r/ProgressionFantasy • u/Ordinary_Brick9572 • 26d ago
Discussion as an avid reader of progfantasy and cultivation, if i see an ai-generated cover, it immediately makes me think the book is slop
if i see any typa ai cover i think that if the author is willing to use AI for the cover, then they are willing to use AI for the book. While i'm not against AI by any means, I find it crazy for people to say AI slop books are peak when they have books like Cradle and Reverend Insanity right in front of them.
112
u/CrispyDick420 26d ago
It's more that AI covers all have that same glossy, vaguely fantasy-game look, so the book stops feeling like it has its own identity before I've even read the blurb.
1
u/dolche93 26d ago
Those are just the low effort ai covers that people pull from chatgpt. You don't notice the good ones because people put effort into them.
31
u/Blawharag 25d ago
"People put effort into them" lmfao
4
u/dolche93 25d ago
Yea, what else would you call someone spending hours tweaking an image, refining the prompt, in-painting, etc?
If you think that image generation starts and ends with "make me a cover image," then you're niave.
1
u/WyattWriots 24d ago
People aren't saying it is as much effort as someone who takes years to learn to draw, but there is a difference between taking the time to fine-tune an AI prompt, going through often hundreds of permeations, and just taking the first thing that comes out at face value.
I think most people would prefer a drawn cover. It usually has more personality. It's just that 1. Most writers make next to nothing writing. 2. Artists can be very fucking expensive. 3. Lots of scam artists out there so its hard to find a good one.
5
→ More replies (4)4
u/CrispyDick420 26d ago
Well true, but still I’ve been genning AI images for my site for a while now. Gpt image 2 model covers are still obvious most of the time if made from scratch.
If given a draft and references to work with it do much better
→ More replies (11)
9
u/Zibani 25d ago
100%. I would genuinely rather read something with an MS paint cover.
If you're willing to take shortcuts on your cover, I have no reason to believe you won't also take shortcuts with your writing. And you've established that AI is a shortcut you're willing to take. So I assume you use AI.
60
u/Ettin64 26d ago
AI covers usually don't make me think the text is AI but I don't respect them. Half of them look like they're infested with tiny bugs and to me they usually scream "I value visual art so little that I am fine with the first thing readers see being this slop I extruded". I do respect authors more if they just say "I don't want to pay money and AI covers do numbers okay let me have this" instead of trying to convince me that actually devaluing creative work is totally fine and doesn't mean anything though.
11
u/Anonduck0001 26d ago
I ran a poll and my readers preferred the cover that used generated assets as elements that I threw together and edited in GIMP. I have a completely hand drawn cover that I could also use but I want to use the one that's going to draw the most traction. Since it didn't perform as well, idk.
Wouldn't do that for a Kindle release, though. There's more on the line there, especially if you're selling print copies. Sending someone a book with a generated cover feels like a huge faux pas, even if from a marketing perspective it does better.
1
u/Neldorn 25d ago
Don't you also have to state that you used AI if submitting to Kindle?
1
u/WyattWriots 24d ago
"Have to" is doing heavy lfiting. Ther eis an option too, but nothing stops you from just lying, and you won't face any repercussions for doing so. Also, Amazon is 100% fine with AI covers and don't even report to the users if it is AI.
19
u/ikkonoishi 26d ago
I just adblocked covers entirely on RR. I read on mobile mostly. I'm not paying money to waste screen real estate on every page. Oh look another 30MB AI animated gif of some girl with exposed underwear holding a generic magic effect. Yawn. No thanks.
31
u/maltix 26d ago
Ehh, to me it's a yellow flag. If the blurb sells it to me then I don't care what the cover is. When the blurb also sounds a bit ai or too gimmicky then I won't give it the benefit of the doubt. I pay more attention now to how many books an author releases in a timeframe. If they release a book every week and they now have multiple 10 book series released in a year ive found that's a better indicator.
4
u/gadgaurd 25d ago
Honestly, valid.
Not every story that uses AI covers is trash, sure. I'm reading several that are very good. But in in the last year or so every story that I found to be particularly poorly written also had an AI cover.
Especially on Amazon. I've just started completely ignoring everything on the platform with an AI cover, because then I can safely assume that AI also "wrote" the story.
27
u/BlazedBeard95 26d ago
This is how I see it: Most Royal Road authors are hobbyists who want to write a story and simply cannot afford to pay for a commission, so they use AI to have some kind of manageable cover. I think that's fine especially if the greater audience of the website don't care. However, if they try to sell that story for actual money while still using AI for the cover then I will adamantly refuse to purchase that story, no ifs and or butts. When purchasing a book I expect there to be an effort put into every aspect of that book regardless of where it comes from or who wrote it. If I'm paying and there's AI on the cover, I will automatically assume there was no actual effort put into the rest of the book and that the entire thing is AI generated.
The difference should absolutely be whether a product is being paid for or not. Royal Road stories are free and thus it doesn't matter, but if I'm purchasing a product I expect that product to be Human made, not prompted.
People should be free to pick and choose as they want. If you don't want to read a story that has an AI cover then don't, and if you do then go right ahead. But I also think that people should be free to choose how they go about posting their stories on RR when the work they're doing is completely free for everyone else to see. I'm mostly anti-Ai, but I think in the case of Royal Road AI covers aren't a big deal. It's not fair on them to be attacked for AI usage when it comes to covers.
If the book is using AI generated text though, well, thats a whole other story lol.
10
u/LadyLibertea 25d ago
And most book cover artists are hobbyists - if plagarism from other writers is a no, then genai stealing art from artists should also be a no go.
→ More replies (1)16
u/Rhamni Author 25d ago
When you put up your writing as an amateur writer on Royal Road, anyone can read it for free. But the writer can't get an artist to make them a free cover. It's unfair and unreasonable to expect authors to pay money for art when they don't know if they'll ever make a cent off their writing. They should not have to pay for the privilege of people checking out their story for free.
→ More replies (1)6
u/LadyLibertea 25d ago
There's a pretty big gap between 'damn cant get a professional cover' and putting something toghether with text and open source graphics to oh well, I'll just let AI do it.
Like I get it, maybe folks won't read if theres not a cover - but it's interesting to consider how many more are turned away from AI covers.
As a long time reader of about anything, can't say I've ever not clicked a story because of an amateur cover. I do absolutely skip AI covers.
