Spotting AI-Generated 'Historical' Images: A Growing Concern

A new trend is emerging in the world of visual media, where artificial intelligence (AI) is being used to generate images and videos that claim to show historical events. However, experts warn that these creations can be misleading and even deceptive. In Italy’s Pompeii, archaeologists have recently used AI to reconstruct an image of a victim from the 79 C.E. volcanic eruption, marking a significant milestone in the use of this technology for historical purposes.

Roland Meyer, a media scholar at the University of Zurich, believes that the increasing availability of AI tools has led to their widespread adoption without proper consultation with experts. According to him, AI generators can recombine images from the past and create synthetic ones that may not exist but could have existed. This raises concerns about the accuracy and authenticity of these generated ‘historical’ images.

AI-generated videos often blur the line between fact and entertainment, making it difficult for viewers to distinguish what is real and what is fabricated. Historian Sebastian Kubon suggests a simple test: ask whether the video could have been made in the time period it claims to depict. If not, then it’s likely an AI creation.

The video supposedly showing Pompeii can be discredited on this basis alone. Furthermore, it displays clear signs of AI generation, such as people moving in a zombie-like manner and the woman’s appearance looking more modern than what is known about ancient Rome. The ease with which AI tools can create these ‘historical’ images has made it simpler for creators to produce misleading content.

Experts warn that AI generators are trained on existing data and will repeat its biases, resulting in images of the past that primarily reproduce typical patterns, cliches, and stereotypes. As Meyer puts it, these images are not a window into the past but rather ‘a mirror of our present.’ This is particularly concerning when authentic footage exists, as viewers may be misled into believing what they see is real.

When examining AI-generated videos or images, experts recommend looking for visual clues and checking the source. In one video, the camera glides in closer to a group of soldiers holding the US flag, showing their faces as they stare into the distance. However, this looks more like a Hollywood film than authentic documentary footage. Additionally, the watermark gives it away: this video was produced by Veo, a generative AI tool.

The video is based on an iconic 1945 photograph of US soldiers on Iwo Jima, but there is no authentic video footage of this specific moment. All experts emphasized the importance of critical source analysis when dealing with these images and videos. Where does the image come from? Who presents it? For whom and why?

Images and videos always present a particular perspective, as Kubon pointed out. They involve a selection of image fragments and audio sources; in essence, they present one perspective on the story. We’re too quick to assume that just because something was recorded, it’s somehow the truth.

The use of AI-generated images has raised concerns about responsibility. In comparison to fictional scenes in documentaries, where a director or production team decide how to portray the past, AI pulls from large datasets without understanding historical context. It produces something that looks plausible at first glance but is not historically accurate because it matches our expectations.

Jürgen Zimmerer, an Africa history professor at the University of Hamburg, warned that visual sources still carry a great deal of authority and have been problematic even before AI. Images have always been highly controversial sources, evident from dictatorial regimes retouching images in the past. The difference today is the scale at which AI can generate altered and completely fabricated scenes.

To spot AI-generated ‘historical’ images, experts recommend comparing them with verified historical sources such as archives, museums, reputable media or academic experts. A video showing alleged CCTV footage of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 is also an AI creation. While authentic photographs exist for Iwo Jima, no authentic footage exists from this moment in Chernobyl.

Such creations raise questions about responsibility and accountability when it comes to using data analysis tools like AI generators. Historians emphasize that history is always an approximation, and pretending there is original film footage can make something seem clear that is not actually clear.