ZONN.ai Forensic Report

Case · C351E09F · IMAGE

ZONN Analysis
0

Inconclusive

Signals are mixed or weak. We can't tell with confidence — context, source, and your own judgement matter here.

Signal ConfidenceLimited · 38/100

Analysed Specimen

Original analysed image
Forensic suspicion heatmap
OriginalHeatmap
POS55/100
No flagged regions

Heads up — 6 things to know

Why this analysis might be off

We highlight every disagreement and unusual signal we found so you can judge for yourself. Stronger warnings come first; informational notes are at the bottom.

No metadata at all

AI evidence

The file has no EXIF, XMP, IPTC, or ICC metadata. This is common for social-media re-uploads and for many generator outputs — real camera files almost always carry an ICC profile.

Upsampling artifacts in the frequency domain

AI evidence

FFT analysis found strong upsampling patterns — a fingerprint of diffusion-model VAE decoders (latent → pixel-space upscale).

ML detectors see this image differently

Note

ML scores span a wide range (4–100). Different architectures read different feature spaces; the majority vote strengthens the consensus, but no single model is fully reliable here.

One detector was unreachable

Note

Ml Python Siglip did not respond during this analysis. The other detectors ran normally.

Signals do not converge

Note

Score 53/100 lands in the middle of the inconclusive zone. Detectors did not agree on a story — review multiple lines of evidence below.

No ICC color profile

AI evidence

The image does not embed an ICC color profile. Real camera files almost always carry sRGB or Adobe RGB profiles — a missing profile is often a sign of generator output or re-encoded media.

Origin Check

Trace this image elsewhere

Cross-reference the source against major reverse-image services. Each link opens in a new tab with the image URL preloaded — ZONN.ai does not re-upload the image.

Evidence — 16 detectors reviewed

What each detector saw

Each detector independently gave this imagea score from 0 (definitely real) to 100 (definitely AI). The score above is their weighted consensus — detectors with higher confidence count more. No single detector decides; you read the spread.

INA v2 (FLUX/MJ)
100
Bombek1 SigLIP+DINOv2
4
Error Level Analysis
21
xRayon ConvNeXtV2
76
Frequency Analysis
73
Pixel Analysis
35
Noise Pattern
64
ICC Profile
62
Color Distribution
39
Edge Consistency
43
Compression Quality
45
CommFor (4803 Generators)
48
SigLIP AI Detector
50
Metadata
50
C2PA Provenance
50
Manipulation Map (IML-ViT)
50

Provenance

Source Dossier

PlatformDirect upload
Author
Content Typeimage
Analyzed OnMay 13, 2026, 4:24 PM