←back to thread

93 points bookofjoe | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.632s | source
Show context
imagetic[dead post] ◴[] No.43656363[source]
[flagged]
paul7986 ◴[] No.43656591[source]
chatGPT (pro at least) creates amazing logos in 30 seconds, amazing look websites around the logo you settled on and then codes the front-end (html,css,js). That can all be done in 5 minutes or less.

As UX Designer and UI Developer who does all the above (also do UX Research which anything where you interface with humans i think is safe for awhile) it's slightly disheartening to see my skill-sets future worth.....

Where I work we were told we can't use GPT and that is fine, but in what a year to three or five Im sure their stance will change.

replies(2): >>43656656 #>>43657384 #
ToucanLoucan ◴[] No.43656656[source]
From an audience perspective, if you use an AI generated site, I'm just assuming your product is shit. And not even because I'm opposed to the way AI is being used in many places (though I am) but for the same reason I don't buy products that advertise with shitty commercials that look like they were filmed in 2006 on a budget of $500. If you don't have a marketing budget for proper advertising, I'm assuming your product is some fly-by-night garbage that's likely to break on first use, if not an outright scam.

Is that fair? No probably not, but I don't know what to tell you. That's always been a rule of thumb for me: if the marketing presence of anything, services, products, tooling, what have you is cheaply/poorly made, I avoid it. I always have almost instinctively.

replies(2): >>43656719 #>>43657243 #
paul7986 ◴[] No.43656719[source]
If you have GPT pro or know someone try it out .. create a logo with it then ask it to create a website around your chosen logo and then ask it to code the front-end. Im sure it can do the back-end code too. The logos and the web design it creates around the chosen logo look amazing .. extremely pro level. I'm not sure how you or anyone would be able to decipher if a website and or brand used chatGPT (pro). I'm betting no one would be able to tell just that it looks really good to great and professional!

Personally it's a wake up call for my skill-sets of over 15 years and that increasing my skillsets to 2025 modern day skill sets is best thing for me and any in my field!

replies(2): >>43656910 #>>43656984 #
rrr_oh_man ◴[] No.43656910[source]
> The logos and the web design it creates around the chosen logo look amazing .. extremely pro level

Loss of words.

I'd be happy to have your standards in life.

replies(2): >>43657307 #>>43657326 #
Spivak ◴[] No.43657307[source]
They do though— it's mostly because the pros aren't terribly good either. If your standards are "the top 0.001%" of graphic and web design then yeah, AI designs aren't on the level. But if your standards are simply as good or better than your typical professional design consulting firm then AI is knocking it out of the park.
replies(1): >>43657527 #
1. rrr_oh_man ◴[] No.43657527[source]
> good or better than your typical professional design consulting firm

Can you give me one example of a decent logo design made by ChatGPT that does exactly that — look good or better than your typical professional design consulting firm? I have literally tried today, but the results have been... very meh. :)

replies(1): >>43657927 #
2. Spivak ◴[] No.43657927[source]
That's no fun. Instead let's play a game. One of these logos was made by a professional design firm and cost over $1,000,000. The other two I just generated. The gap between well-known national brands with millions of dollars to hire the best and what normal companies actually get is massive.

https://imgur.com/a/5En58cl

replies(1): >>43658121 #
3. rrr_oh_man ◴[] No.43658121[source]
They are all pretty terrible, but I guess the rhombus-caret one is real.

The stripes one is rounded (looks shit when small), the complicated one is complicated for no reason.

Good logos work when black-and-white and when very small or very large.

And one more thing: The high cost of a rebrand isn’t paid for the logo or the redesign of stationary. It’s for the pain & process of aligning a committee of aloof decision-makers around a single choice.