AI Detection Artificial Intelligence

Which Tool Identifies AI Images with Higher Accuracy? ImageDetector vs. AI or Not

We skipped the easy samples and went straight for Midjourney, widely considered the hardest generator for detection tools to crack. Six images, two tools, one clear winner. Spoiler: One didn't flinch

Mark Gotauco

Updated April 23, 2026

Reading Time: 4 minutes

AI-generated misinformation isn't a future problem. It's already running in the wild, and the images driving it are getting harder to catch with the naked eye.

Detection tools such as ImageDetector and AI or Not are supposed to close that gap. But most of them get reviewed against easy samples, obvious AI outputs that practically announce themselves.

We wanted to test differently.

Midjourney is widely considered one of the hardest generators for detection tools to catch. Its outputs carry a photographic quality and compositional coherence that fools both humans and algorithms.

So instead of mixing generators to pad our sample size, we ran six Midjourney images through both tools and nothing else.

Let’s see if either tool could hold up against Midjourney across six rounds.

What is ImageDetector?

ImageDetector (imagedetector.com) is about as frictionless as these tools get. No account, no credits, no paywall. You drop in a JPG, PNG, or WEBP and get a result in seconds.

It works purely from visual signals, it looks at texture patterns, noise behavior, structural details without touching metadata or watermarks. That's a deliberate design choice, and it means the tool lives or dies by what it can actually see in the image.

Generator coverage includes Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, DALL-E, Gemini, Flux, Ideogram, Bing Image Creator, and GANs. The output is a single confidence score. Nothing fancy, but nothing getting in your way either.

What is AI or Not?

AI or Not (aiornot.com) is the more serious tool on paper. It comes from Illuminarty, covers text, audio, video, and deepfakes alongside images, and is clearly built with enterprise use cases in mind.

The accuracy numbers are hard to ignore. The platform claims 98.9% detection accuracy on recent AI image datasets, and an independent study ranked it as the top-performing image detector in a controlled test.

The tradeoff is access. The free tier gives you 10 image checks per month, which is almost nothing if you're reviewing images regularly. Paid plans start at $5 a month for 100 checks, and $15 a month for 625. Beyond that, you're on a credit system.

So there's a real gap between what the tool claims to do and what most people can actually afford to use it for. (not that $5 is that expensive anyway)

A Quick Note on Privacy

AI or Not states that images are analyzed securely. Storage terms vary by plan, with enterprise users operating under separate data agreements.

ImageDetector states that images are stored in accordance with its privacy policy. That's a softer position than an outright denial of storage. If you're submitting sensitive images, it's worth reading through before you upload.

What We Tested

Six Midjourney-generated images. Same generator across all six tests, no mixing.

Midjourney was a deliberate choice. It consistently gives detection tools the hardest time of any major generator.

Its outputs mimic photographic realism convincingly enough to fool tools that perform well against DALL-E or Stable Diffusion samples.

If we had mixed generators, a strong score on easier images would have obscured how each tool actually performs.