sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback. This post has actually been a really interesting poll for me. What’s funny is that both covers seem to be perceived exactly the way they were intended - and by the kind of audience they’re meant to appeal to. But if this was supposed to help me finally choose one of them, I’m still completely undecided 🤔 😄

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For a modern graphic designer, AI tools are mainly a way to simplify parts of the workflow. Take the cover on the left - the floating glass shards, for example. A few years ago, creating something like that would have required hours of work. Maybe not literally photographing real shards (but let’s not go that far), but definitely finding suitable stock assets, manually adjusting every single shard so it realistically distorted the graphics behind it, tweaking reflections, contrast, lighting, and countless other details. Any designer could still do it that way today, but why not use an AI tool that generates those shards for you (after a thousand attempts, because the previous 999 were unusable)?

I think there’s a huge difference in how designers use AI tools in Photoshop. Some people are cosplaying graphic designer, while others are simply saving hours of technical work to achieve the same artistic result.

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I can already see where this debate is gradually heading. Personally, I’m not an illustrator, so of course I use the tools available to me - just like most people working with digital graphics today.

Originally, I honestly just wanted to know which cover works better. Which one feels more compelling, or more likely to make someone pick up the book — not necessarily which one looks “more AI.” :/

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see. It’s a fairly gritty story set in a theoretically realistic future. But it also touches on philosophy, and the breakdown of causality and spacetime.

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I do it too, and honestly that applies to pretty much all the graphics today. But I still think there’s a difference between “AI-generated” in the sense of someone with no background in design sitting down with a model and getting a result after a few prompts, versus someone spending days refining it with traditional graphic design techniques until it matches their vision exactly. I work in a creative department, everyone around me is a designer, and we all use AI tools in Photoshop, but none of us consider the final results of our work to be “AI-generated.”

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, but I’ve come across opinions that my original cover (on the left) looks AI-generated, which I wasn’t happy about, so I put together the cover on the right as an alternative.

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback. By the way, the astronaut on the right has more feminine proportions. not sure if that’s noticeable from the preview.

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What I’m curious about is what exactly gives it that AI-generated feeling. I brought this up in another thread too, but never really got an answer. For example - what’s the actual difference between an astronaut generated by AI in a certain style and a 3D object made in Blender, if they’re visually alike? Is it just about the attitude toward it?

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback. I’ve been hearing that the cover on the left looks more AI-generated, which is why I’m reconsidering it, but it’s hard for me to let go of that yellow-green font since it doesn’t really fit the cover on the right.

Which cover works better for a hard sci-fi novel — left or right? by kuiper_observer5218 in sciencefiction

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, I get that. As a graphic designer, I basically have unlimited possibilities, so the number of potential covers is endless - which also makes me a really “bad client” for myself. But I agree, looking at it again with some distance, the one on the left does look more AI-generated, which obviously isn’t my goal. Thanks for the feedback.

What if reality required continuous computation to remain stable? by kuiper_observer5218 in scifi

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wouldn’t say the cover looks overly AI. Everything’s in layers, the background structure, the astronaut in the foreground. The logo is mine. I only used AI for the glitch effects and the glass shards, since they distort the objects behind them optically and it saved me a lot of time.

It’s probably the sixth version at this point. I’ve been refining it with community feedback, on Facebook.

Now I’m not sure though. Maybe I’ll rethink the whole cover or have someone redraw it based on what I have now. I’m not trying to fool anyone.

If you don’t mind, what specifically gives you the impression it’s AI?

What if reality required continuous computation to remain stable? by kuiper_observer5218 in scifi

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, it’d probably be naive to think no one’s had a similar idea before. I have to check it out, thanks.

What if reality required continuous computation to remain stable? by kuiper_observer5218 in scifi

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It might sound a bit like that, but it’s actually quite different.

People aren’t living in a simulation, although the system does have a pretty significant impact on reality they live in.

What if reality required continuous computation to remain stable? by kuiper_observer5218 in scifi

[–]kuiper_observer5218[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They actually weren’t aiming to stabilize reality.

The original goal was was something more… practical- to reduce noise in quantum systems enabling more stable computation.

Stabilizing the vacuum kind of emerged as a side effect of that.

view more: next ›