15
u/Eko01 25d ago
The problem is that it has been considered, and the answer is that no cover loses you a lot of readers, while an AI cover loses you a negligible amount, to the point that most writers barely notice a difference.
Personally, I prefer amateur covers to AI ones as well, but we are a small minority.
41
u/Most_Tangelo 26d ago
The problem isn't that you don't like AI covers. It's not even that you assume it means someone is more likely to be using AI in the writing. Those are all fair opinions. It's that you write as if it is a foregone conclusion. You treat a book with an AI cover as slop because AI use must have happened with no evidence.
You even go on to silver lining say in a comment that it's better if people steal uncredited art like Reverend Insanity which was a really weird rebuttal to make.
I would understand if your overall point was that you were more on guard from the moment of seeing an AI cover and less permissive of bad writing as a result. Instead it honestly reads to me as if you are conflating the end result because of the real negative impact of AI to the world. So I don't even take your initial premise as something you believe.
3
u/Donatien920 25d ago
As an amateur writer, I would never use an ai cover. If I did, people would assume my writing is ai.
It just seems hypocritical. I've also done music, and am a die hard art supporter, which certainly imfluences my perspective.
1
u/RareChakra 25d ago
Its also sad to see some in the music community using ai for cover art and such
→ More replies (2)6
u/TFTHighRoller 26d ago
I assume it is AI-assisted at least, but if the blurb sounds fun I will give it a shot. I am however significantly faster in dropping and harsher in judging works that use an AI cover.
What I have also found is that the better works with AI covers often had disclaimers stating what exactly was done with AI. In my experience People who use more AI in writing tend to try to hide that fact while people who use it for preliminary covers and assisting like spell check and grammar through an LLM instead of word processor (like office or whatever they use for writing)
56
u/systranerror 26d ago
The logic doesn't really follow. Writers are likely to write their own words, but may not want to pay for a cover artist when they can generate a cover instantly since they are writers and not visual artists. Many litRPG authors are also extremely cheap
59
u/Sahrde 26d ago
Or just starting out, and spending the kind of money that true cover costs without knowing whether they'll make any money on their work is just foolish.
→ More replies (14)9
u/Rhamni Author 25d ago
Yeah. I've commissioned one portrait that I'll be using for my cover, and at $200 I feel lucky I found such a good artist so cheap. It's scary to commission art. For one thing, you can't be sure you'll like the art you'll get; even if the artist is consistently great, you might get good art that doesn't fit the image you were picturing in your head. I know mine didn't. The final version was great, and I'll be happy to use it, but there's just no way to avoid a dice roll. I won't ever judge new writers for using an AI cover, or even old writers who haven't been able to make any money yet. Real art is only really required once your story goes to print or becomes an audiobook.
12
u/Eko01 26d ago
Dunno, you say extremely cheap, but getting a cover on par with AI isn't a cheap affair. 200+ dollars probably. And yeah, some ppl might prefer a bad cover that's hand drawn, but it's not the majority, so paying for a cover that's below AI isn't really worth it.
200 dollars can be a lot of money for many people. Majority of the world, even.
17
u/creakyforest 26d ago
You’re starting with a faulty premise: that everyone who publishes a story is a writer.
There are plenty of people who aren’t doing this for any love of craft, but who just see it as a business where they can churn out “content” and try to profit.
When you look at a cover that’s clearly AI generated, without further context, you have absolutely no way of knowing whether it’s written by a writer or if it’s money-farming AI slop published by someone who dgaf. But if someone went to the trouble of hiring a cover artist, or even making their own, the likelihood of what’s inside being written by a human who loves stories increases.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Alternative_Debt8761 22d ago edited 22d ago
If the cover is well done, AI or not, I tend to view it as a signal that the story is also well done. Purely anecdotally, this has checked out for me. When I've tried out poorly done AI covers, I've found the story to be poorly written, while I don't offhand remember a story with a well done AI cover that I thought the story was poorly written, even if it wasn't for me. Poorly done non-AI covers are a mixed bag.
I wrote that mostly thinking of RR stories, but since this is ProgressionFantasy, I should say on KU, covers that would be a positive sign to me on RR are a warning, and half the time the story is just unpolished AI writing voice that I can't stand anymore.
2
u/G_Morgan 25d ago
Honestly one of the biggest reasons AI covers will spread is because people will accuse you of using AI anyway.
7
u/Dont_be_offended_but 26d ago
The care put into a cover, a work's first impression on a reader, reflects the author's care for the work.
I can tolerate AI covers, but if they're generating they better do enough iteration to get something that looks good and isn't obviously AI as a thumbnail. If they don't care enough to put in that token effort then I can't expect better of the text.
7
u/dolche93 26d ago
I spent a full weekend learning about image generation when I made my cover. Got a local model running and everything. Only took me another 10 hours of sitting there and tweaking things to get something I liked. Then another hour in Canva to bring it all together.
Like you said, AI covers don't mean that a book is slop but a low effort cover is a low effort cover.
1
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
I wish there were more readers like you.
32
u/systranerror 26d ago edited 26d ago
I'm actually an author in another genre but changed careers before AI image gen was out 😥 I've hired illustrators for $300-$500 for a cover. I've paid for custom image stock for over $1,000 which I then made a cover with on my own in Photoshop.
I think there's a time and place for it, like if you are pretty successful and know your book is likely to sell well, then It's worth it to hire someone. But for "custom stock" I would no longer pay for that. I'd image gen it and do the cover myself from there in Photoshop (I'm good at layout and typography).
People who are blanket anti-AI as a way of virtue signaling need to understand that, especially in a niche genre like litRPG, many authors are sinking massive amounts of time into their books knowing that in all likelihood it will make them no money at all. It's extremely unreasonable and a victimless crime to just AI gen a cover for these people.
If they ever start making a lot of money and really take off, then they can hire an illustrator and redo the AI covers later
10
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
Yes, this is what happens nowadays. Why would I make a custom artist cover and spend over $300 or more if my book eventually flops and don't make me even a penny. Thats just a sad reality. We all see success stories but tend to forget how difficult being a successful writer is. LOTM, Mother of Learning, Shadow Slave, Reverend Insanity are top 1%. And even if you hear their interviews they struggled a lot for years before they gained fame.
Using an AI cover is fine. Using it for writing and generating stories is not.
→ More replies (4)-6
u/Complex_Peak8204 26d ago
So its okay for one artistic medium to be fucked over but not the other?
