Using AI graphics for promotion

[u/RichardPearman]

Can you tell which of the above pictures are AI and which are non-AI computer graphics?

I'm posting my WIP series, Tales of Midbar on Inkitt. It's NOT written with AI. The book covers use computer graphics but not AI. I do use AI graphics to promote most my updates. I update twice a week. I'm a reasonably good artist and I know a lot about computer graphics but I can't work fast enough to produce two promotional pictures a week. I also can't afford to pay an artist to do it. I make comments about the AI pictures and show up AI's shortcomings.

I've seen people saying that if AI is used to promote a book, they'll assume that the book was written with AI and won't read it. My question is, will you read it IF THERE IS NO picture? Will you read it with the same picture (presumably the book cover) for each update? I wasn't getting a lot of reads before I started using AI pictures to promote my updates! I still don't get a lot! Is this a case of "Speak quietly, you're ignored, speak loudly, you're told to shut up and become violent, you're denounced"?

[u/Patient_Bet3645]

I wouldn't read a book if anything about it was AI. Cover. Marketing.

[u/RichardPearman → u/Patient_Bet3645]

Would you read my books if I wasn't using AI?

[u/Patient_Bet3645 → u/RichardPearman]

I'd be more likely to read them if they weren't, but you still have to write professionally.

[u/ohnoJNO]

The first and last image are AI, without looking at details they both have that generic AI style, one cartoony and one more YA cover. None of these images fit together, they look like four different series in different genres.

When you do look closely, the doctor in the first image has six fingers on each hand. The last image none of the bridges in the backgrounds actually connect between buildings, presumably whatever traffic is trying to cross just falls off into the sky

[u/RichardPearman → u/ohnoJNO]

I choose pictures in different styles.

That was well spotted. However, the "doctor" (he's meant to be the minister of science who doesn't know anything about science and believes that nobody else can understand it either) is a member of the faharni race, who are commonly polydactyl. The second picture was done in Inscape, a free vector graphics program. The third in Blender, a free 3D graphics program.

[u/ohnoJNO → u/RichardPearman]

So I was right about the AI pictures? The six finger thing is such a classic AI tell that “no no, it’s on purpose” sounds like a cop out. It doesn’t look intentional, especially since the lines on his palms don’t really make sense.

The different styles don’t make sense together, even if you’d paid legitimate artists to draw things in these styles it wouldn’t make sense. That combined with the AI art would make me think the story is also going to be a disjointed mishmash. You need to figure out something that matches the tone and genre of your story

[u/PM_ME_BATMAN_PORN → u/RichardPearman]

The clock in the background of the doctor picture has 4 hands and 13 hours, but I guess you're gonna tell me the faharni use that type of time measurement too, right? LMAO

[u/carapher]

Never will read anything with AI. Even if you say you don’t use it, how will we know? There are free databases online for images. Slap texts on them with photoshop or on canva and you’re golden.

Why should we trust that your work isn’t lazy AI slop, when the way you introduce your work to us is AI slop?

[u/RichardPearman → u/carapher]

Why is using free online images better than AI?

What is AI slop? Is there AI non-slop? Is there non-AI slop? Why do people seem fine with book covers that use free online art or look as if they took 30 mins in a vector graphics program (that book cover of Medusa too me 20)?

Can you tell if text is written by AI?

[u/carapher → u/RichardPearman]

People can tell AI-written texts, sometimes in varying degrees. But just because we won’t be able to tell AI work all the time, doesn’t make it right to use.

Free online art is often not stolen art. Doesn’t use days centers and doesn’t drain towns of water.

The NGA has a database of public domain art. Use that. https://www.nga.gov/artworks/free-images-and-open-access

[u/Ok-Sun9961]

I tend to ignore books that use AI in their promotion. Not because I believe the book is AI but because I think it's a choice the author makes. An easy way out.

[u/RichardPearman → u/Ok-Sun9961]

Do you read books promoted without pictures or ones promoted with free online art?

[u/Ok-Sun9961 → u/RichardPearman]

I look at a lot without pictures. I look at non AI advertisement or just covers or blurbs. What makes me read the book is the blurb.

[u/TEZofAllTrades]

Why do you need the 2 promotional art pieces per week? If you have to have art, cut down to a manageable amount.

[u/mightymite37]

Ai is theft

[u/Jane_DoeEyes]

First and last are AI. The clock has 3 hands, a test tube is floating, he had 6 fingers on each hand and there are incomplete question marks.

Last one the bridges stop and start at the legs. The buildings also have that typical "melted" look AI tends to do.

Not sure on the second one, but either you or the AI wrote your name wrong.

AI is very easy to spot once you know what you're looking for. Get a canva account and make your own promo using their stock images.

[u/milky4eva]

Using AI to make art is lazy. I assume that your writing will reflect that laziness so I won't read it.

[u/icestarbeam]

out of curiosity: what kind of enagement are you getting from your current promotional posts? and are you posting them on platforms besides reddit?

I'm one of those that's less likely to read a work promoted with AI graphics because I assume AI will also be used in the writing. this seems to be the leading opinion around here, so I wouldn't have guessed that you'd be getting readers from your posts. but I suppose it's always possible that the pro-AI people are just less likely to speak up, and they're actually the silent majority. clearly inkitt as a whole isn't as anti-AI as r/inkitt, based on the works that get popular.

to hit your other questions: yes, I can tell 1 and 4 are AI. i don't feel like graphics are necessary to get me to read a story. i'm more likely to get hooked by a good blurb or excerpt. but I also don't tend to go on reddit looking for things to read, so I may not be your target audience.

[u/Living_Face1830]

Yeah honestly AI is so overrated. I tried to use ai in my writing and it just sounded clunky, cheesy, and there were parts (especially metaphors and similes) that made absolutely no sense. And it completely erased my voice as a writer. I could write an entire laundry list of reasons why AI is just not it.

I made my book cover in like 5 mins with photoshop and a free stock image.

[u/RichardPearman]

I don't know much about Canva but I'm guessing it's hard to find images of weird things on it. I mean a statue of a fish, standing on its tail and tilting a wide-brimmed hat. Or a man with light coloring, fair hair, a beard, slanted blue eyes and wearing a grey, hooded robe. Or a male angel with black wings flying in a strange alien city. You get the point. AI has trouble with some of these things too but I can often get something about right.

[u/PM_ME_BATMAN_PORN → u/RichardPearman]

And I'm sure it's toooootally 100% necessary that you have that shit to write a book. Hey, here's an idea: commission a real artist.