Text:

Please do not add genAI images to punch up your writing. You might think that it adds a nice little bit of visual pizazz to your content-marketing piece, but what you’re actually doing is *making it look like content marketing* rather than a useful resource. To the extent that content marketing is an effective tactic, it is because you build trust with the customer by providing them valuable information. A genAI turd plopped on top of your writing is a signal that it will be worthless slop.

  • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think the real complaint here is about bad looking art. Not a lot of people have an eye for picking out good-looking images. Or this person is just a huge snob.

    • Wilzax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I personally would rather see a well-crafted MSpaint diagram of what the fuck the author is describing than a Generative AI’s take

        • Wilzax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          You know The jeopardy clues have a set height that this violates right? I know from context that this image isn’t what it appears to be, even without knowing which tool was used to make it.

          And the alignment isn’t centered properly, which isn’t something someone with enough skill to replicate the font that closely would do.

          • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Yeah, but the point isn’t to look like a legit Jeopardy clue, it just has to not look generated. You can respect the height limit if you want, or break it.

            Your reply also wasn’t in the form of a question. No points.

            • dustyData@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              It’s extremely obvious because the lettering shadows have shadows themselves and they don’t match. It’s simultaneously trying to be the flat image and the CRT soft afterglow of the shadows at the same time, when in real life you’d only have one or the other. It’s also giving a headache.

              • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                That isn’t extremely obvious though, especially with the JPEG compression. If you didn’t know to look, you wouldn’t have noticed it. No one scrutinizes Jeopardy text.

                • dustyData@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  It’s super obvious, I caught it immediately just scrolling the thread, I don’t even do graphic design or anything. You can just tell if you have ever seen a single episode of Jeopardy in your life.

                  • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    That’s a lot of things to infer off of just scrolling past a 512×768 JPEG. If the image was in another context and the text had been different, no one would have batted an eye.

    • Zexks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Or it could be the fact that “good looking” literally has no objective measure.

      • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think something innocuous or inoffensive enough to most people qualify as “good looking”. I mean, that’s how marketing works.