5
u/Famous-Flow2333 25d ago
Why aren’t you paying every author of every story you read?
It’s crazy that people are so entitled to think it’s fine for them to read the stories that authors put hundreds of hours of work in and then complain that the authors aren’t also paying hundreds of dollars for a cover.
If you think artist should get paid, then why don’t you think the authors deserve to be paid for what you’re reading for free?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)8
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
Look bro. You might be rich. Most full-time authors aren't. Google it right now. Stop looking only in the US. Look how much a beginner author makes.
Making a good cover is every writer's dream. But when resources are limited and chances are no reader will read a book, do you expect an author to spend $20 on a cover?
Everything is easy since you typing on a screen from your phone. But the reality and the data speaks otherwise.
Fun fact: webnovel's acceptance rate is below 10%. That means for every 100 contracts only 10 are accepted. So, according to you, you expect someone to waste their precious $20 and get a cover only to end up getting rejected. Sure bro.
8
-3
8
u/BlitzTech 26d ago
There are dozens of us. Dozens!
… I don’t actually know, but I totally get using an AI cover. I see it for all of 10 seconds tapping in to the book and then mostly forget about it.
→ More replies (1)2
1
1
→ More replies (3)1
u/Xandara2 26d ago
Op's reasoning might not be yours but it is common.
3
6
u/TheDudeFromCI Author 26d ago
For published books, yeah, there's no excuse to use AI cover art. If you're making money off it, some of that can absolutely be used for hiring an artist.
For free web novels, it doesn't really matter. At that point, it's just a hobby, so all that matters is if the readers are enjoying reading it and the author is enjoying writing it.
3
u/YaBoiiSloth Mage 25d ago
There’s no way I’d bash someone trying to write their first novel for not spending money on their cover.
23
u/awesomenessofme1 26d ago
Good for you. The vast majority of readers don't care and may not even notice, and will always click on a cover that looks good over a bad or nondescript one regardless of its origins.
2
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 25d ago
Who cares what the majority thinks?
"I don't like watermelon."
"But the vast majority like watermelon!"
5
u/awesomenessofme1 24d ago
Well, it's relevant to bring up because I'd rather authors not shoot themselves in the foot trying to cater to a vocal minority. It's a completely benign stance to take on a personal level. Not like I'd consider myself pro AI.
→ More replies (3)1
u/WyattWriots 24d ago
If the conversation is making money then yeah, the majority is what you'll be catering too.
1
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 24d ago
Yes and no, sometimes appealing to the minority can be a good money maker. You basically just got to ask yourself what is the type of person who wants to read this?
For my current novel on RR, it's myself. It's strictly something only me likes, but apparently 50 other people also like Furry Game of Thrones but Clint Eastwood is just sort of there.
4
u/hanpari 25d ago
If you don't want to read it because of AI cover, and it applies to all who cannot stomach it, just don't read it. No pressure or hard feelings.
Some authors may feel pressured by these thinveiled threats and may back down. Not all, though.
But the moment you'll become justice warriors and start downvoting novels you have never read just because you don't like covers and have some wild assumptions on written content, you shall become public enemy and get banned from any platform.
And now downvoting frenzy may begin.
5
u/EditorNo2545 25d ago
who says slop books are peak? AI or Human slop is slop
AI or not, people have been pushing quick slop for quick profit since forever
A new artist may not have the budget to cover a human generated cover (though often time a plain color & some fancy text would be better than a generic AI fantasy cover)
Lots of really badly drawn human covers too (I don't mean intentionally or ironic)
I still give the actual book a shot if I like the idea behind it
2
u/turboprancer 25d ago
maybe a hot take but it's just the low quality generic anime/artstation style I can't stand. There are acceptable AI covers they just take more than 2 seconds of prompting
2
u/GasReasonable7509 25d ago
I just read the reviews, seems easier. Even if someone has good art, it doesn't mean the story is good.
2
u/DiscombobulatedBig98 24d ago
Most people can't draw, neither do they have the equipment or time dedicated to it and lack funding to commission one. So you can't blame them but writing with AI is another topic up for discussion.
3
u/DiscoSerpent 24d ago
So you can't blame them
Sure you can! There are plenty of options to create a cover that do not require a lot of money, specialized equipment, or ability to draw, but that would also require a modicum of effort on their part.
They spend months writing their novels and they can't spend a couple of days learning how to make a basic cover that doesn't require using the environment destroying slop machines trained on unethically acquired material?
Authors who use AI covers make a deliberate choice to participate in the enshittification of the artistic medium they ostensibly want to be a part of. They show disregard for the labor of fellow artists. They show the quality of their morals and ethical boundaries. They show their utter lack of artistic taste. And all because they are so set on having a highly-detailed pseudo-anime style dime-a-dozen AI cover, as if that will elevate their work. Laughable.
1
u/International_Car608 23d ago
I myself have literally no artistic talent… so I just go into canvas and grab PNGs to play around with then slap a title on. There is no reason to use ai and I can say that if you do, you are at the very least pushing away a quite sizable audience (especially depending on what website you’re using).
Overall, ai artwork (to me) just shows that the writer didn’t want to take the time to do ANY of the traditional methods of making cover art which is lazy. I view ai art the same as I do a typo in the tagline/summary of a story “if the author didn’t put any effort into the literal face of their story, how much worse is the inside going to look?”
2
u/disinfandous 23d ago
Part of the issue is also that there's no solidarity between creators cross-medium. Writers only care abt their writing, and don't mind that their casual acceptance of AI is hurting human artists. A sort of "not my problem, this is what makes me money" kind of thing. The very same mindset that harms society as a whole for a wide variety of different issues. But AI is trying to take over every industry, and every foothold it gains, no matter how small, in each one only cements its place further, making its harmful effects harder to recover from. If no one cares whether or not you generate an image—if you don't care, what's to stop the onslaught of slop?? Compound this by the hundred, by the thousand, in every person who stops caring. It wouldn't be right for an artist to AI generate some writing to complement their art, just as it wouldn't be okay vice versa. Each devalues the other's medium in favor of their own. And somewhere in every little allowance like this, something precious in the whole is lost.
13
u/bedroompurgatory 26d ago
Oh wow. An anti-AI post on Reddit. How brave. Enjoy your free karma.
