandicoot, huumanoid Princess Celestia, Carrot (One Piece), Asuka Langley Soryu, Amy Rose in a wedding dress, and Twilight Sparkle in winter wear.

Lafcadio reviewed the footage briefly and had some immediate complaints about work that was not proven in other cases, including some AI-like errors. He raised various issues with different posts from their Twitter, as well as a very particular style of outlining in three posts that seemed to be indicative of some kind of automatic process, based on an image that, in at least one case, did not resemble details in the "final" background. A separate post included a very specific AI-like detail, which Lafcadio noted: if the artist could demonstrate a detail like this in a high-quality video, they would have a path towards proving innocence. He drafted a reply for Rainbow Dash to send, asking for source files related to 9 different tweets, along with specific directions on how to make better video evidence.

2026-03-11, Gravydood began the appeal, being briefly introduced to the appeal process by Versperus as Lafcadio was away. Gravydood provided a Google drive folder with some Clip Studio Paint files they chose. An hour later, Lafcadio arrived, asking for the files related to the previous list he compiled. Gravydood provided them, then submitted a video. The first video was corrupted, but Gravydood fixed this issue, providing a better and longer version of the same video 15 minutes after.

Over the next day, Lafcadio started looking into the multiple file submissions and the hour-long video. A staff-only list of suspicious elements was compiled. At 2026-03-16, Lafcadio asked about a number of details from one of the requested files, including what appeared to be a silhouette of power lines, and a crop of Pakkun from the Naruto anime. The background elements appeared to be subject to an "Extract line" function in order to quickly generate dark outlines for these background elements. Gravydood confirmed this. This then led to Lafcadio asking about a similar item in an image of Amy having sex at the beach, a small set of dark-blue dots along the left part of the background. The artist themself was not certain where these dots came from. Both parties chalked it up to an error, and they moved on.

Lafcadio then explained: separately from the matter with the "Extract line" lineart in a small number of posts, there were certain AI-like tells in certain works that had not been demonstrated by the artist's prior video submission. He explained he could provide no specific guidance as to what these AI-like tells were, and gave further instructions on how to continue recording video. As the first video showed Gravydood working from a tablet with a monitor along the top of the frame, Lafcadio asked for the monitor's display to be incorporated into the video as well.

Gravydood volunteered another video on 2026-03-20, but the AI-like details that Lafcadio wanted proven were still not proven by Gravydood's video. While they could certainly perform on camera, their two performances were simply not enough to reproduce the AI tells found in their previous works. With no ability to make these AI-like details proven, and no disclosures by the artist, it was impossible to treat any of this artist's work as AI-free. In a reply on 2025-03-22, Lafcadio gave a final rejection and prompted the artist to escalate if they believed he had committed a procedural error. The appeal ticket lapsed after 5 days with no reply from the artist, and the matter was treated as settled.