I’d think AI imagery is uniquely toxic for product marketing because it reads as an admission the product is worse than the picture.
We know you’ll pick the most flattering angle, and the one perfectly formed unit out of 500, with a photo of a real shirt. It’s the upper bound on reality, but it’s still reality. If you have to hallucinate instead, you probably can’t even make that cherry-picked example look good.
Yes it’s dumb. I’ve seen AI in a su ermarket catalogue, but only for the background and not the models/products. They make photos in a studio and replace the background. That’s okay, because I don’t care for the background
I’d think AI imagery is uniquely toxic for product marketing because it reads as an admission the product is worse than the picture.
We know you’ll pick the most flattering angle, and the one perfectly formed unit out of 500, with a photo of a real shirt. It’s the upper bound on reality, but it’s still reality. If you have to hallucinate instead, you probably can’t even make that cherry-picked example look good.
It’s simpler than that. AI is faster and cheaper.
And it tells me nothing. I can’t tell how a shirt is going to lay over the body if the image is fake.
Faster. Cheaper. Stupider. And possibly to obscure something.
Yeah, their goal is not to tell you something, is to save budget to get a larger bonus.
Yes it’s dumb. I’ve seen AI in a su ermarket catalogue, but only for the background and not the models/products. They make photos in a studio and replace the background. That’s okay, because I don’t care for the background
I’m gonna be real… that would still damage my trust in them.
If I wanted the thing badly enough, I guess I could get by it, but that’s really cringe.
I know of it because they always wrote “background AI generated” at the bottom or top of the photo if that was the case.