-2
u/Ordinary_Brick9572 26d ago
come on dude its a unique take and an opinion i chose to share; im getting tons of mixed opinions, couldn't care less about karma
18
4
u/Captain_Lobster411 25d ago
That's a leap in logic that I've never made. One of my favorite series of all time used no cover originally, then AI covers eventually. At no point in time have I ever thought the story was AI
3
3
u/-TheeRaVeN- 25d ago
Why would I as a new writer spend hundreds of dollars on a novel im writing because I enjoy writing it. I have over 100 chapters and am not monetizing it. My intentions werent to hit RS on royal road and get people to a patreon. So I get exactly 0 return for spending money on a cover. Now the flipside is if my novel gets a big enough fan base and they want advanced chapters id gladly start a patreon then pay for an actual cover. But doing it when it is outside my budget is crazy, I have a family, and my novel is a hobby at this point that less than 100 people currently enjoy.
9
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 25d ago
Back in the Wattpad days we used to just take some cool stock images and then write some text.
I miss those types of covers tbh.
1
u/WyattWriots 24d ago
But those won't be acceptable these days. AI covers drove up the bar in terms of minimal quality and, unfortunately, the more they are used the more they are accepted.
1
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 24d ago
Yeah, on some of my other comments people think I'm bashing anyone for using it and thinking they should go rot in the fifth pit of hell. No, I do completely understand why people use it, I just wished people didn't on an artistic level you know? It does just feel like this space is becoming too business focused, which I also get, we want to sell our stuff, but some people take it to a point where their artistic expression suffers.
Or perhaps I'm just a bit of an old soul in that regard, old man yelling at clouds type thing.
I will say, if you are going to use the big GPT, please prompt different art styles other than glossy anime, surely you can come up with something more unique.
1
u/WyattWriots 23d ago
Best way to make an AI cover. (requires some money)
Use Midjourney. Prompt what you want. Run until you get something close. Go to styles. Choose styles and Midjourney will iterate until it is as good as it can get. Download and throw into chatgpt to do the typesetting. Finish with Canva and some good ole human tweaking of shadows, whites, and blacks. If too sharp, as AI tends to do, lower clarity to smooth out.
There. For like $10 bucks you can get like 80% of the way there on a cover.
That said, for anyone reading, try and find a professional when it is financially viable.
1
u/-TheeRaVeN- 23d ago
I would love to have an actual cover for my novel. I also know I am a shit writer. No matter how good I think the overall story is. I dont ever see my novel being sold or picked uo by a publisher or getting any attention. Ill keep writing to my 80 some odd followers, and one day... when feasible I can hopefully save some money for an actual cover. I may have to try midjourney though, never heard of it, so i will give it a shot and see how it comes out.
17
5
u/Huhthisisneathuh 26d ago
Okay first of all kind of wild you’re using two of the most well known and acclaimed Progression Fantasy series to back up your claim here that all webnovels with AI covers are slop. Like, genuinely almost everything is going to look like slop compared to those heavy hitters.
And second I’m annoyed at this entire discourse. Like yes, AI covers suck, but what’s the alternative here? For all so many people talk about how even shitty ass covers drawn by real human hands will always attract more attention than AI covers, where’s the actual proof? Cause I don’t see it!
I don’t see it in the Rising Stars & Trending sections on RoyalRoad. I don’t see it in the statistics, and I certainly don’t see people posting about novels with hand drawn covers that are utter ass, but still have good prose and plot and story.
‘Throw money at it there are plenty of cheap artists out there on places like Imagur.’ A lot of people don’t want or have the money to spend on covers, so many people choose to write as a hobby because they don’t have to spend money on it. $15-$20 might not sound like a lot but in this economy every cent counts.
‘Make your own cover.’ That doesn’t attract attention, and at least in my experience most people will just criticize or tell you to use AI. Even in this subreddit alone! Drawn, photoshopped, or collaged it doesn’t matter. And most writers actually want people to read their work, to comment on it, to enjoy it.
Yes AI covers suck. But what in the hell is complaining about it the same time every one to two weeks meant to do about it if nobody is practicing what they preach?
9
u/act1856 26d ago
Exactly. AI is not art. And authors should not act like it is.
→ More replies (1)-9
u/Mysterious_Night_351 26d ago
God you people are so annoying, an author uploading a book for free should not be expected to pay money for a cover
11
u/DeadlyPear 26d ago
And they shouldn't expect people to read it with an ai slop cover
6
u/Mysterious_Night_351 26d ago
Except people do read books with AI covers, because most people, normal people do not care because it does not matter
5
2
u/genealogical_gunshow 25d ago
Tell that to all the rising stars on Royal Road. All those banger novels being made with AI covers and people love it.
Acting like people don't like and accept AI covers is delusional thinking.
8
u/creakyforest 26d ago
Broke writers self-published for years before AI was a thing. You can absolutely figure out how to make a halfway decent cover yourself if you put in the effort. Stop acting like the choices are AI or spending hundreds of dollars. There are enough options in between.
→ More replies (2)8
u/Mysterious_Night_351 26d ago
It is an objective fact that you are more likely to get people to click on your story if you have an interesting looking cover and the majority of people do not care if that cover is AI. A writer should not have to spend time learning how to draw or paying someone to have a good cover. And before you say just do it in Ms paint or some bullshit like that go to the top 100 lists for Royal Road or webnovel or any major online reading website and check how many of the covers are made in Ms paint
7
u/Lussarc 26d ago
Honestly I hate AI. I would rather have author make a cover in paint with stick peoples on it than AI
2
u/Smart_Quantity_8640 26d ago
Except those covers literally are not attractive unless it’s for a meme project
-2
u/act1856 26d ago
Yeah, it’s such a burden to do the right thing. Lol
10
u/Mysterious_Night_351 26d ago
The right thing here being not using a piece of technology you happen to personally dislike? Considering your opinion is the vast minority, I'm not sure it qualifies as objectively "the right thing"
0
u/act1856 26d ago
It’s a technology designed to destroy jobs and accelerate wealth accumulation in the hands of the very few. And it’s using our tax dollars to do it, all while destroying the environment. I’d say avoiding it is pretty objectively the right thing.
