Content Credentials checker
Whether an image says it was made by a model, in the file's own words. The field that answers it is a published standard, not a guess about the pixels.
Drag images in, paste, or click to choose
A whole folder works too · Ctrl/Cmd+V pastes · on phone this opens your photo library · up to 40 MB per file
Read only. This page never changes a file and never uploads one.
What a result here does and does not prove
A manifest is a claim the file makes about itself, and this page reads that claim without checking who signed it. Verifying the signature needs a trusted certificate list fetched over the network, and nothing here touches the network, so treat a named tool as “the file says so” rather than as proof. Adobe’s official Verify site does the signature check.
The reverse matters more: finding nothing is not evidence that an image is real. Metadata comes off with any stripping tool, survives no screenshot, and is dropped by most social platforms on upload. There is also a second kind of mark that lives in the pixels rather than the metadata, and no metadata reader reaches it.
How Content Credentials record that a model made the image
The answer usually lives in one XMP field, Iptc4xmpExt:DigitalSourceType. IPTC defines its values, and trainedAlgorithmicMedia is the one meaning a generative model produced the image, with a separate value for images only partly generated. It is plain text inside a plain XML packet, so this page reads it directly and shows you the raw value next to what it means. Where a C2PA manifest is present as well, the tool names found inside it are listed too.
Where this Content Credentials checker falls short
- This reads a declaration, it does not detect anything. An image is flagged here only because whatever produced it chose to say so.
- A file with no declaration is simply a file with no declaration. It is not evidence either way, and the absence is the normal state for screenshots, re-saves and anything that has been through a social platform.
- Statistical watermarks carried in the pixels are outside this entirely, and are not affected by stripping metadata.
Questions about the Content Credentials checker
- Does checking Content Credentials cost anything?
- No. It is free and ad-supported, with no account and no cap on how many files you check. The manifest is parsed in your browser, so each extra image costs nobody anything.
- An AI image tool made this picture, so why does the checker find nothing?
- Either the tool never wrote a declaration, or something removed it afterwards. Re-saving through most editors, taking a screenshot, and uploading to most social platforms all drop metadata, and a plain compression pass does the same. The declaration is easy to write and just as easy to lose.
- Can this tell me an image is definitely a real photograph?
- No, and no tool that reads metadata can. Camera fields are as easy to write as they are to remove, so their presence is weak evidence and their absence is none at all. This page reports what the file claims, which is a smaller question than the one you are asking.
