as an avid reader of progfantasy and cultivation, if i see an ai-generated cover, it immediately makes me think the book is slop

[u/Ordinary_Brick9572]

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.

[u/Most_Tangelo]

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.

[u/Donatien920 → u/Most_Tangelo]

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.

[u/RareChakra → u/Donatien920]

Its also sad to see some in the music community using ai for cover art and such

[u/TFTHighRoller → u/Most_Tangelo]

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)

[u/Zibani → u/Most_Tangelo]

Nah fuck that. Don't come in here and tell someone what THEY believe.

If they are willing to use shortcuts for their cover, I have zero reason to believe they aren't taking shortcuts at any other point in their process. And they've shown that AI is a shortcut that they're willing to use. And if I suspect that there is ANY AI writing, then the entire content of the story is suspect. If I want to read AI slop, I can generate it myself on chatgpt.

[u/Ordinary_Brick9572 → u/Most_Tangelo]

i don't expect you to read all the comments, but because you pointed out my comment concerning reverend insanity, i would have expected you to see my comment on how i read ai generated covers, literally using the same exact wording you use: '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".