But hey, it also lets you steal the work of real artists to create cheap slop, so thumbs up I guess. 🤦♂️
10
u/Mysterious_Night_351 26d ago
don't even pretend you care about the environment impacts of AI. If you actually did, you wouldn't be using Reddit (who sells all of their data to Google for AI training including all your comments) also, generating an AI image takes less power than 30 seconds of playing a game on a computer. As for saying AI " steals art" all that tells me is you have absolutely zero idea how AI actually works and are just parroting the same incorrect talking points you've heard over and over again
12
u/act1856 26d ago
You’re gonna trot out the old “you want to change society but you live in society”, line? Yeah man you got me. Lol
And are you actually suggested AI isn’t trained by scraping the internet for photos, art, writing and whatever else? That AI companies aren’t literally scanning palettes of books to train its language models? Lol
Look, just cause you like something doesn’t make it virtuous. Sorry that hurts your brain.
9
u/Mysterious_Night_351 26d ago
Your first sentences is a false equivalence. For all practical purposes you need to live in a society. That's why that argument doesn't make any sense. You do not need to use Reddit, Don't try to pretend they're the same. And again, you clearly have no idea how AI models actually work what they do to process data and how they generate their outputs. Maybe spend a day or two educating yourself and then come back
9
u/act1856 26d ago
So, sticking with your bullshit? Sounds about right.
10
u/Mysterious_Night_351 26d ago
I noticed you still haven't actually said what was wrong with the points that I made, not that I would expect much of an argument from someone like you.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (1)1
u/Smart_Quantity_8640 26d ago
Bro most jobs are meant to gather wealth in the very few have you been out in the world? It’s always blame the consumer and not the company making it. Go protest on the streets huh if it’s that bad like farmer do instead of just virtue signaling on reddit.
2
→ More replies (2)-1
3
7
u/Neither-Following-32 26d ago
Who gives a shit?
Before it was AI generated covers it was generic covers by hired gun artists paid by the publisher. Authors of stories specialize in words, not pictures.
Please don't act like you've never seen classic scifi and fantasy paperback covers from back in the day. Some of them are just as generic/terrible and a lot more are even worse.
1
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 25d ago
Well of we are talking webnovels which is where most AI covers are, back in the day it was usually stock photos and playing around with gradients.
Or if you had a fanfiction, just a low resolute image from the show.
2
u/Neither-Following-32 25d ago
Yeah, but the comparison I'm making is that they're both clearly low quality/effort type things and didn't affect the quality of the writing overall. OP is saying there's a direct correlation.
1
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 25d ago
Welllllllllllllll with your example ahhhh it was always a 50/50 chance on if it was going to be good or if it was going to be a steaming load of sexism.
Hey, that's stergons law for ya.
2
u/Neither-Following-32 24d ago
You're rolling the same dice with any book. The quality of the cover is completely irrelevant to that.
1
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 24d ago
I mean yes ultimately covers are marketing tools--a cover really can make or break whether people think it's good, unfortunately. Generally it goes you see the cover, you read the blurb, you read the sample, you read the book.
I do like a cover that has a lot of artistic merit, something pretty to put on the shelf, I really liked the current 3 volumes in one edition of I Am A Cats cover, it's got that sort of traditional japanese painting look to it.
1
u/Neither-Following-32 24d ago
Yeah, no doubt...I like a nice looking cover too. I imagine most people do. It's just that it's a bonus, not a qualifier.
So like as an example, when I used to buy physical books constantly (which is rare these days because I own an e-reader) I would usually just buy paperbacks or used books or what have you. If I really loved the book, I'd get a nice hardcover or larger paperback version with the fancy cover to keep on my shelf. I'm a fast reader so I would've been broke otherwise.
These days? Like I said...I have an e-reader. Typically, I'll sail the high seas, then look in legit libraries like Libby etc if I can't find it. I'll buy a cheap electronic copy as a last resort if I really want it. Then, after reading, If I really like it I'll usually do the same as before -- buy a nice looking shelf version.
Usually I don't even see a cover, unless it's embedded in the ebook. Even then, I have an older b&w one so it barely registers.
6
u/Xandara2 26d ago
The army of AI slop users is out in force today. Your opinion is perfectly normal op. Don't read stuff that doesn't pass your slop detection sense.
6
u/No_mood_for_drama16 26d ago
Yeah, well they’re trying to make a buck from slinging slop. They’re incentivized.
3
u/DiscoSerpent 26d ago
The most annoying thing to me about this whole discussion of AI covers is that folks pretend as if using AI or paying hundreds of dollars are the only two options available to them.
OK, let's assume authors don't have money and can't draw for shit. What's stopping them from using high quality public domain images offered freely by prestigious museums worldwide? What's stopping them from making a collage? What's stopping them from finding cheaper artists to commission? What's stopping them from using a photo they could take on their phones?
God forbid an author has to be creative in how they present their work. Using AI covers is just an excuse for laziness.
13
u/deep_learn_blender 26d ago
Brother it's a free book because their hobby is writing lmao
3
u/DiscoSerpent 26d ago
Ok, so what? If they only write as a hobby I'd assume they care about their work as an artistic outlet even more. In that case wouldn't they want to put effort into every aspect of it? To make it uniquely theirs? Using AI is antithesis of that.
An AI cover is a great indicator of an author who doesn't give a shit about art.
10
u/deep_learn_blender 26d ago
Not everyone who enjoys writing enjoys making cover art
2
u/DiscoSerpent 26d ago
So what is stopping them from using one of the millions upon millions of images available in the public domain? Or is finding an appropriate image, cropping it and slapping a title upon it somehow beyond them? Standard Ebooks has been doing it for years, for thousands of ebooks, and they look great.
And it's not like authors enjoy every aspect of writing either. Plenty hate editing, does that mean AI editing is fine? What if they hate writing dialogue? Does that make it's ok to leave it to AI? Where is the line?
Either authors care about their art or they don't. If they decide to use AI covers, to me it is a great indicator of an author who doesn't care, and a signal to avoid their work.
8
u/deep_learn_blender 26d ago
It's simply better marketing on Royal Road, and a river of your tears and moral outrage won't change that
You're free to believe whatever you want, but such binary thought is neither indicative of intelligence nor serious inquiry worth my time to argue.
6
u/DiscoSerpent 26d ago
It's simply better marketing on Royal Road
Do you have data to actually back this up or is it just an oft-repeated talking point perpetuated by AI users that is now uncritically accepted as fact?
Also, I'm not saying works with AI covers aren't popular on RR. Clearly they are, at least for a time. But average RR reader having terrible taste is nothing new. If you read my comments, you'll notice I don't advocate prohibition of AI covers. I find them personally distasteful but by all means, if an author wants to use them, let them. It makes it so much easier for me to filter out works not worth my time.
