3 ms·
10/10, but I find the explanations to be somewhat lacking. "Not real hieroglyphics". Yeah, of course, should have paid better attention in my classes on old Egy
by avhception 2y ago
10/10, but I find the explanations to be somewhat lacking. "Not real hieroglyphics". Yeah, of course, should have paid better attention in my classes on old Egyptian writing I guess? I feel a proper spotting technique should be generic, not specific to the subject matter at hand which you might or might not know.
- avhception 2y agoFor example, in the Egyptian example, I thought the outlines of peoples feet and legs to be too precise and devoid of the little imperfections of human drawings.
- dTal 2y agoI got the egyptian one right (all of them actually) and I was very confident of it despite not really knowing anything about heiroglyphics. The technique was simply, which one is more stereotyped? The AI one just has the classic figures and "heiroglyphs" and that's it. The real one has tons of detail - odd plants, a banquet, stacked pots, a king with a face that has personality. I look at it and am drawn into wanting explanations for the things in it. It's clearly the work on someone trying to tell a story, rather than trying to "look egyptian". The same basic idea worked for basically all the others - which photo has more odd, incidental, imperfect detail? The AI ones are "generic" in the same way ChatGPT prose is.