Get the weekly radar
One short email with the freshest products, every week.
An AI-content detector that scores images, video, audio, and text for signs of AI generation and deepfakes.
Grounded in available product and source data
Telling whether an image or clip was AI-generated by eye gets harder every model cycle; AI or Not's answer is a confidence score instead of a guess — upload an image, video, audio file, or text, and the tool returns a percentage likelihood of AI generation alongside a separate deepfake score.
That score isn't a black-box verdict: a data breakdown shows model-specific probabilities, and the site names two specific generation sources it checks against — Stable Diffusion and Midjourney — on top of general deepfake detection. Beyond the web upload interface, an AI Detection API covering all four content types lets a team run the same checks programmatically, the kind of thing a content-moderation or review pipeline would need rather than a one-off manual check.
The site states a 98.9% accuracy figure alongside more than 6 million checks run and 500,000-plus users, and displays logos for The New York Times, Forbes, The Wall Street Journal, Fox, Hitachi, and Fanvue. None of that is independently audited from the homepage alone, and AI-detection tools as a category have a well-documented weak point: false positives on real human-made content and false negatives on newer generation models the detector wasn't tuned against. The site doesn't break down its accuracy by media type or by which specific models it tested against, and only names two generators specifically — content from tools outside Stable Diffusion and Midjourney isn't confirmed to be reliably flagged either way.
Anyone using this for a decision with real consequences — a fraud review, a moderation ban, a journalistic verification — should treat a single score as one input, not a final ruling, and check the model-specific breakdown rather than the headline percentage alone. Pricing details live on a separate page not covered here, so specific plan names and what each unlocks are worth checking directly before committing to a workflow around the API.
No — the site returns a percentage confidence score rather than a binary verdict, plus a separate deepfake score and a model-specific breakdown, so a result reads more like a probability than a definitive ruling.
The site states 98.9% accuracy, but doesn't break that figure down by media type or by which specific models were tested against — AI detectors generally struggle more with newer generation models they weren't tuned on, so that headline number is worth treating as a general claim rather than a guarantee for any specific file.
The site names only Stable Diffusion and Midjourney specifically, alongside general deepfake detection — content from other generators isn't confirmed to be covered by name, so results outside those two tools are worth treating with more caution.
Yes — beyond the web upload interface, the site offers an AI Detection API covering all four supported content types, letting a team run detection checks programmatically as part of an automated review pipeline rather than uploading files manually one at a time.
Text is listed among the supported content types, but the homepage demonstrates the upload-and-score interface primarily for images, video, and audio — the text-detection experience specifically isn't shown in the same detail.