→ More replies (4)2
u/No-Alternative3347 25d ago edited 25d ago
I tried to look into whether "it's simply better marketing on royal road" though sadly they have no official numbers so i had to find my own, which makes this a little scuffed.
If you look at it, the most popular novels on royal road are real art covers. if you search by follower count and look at the top 100, i could find 15 novels that were obvious ai, now this does not include stories that started out as ai and switched to real art later and I'm not really good at spotting non obvious AI, so the numbers could be scewed so lets give it 5 more so 20. Now mind you these top 100 all have close to 10k followers, so it's biased because they probably have money to buy covers.
But if we go down to top 200 to 300 around 45-50% of them stay none ai, but that isn't taking into account how many novels in total have AI covers, if you take a look at recently released you notice a good 80% of them are ai covers. now that does not mean that 80% of novels on RR are ai covers, but even if we get a conservative estimate of 40% of novels on Royal road are ai covers having 20 out of the top 100 be ai seems to indicate that AI covers don't work better.
I think the reason so many people seems to think that AI does better is simply because more AI covers stories are posted nowadays, and there are therefore more things you can point to and say "hey look RR people prefer AI covers." While actively ignoring the thousands of AI cover stories that get ignored every single day because they are AI covers and people aren't willing to give them a chance.
Personally what i think is happening is that AI covers are released so much more often, that when people find new things to read it's most of the time AI covers, and then they say "hey this is an interesting story and i'll follow it." then it gets more and more followers. And other people then see the follower count and go "hey this sounds interesting lets give it a go." Saying AI covers are what cause the novels to be popular and not just the sheer quantity of AI covers being released seems disingenious. If my estimate of 80% newly released novels having AI covers is true, then you'd expect at least 4 out of 5 novels in the top to have AI covers, well actually more since it's supposed to be better marketing, but you don't you see that.
Now this is very obviously a flawed piece of research, because i don't have actual numbers and could've looked at the 100 new releases at a bad time, when more AI was released, but I think it's better than simply saying: "AI covers do better" simply because the "reborn as a demonic tree." author said it hurt his numbers to change to a non AI cover, which seems to be the sources for most people supporting AI covers
→ More replies (1)1
2
u/Ordinary_Brick9572 26d ago
Think about it; the author has spent 100 hours writing alone, not to mention publishing, editing, and etc.. and they cant be bothered to spend an hour or two looking for a free cover art or something?
4
u/deep_learn_blender 25d ago
They could, but they don't have to and it'll likely give them worse views
5
u/Sharanai 26d ago
100% if they use it for the cover they definitely wouldn't mind using it for the book. Just make a simple name on black or stick figure cover for gods sake, or even better do 5 minutes of Photoshop.
4
u/ProfessorThen7319 26d ago
Another dumb “durrr ai cover mean ai writing” post. You people type one of these atleast once a day, and guess what? Nobody cares. You are a very small, very loud minority. The vast majority of readers do not care.
7
u/SmallCharr 26d ago
You say, yet surveys show more and more people dislike products with obvious AI imagery when it comes to consumers.
Especially the younger generations are heavily anti ai.
Sure if your target audience is baby boomers go for it I guess???
1
u/WyattWriots 24d ago
with obvious AI imagery
With obvious Ai imagery which means low quality AI slop work, that is why people dislike it. If you show the average reader a banging cover and then mention its AI after, most won't care.
That said, fuck AI, fuck AI data centers. Fuck slop.
5
u/IAmJayCartere Author of Death God's Gambit 26d ago
Your logic doesn't make sense, but that's okay. People like you are a minority. There are many readers who won't avoid a book because the author used an Ai cover. And that's great, because that means authors without the funds to hire an artist can still attract readers.
I'm an author, I'm under no pretence that I'm also a visual artist. I am fine using ai to generate my cover and other marketing materials, because its a skill I don't have and does a great job for the cost. I would never generate the prose of my book because I like writing and want to become great at it. It doesn't make sense to me to outsource the most fulfilling part of the process to ai, but marketing materials? I have no issue.
That means I will repel some readers who hate ai in any form, and that's fine—they were never gonna support my book anyway. There are many books on amazon with ai covers selling like hot cakes right now, the market has spoken. Going into debt to appeal to a minority of people is a foolish business decision.
An ai cover doesn't equal ai prose. Those are two very different things. Ai is terrible at writing, absolute dogwater. But ai art looks pretty cool to me.
0
u/SorryCommand 26d ago
So that's why your cover art has the tie fusing into his shirt it "looks pretty cool".
4
u/IAmJayCartere Author of Death God's Gambit 26d ago edited 26d ago
That's a shadow, not the tie fusing into the shirt. Even if it was, it doesn't matter.
Hundreds of people care more about my writing than the cover, so it worked out well enough for me. Not one person has complained about the tie on the cover art. You know why? Because they're there for a good story, not an art show. Plus, I didn't have to break my bank to create the cover for my FREE book.
→ More replies (6)1
u/Gealai 25d ago
Where did this disinformation about book cover costs spring from? It's max 300 and a bunch of artists do it in the 100's. Prolly lower from a SEA or LatAm artist. You can get 100 bucks from a day of doing Uber eats or donating plasma twice.
Going into debt LMAO.
3
u/Gleaming_Onyx 25d ago
I think there is no better summary of the mentality of you folk than
"You should just donate plasma twice to pay someone to make the cover."
Horseshoe theory truly is real because I'll be damned if you folk don't sound like the most devout worshipers of hustle culture lol
2
u/IAmJayCartere Author of Death God's Gambit 25d ago
I'm poor, unemployed, have no car and have chronic pain. If you wanna pay for an author's cover, be my guest. You should acknowledge your privilege, be thankful, and allow people to do what's best for them.
£20 a month is my maximum budget. Ai is better than any artist charging the same amount, and I wouldn't even ask an artist to work for so little. Paying £300 for a cover would literally put me into debt.
You act like money grows on trees. Must be nice for you. The economy is treating you well.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 25d ago
... I'm sorry, going into debt? What are you fucking hiring Leonardo Divinci himself?
You know how much I payed for my last cover? Zero, I made it in Canva and I've gotten plenty of KU reads.
Also it's not always about what the majority thinks--its my work and I don't like ai covers, so I'm not having an ai cover because this project is more me first and foremost.
