Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me. I cannot argue that the AI didn't improve this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better, and this example makes it painfully clear.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument against AI, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza - decent, but a dumb argument nevertheless.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me. I cannot argue that the AI didn't improve this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better, and this example makes it painfully clear.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument against AI, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza. A dumb argument nevertheless.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me. I cannot argue that the AI didn't improve this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better, and this example makes it painfully clear.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza. A dumb argument nevertheless.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me. I cannot argue that the AI didn't improve this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better, and this makes it painfully clear.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza. A dumb argument nevertheless.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me. I cannot argue that the AI didn't improve this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better, and this makes it painfully clear.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza. A dumb argument nevertheless.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me. I cannot argue that the AI didn't improve this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better, and this makes it painfully clear.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza. Dumb argument.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me. I cannot argue that the AI didn't improve this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better, and this makes it painfully clear.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would even think to present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza. I cannot argue that the AI improved this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better and this makes it painfully clear.

Meh, I think the right is a workable improvement and I have seen worse pass for illustration. Granted, poorly utilized perspective will always look bad in ways that AI can't really fix, the legs on both of these hurt me.

Also, being conservative with detail is very much a design 101 thing and I am surprised that such a lofty name as RJ would present the reduction of redundant detail as an argument, but then again his work tends to be gritty reboots of pokemon ala Dave Rapoza. I cannot argue that the AI improved this man's work - but that is no excuse to not get better and this makes it painfully clear.