Pangram's AI detector now checks video and images
Pangram built its name on spotting AI-written text. Its new tools extend that to AI-made images and video, and they are open to subscribers now.
Why phone photos made image detection hard
Real photos are not untouched either. CEO Max Spero wrote on X: "Most phone cameras, including iPhones, do some level of AI postprocessing to add detail to real photos."
The model therefore had to cope with that processing and still separate AI edits from fully AI-generated visuals. Spero told Pirate Wires that Pangram delayed the image model to test it on several iPhone 18 Pros, because it first marked pictures from those cameras as AI.
The image model arrives in Chrome
Pangram Image 1.0 was earlier released as a research preview. It now sits inside the company's Chrome extension, which scans images as you browse and flags likely AI ones.
Pangram's own testing gave a catch rate above 99 percent for AI images and a .27 percent false positive rate.
There are caveats. Below 512 x 512 pixels, Pangram says results carry a reduced confidence disclaimer. That may explain a demo from Spero showing the extension on Pinterest, where two obviously non-genuine images got an "unsure" result.
Video checks and access
A subscriber uploads a clip and gets a verdict on whether AI generated or altered it. The tool separates "partially AI" clips from fully AI-generated ones. A "heatmap" points to the parts of the video likely to be AI.
Pangram says the video model "particularly excels at frontier AI video detection" and outperformed other detectors in testing. One internal test showed more than 98 percent accuracy at flagging AI content.
Both detection tools need a Pangram subscription. Free accounts can still check a handful of images.
Our take
The accuracy numbers come from Pangram's own tests, and no outside evaluation was mentioned. Independent testing on real phone photos and on short, compressed clips would show how far the 98 and 99 percent figures hold in everyday use. The "unsure" results on obvious fakes suggest the small-image limit will matter for users of the browser extension.
Source: Engadget