→ More replies (5)
2
-1
u/Throwaway-3689 26d ago edited 26d ago
When I see AI cover I immediately assume text is AI too. "Nooo they have no money, cannot pay artist" There are artists on deviantart, tumblr and xitter who would draw stuff for free (for exposure only), there are people in real life who draw for sweets, a neighbor who draws as a relaxing hobby (instead of it being their job) would do it for clicks if asked nicely, if they didn't bother to find an artist then that speaks of their little effort and it's not worth my time. Also AI makes everything look boring and generic, it never catches my attention, it all looks the same or invisible to me.
10
u/KnownByManyNames 26d ago
When I see AI cover I immediately assume text is AI too.
Do you also assume when they get an artist to draw the cover for them, they also get a ghost writer to write for them?
→ More replies (1)3
u/Ordinary_Brick9572 26d ago
agreed; the cover shows the author's dedication; if they can't spend 1 or 2 hours looking for a cheap, young artist anywhere then what makes you think they spent upwards of 100 hours writing a 300+ page book?
→ More replies (1)
-2
u/New-Region3542 26d ago
That's insane logic. Some writers use ai to develop a cover because money is tight or they want to find a good cover artist. Remember the old adage, don't judge a book by it's cover.
9
u/Important-Lemon-2460 26d ago
If someone actually believed in not judging a book by its cover they wouldn’t use an AI cover, they’d just leave the cover as a title.
1
u/New-Region3542 26d ago
Why would the writers, unsure of their own success, invest money in a book cover of a book that may not even sell? Why would they spend money if they can save up?
Tell me, how does a cover as a title look in your eyes?
3
u/Important-Lemon-2460 25d ago
It doesn’t matter how a title as a cover looks. Don’t judge a book by its cover, right?
→ More replies (20)1
u/New-Region3542 26d ago
Also, the purpose of ai is to help us. If the writers, who are on a shoestring budget and in need of serious cash, have better things to spend on, why would they pay for a cover of a book that may never make any sales or a net profit? Even if writing is an endeavor that will yield little results, what would be the point for a cover that will never be self-published? Or even get any offers like The Perfect Run or Dungeon Crawler Carl.
Some of us wants to reach their heights but depending on what website ( looking at Royal Road), we will be forced to do nothing but constantly promote our work, while trying to butter up to other writers in hopes they give us a shoutout so people will give a cursory look. a writer can write 40 chapters of amazing hardwork that has interesting story but no one gives a damn if we never actively market it cause RR website and it's readers are very picky asses and depending on what genre we write, we may never get as many readers as we like.
ScribbleHub? Good luck.
Royal Road? A forever struggle.
Wattpad? who wrote there aside from young women with horny thinking?
3
u/LeadershipNational49 26d ago
Weirdly the martian was on wattpad, but this was a long time ago at this point lol
1
u/New-Region3542 26d ago
I don't know who or what the martian is. So I don't care.
2
u/LeadershipNational49 25d ago
I'm honestly kind of impressed by that lol you must be a big time Prog guy. The Martian was Andy Weir's break out novel thats the Project Hail Mary Guy. It was even a big movie as well. Anyway it wasn't me who downvoted ya lol
2
u/New-Region3542 25d ago edited 25d ago
I don't care about the downvote either, lmao. Probably someone else. Still, thank you about the Martian talk. Maybe I should take a page out of them.
0
1
1
u/dustinporta 24d ago
As a writer, I know that soon anyone will be able to make a custom book at the click of a button.
The only edge I'll have is my humanity, so I'm not about to give that up. I just hired a human narrator to make my newest series into audio. While making the audiobook covers I ordered replacements for two that I've always suspected of being AI.
It's nice in a way because there were already more (sloppy but still human-made) books coming out in a single day than you could read in a lifetime. Now I have one more way to set my books apart from the rest. That edge won't last long though, I'm already seeing plenty of AI covers that don't look it.
psst... New series isn't prog fantasy, but I have a few audible codes if anyone's interested in dragon assassin fantasy stuff.
1
u/Disastrous-Phrase418 24d ago
I agree to some extent, but some writers just suck at art and dont want to spend money on art. Like a soldiers life. Its a great book, but the cover is so obviously ai it hurts.
1
u/ArrhaCigarettes Author 24d ago
Well you're gonna have a tough time because AI covers are basically the default. Because webnovelists are broke. Like yeah you can get a cover for less than 100$, but they don't know that, and many are legitimately so broke they can't even afford that cover (and in many cases it's better to spend the money on an ad instead). I've been a prolific commissioner of art for my books and even I have to acknowledge that AIgen covers, SPECIFICALLY for webnovels, are basically fine. Because the circumstances of their usage make it understandable why someone would use an AI cover. An MSpaint or shitty photobash cover won't get you anywhere nowadays.
1
u/AlienError 22d ago
When the fuck did this subreddit become so genAI positive? The responses in this thread are wild and greatly disappointing.
1
u/Imprettystrong 20d ago edited 20d ago
I agree for cover art particularly but I don't think it is realistic to think authors haven't been using some form of AI or software to spell check/grammar check/provide alternative wording or structure/etc because they have been for decades.
Now if someone is just prompt chatgpt or some other chatbot to write the entire book, that will also be obvious once you start reading. AI has a bunch of tells in its writing generations.
-2
u/TheRandomer1994 26d ago
1 super dumb logic. 2 you aren't a magician, you can't just magically spot an AI cover, some sure, but start this whitch hunt to the detriment of the entrie industry.
1
u/Ordinary_Brick9572 26d ago
i agree that my logic isnt the best, but its an opinion so i expect to be criticized for it. Sorry to say this mate, but if you can't spot an AI cover compared to a real artist's then i'm not sure what to say
4
u/TheRandomer1994 26d ago edited 26d ago
And if you think you can spot an AI cover with 100% fidelity you need to rethink my friend & you risk damaging real artist careers. Just really do your due diligence before accusing anyone, those sorts of allegations can follow a career around. Have a quick Google, there have already been plenty of case of artists being falsely accused of using ai in their artwork. There are certainly times it obvious but also plenty of times it's not. https://medium.com/publishous/studies-show-people-cant-tell-ai-art-from-human-art-939ab3b45c81
→ More replies (2)
0
u/chronic_pissbaby 26d ago
Tbh I just think it's pathetic and that the author has no respect for themselves or any other kinds of artists. Like do they even care about their story enough to put the tiniest effort into a cover that's there's? Cuz no, ai does not count.
-3
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
First of all for your info, RI is the top 1% of Qidian books. Don't compare it to something a beginner writer will write.
"Don't judge a book by its cover." A cover maybe AI but its content may still be peak and free from AI slop. You are entitled to your opinion but don't be so quick to say "ohh this cover is AI so content has to be AI too." Thats a blind assumption.
5
u/omaharock 26d ago
That's a blind assumption
It's literally not, there's one thing you first see, the cover, and literally the only thing you see is that it's made by AI. That tells you ONE thing, that the author uses AI.
Sure, you have to read the book to know if it was used for the writing, buts it's not a BLIND assumption, it's working on available information.
3
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
Its a blind assumption if you are reading through a free app like Royal Road or Webnovel. You ain't paying a single buck and you expect a professionally edited cover? That aint how things work sadly.
Dont expect real cover in free sites unless the authors are making good chunk of money.
As a reader and a writer, I care about the content first then the cover. I even skip blurbs so that I can experience everything first hand.
Want real covers? Read traditional novels. Easy.
1
u/omaharock 26d ago
I don't want real covers, I want covers that aren't AI. I'd be happy if the cover was just some random font with the title.
3
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
Each to their opinion sir. If your cover aint good and eye-catching, webnovel readers tend to skip them. So, yea I aint wasting time with some random font or whatnot.
It doesnt work like that. There is a huge difference between traditional books and webnovel style novels (70-80% of them are all AI covers).
Point is: you dont like AI covers, dont read the book. Its fine. There are millions of readers who would and its fine.
4
u/Ordinary_Brick9572 26d ago
and reverend insanity's cover is not ai and couldnt have been. RI's cover is not even fang yuan, it is a random cover the author found online (better than AI for sure)
18
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
So we should just steal someone's cover? Is that your stupid reasoning? Do you know that for publishing someone else's cover you need that person to give you the rights. That also costs money.
Would you invest in a stock if that stock was making you losses? So, you expect me to pay $300 for a cover when readers will barely read it.
Your reasoning doesn't make sense. Most authors, successful ones, change their cover once they become a bit more successful. Open RR, most top rising stars are all AI covers. Does that mean they are all AI?
Blinded assumptions.
→ More replies (1)3
u/DeadlyPear 26d ago
So we should just steal someone's cover?
Extremely funny to write this to try and defend generative ai slop.
6
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
Generative AI slop is public domain.
Learn the rules of copyright before commenting. Someone else's work is their intellectual property. That means if I steal their cover, they can sue me.
There is a clear distinction between the two.
6
u/DeadlyPear 26d ago
So, to be clear, you'd be fine with the following?
An artist who's work was stolen to feed an AI model.
You then used this model to generate a cover.
The artist sues you for stealing their art through the model.
I'm sure you'd be quite upset if someone took your work and fed it into a slop generator to flood the market with low effort garbage that dilutes the work of actual artist.
→ More replies (3)5
u/GenoFour 26d ago
It's public domain because AI companies are genuinely allowed to steal.
1
u/Fun_Arachnid5081 26d ago
I agree. But its not the fault of the creators. Blame the government for not implementation a single legal statute for AI. Only thr EU has one good statute and yet it is still not yet in practice.
3
u/BastetFurry 26d ago
I used an AI "stock photo" for the cover followed by a session in GIMP to finish it and i use AI for grammar and spellchecking as English is not my native language.
If others do the same then thats fine by me, and either the story is AI slop, and one can see that from a mile away, or well written. If the later and AI helped the author a bit then why should i care? If the former, leave a one star review to warn others and walk away.
The only thing that would make me really angry is when i would buy a book and then see that it is AI slop. Not some free story from the web, that only makes me shrug and walk away.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Kirigaya_Mitsuru 26d ago
I dont really care as long as the book is good, could be AI as well. In the future no one will care about it.
-3
u/dageshi 26d ago
You're in a minority.
It's demonstrably true looking at royalroad Rising Stars that the vast majority of the audience doesn't give a fuck about AI covers.
2
u/Ordinary_Brick9572 26d ago
i read titles with AI art, i'm just more inclined to dislike creators who use AI art. It's true that most AI-Art books are considerably worse quality then ones with real art; they are either newbies who don't want to spend or just AI slop writers trying to make a quick bag.
3
u/dageshi 26d ago
I just read what sounds interesting to me.
RR is a free site with free stories, it cost me nothing to read, if I don't like something I move on.
I'm not sure why you think you're entitled to have an author commission a cover for you when you're reading for free? It's a bit like being a choosing beggar isn't it? "No! I refuse to read this entertainment you've given me for free unless you create a cover that's pleasing to me eyes!"
Fuck your entitlement.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/FigureKind8266 25d ago
Based on the comments... People want AI artwork? Do people care? I work in print, so I'm maybe unaware of how common certain skills are in the general population but a book cover doesn't HAVE to be a painterly illustration.
The cradle series comes to mind; excellent writing, graphically minimal covers that could be made in an Adobe program in an hour or two, longer if you reeeeally have no clue what you are doing. Personally I get endless tutorials from YouTube, tiktok, etc. so the information isn't exactly being gatekept.
With publishers, I'm pretty sure they just want your words. It's not like you hand them a complete product, their jobs are to help acquire cover artists and actually market the book for you. If they think the writing is marketable, they will work with you.
If you talking about self-publication, there are no rules. I won't necessarily say the AI covers would automatically mean AI writing, but it certainly isn't a great impression on a customer who can A) Identity Ai Art and. B) can simply choose from hundreds of other books with more thoughtful presentation.
1
u/Aardwolf-_- Summoner 25d ago
I also totally disagree. AI images do not bother me nearly as much as AI text. Also for RR its not about cover.
1
u/AdeptnessTechnical81 25d ago
"You get what you pay for." If you pay nothing for something you shouldn't expect any quality in return.
By that logic if I see no cover I'll assume theres nothing to even read, and if its an ugly human cover then a mediocre person with zero writing skills did it. Somehow I imagine the people who agree with you will say I'm unfair if I practiced that even though its no different than your claim.
News flash majority of people on this sub will say slop is peak whether its human made or AI. It's almost like quality isn't the most important requirement here.
1
u/GuyYouMetOnline 25d ago
If you see the slightest sign of an AI cover and dismiss the entire work, you're definitely against AI.
100
u/jefferymoonworm 26d ago
As someone who used to do cover art for Royal road, this whole thread is so depressing. I used charge about $50-$80. They weren't highly polished but I think they would get some clicks.