People in the industry are going to notice if you get the little details wrong. So going to a "specialist" for marketing materials and mockups saves time iterating.
What I find interesting about this is basically this is just a poor photoshop - they've taken an existing image and just mucked around with some details. But I think it's worth thinking about why this has traction - is it because people are now on the look out for AI generated images. Certainly that's what I first went to.
TL/DR: it's not. And for a fake, it's a pretty bad one too. Besides all of the points the Aviation SE users noted, notice how all of the passenger windows were photoshopped out except the ones partially overlapped by the large IndiGo logo at the front of the plane, which would have required some more work...
Yeah, but I love the way user DeltaLima on Aviation SE left this detail until the very end of their answer. This would have been enough to settle the issue on its own, but of course pointing out all of the other details gets more upvotes...
Wow, I noted it looked strange and spotted some things other people mentioned, but somehow completely missed the windows... I'm sure there is some sort of name for this thing of not spotting the obvious while getting the details.
Banner blindness is more a web term, but maybe fits as the logo could count as some kind of banner/ad which we only glance over and won't pay much attention to it.
It's pretty good if it were an AI generated image fake. That was my immediate thought, and then changed when the only differences were things like 'it should read AVAF not AVAX'.
Besides AI, trolling is becoming a common source of entertainment.
I know cars and car mechanics inside and out. There's a lot of good car based media and advice on YouTube, Instagram, and stories/TikTok.
There is also a high level of trolling. Sometimes I have to stop and think if this is real. Or if it's a joke. Or if it's just a mistake. Or stupidity. Or trolling for fun/laughs. Or trolling to mock. Or trolling as an antisocial Darwin award instigator.
As basically an experienced expert, I can tell all of those apart. But it makes we wonder if those with less experience can draw the lines as well as I can, and what that really means for them.
Finally, what am I supposed to think about the media for things Im not an expert in?
That's one of the elements which is actually real (original photo: https://www.airliners.net/photo/IndiGo/Airbus-A321-271NX/528...) - the German flag (as well as the German registration and the MSN) are apparently added over the airline's paintjob until the plane has been delivered to the customer and is allowed to use its Indian registration (which is to the right of the Indian flag over the rear passenger windows, covered with a white sticker).
Probably a big part of the curiosity this picture creates is that some of the elements that look like really bad photoshop are actually real, but others are not. This is where the surprising entertainment value is. Almost reminds me a little of that oddly-colored dress that took the internet in 2015.
Low cost seems like the wrong way to describe Indigo. They seem to be the safest and most reliable choice in the market at the moment (since vistara got vacuumed into AI) and have been quite pleasant the few times I’ve taken them. They just don’t have a business class at the moment.
My guess would be illustrating what it would look like if IndiGo had a freight service. Still not a good explanation for the winglet job though. Perhaps the artist felt the Boeing ones look more modern? Or "if we had a freight service, it would be on Boeings"?
It’s illustrative of the level of effort required for humans to resolve the “real or fake” question. We’re about to see an explosion of AI-generated images and other content on the web.
That said, a thoughtful person can easily estimate that the level of effort to spot a fake image is much greater than the effort required for an AÍ to generate it. There does seem to be a significant number of HN readers who like spending their brain cycles on trivia.
I appreciate it for the allegory I find in it. It's kind of like "Something's up, so shall we commence a forensic analysis of this system and then reverse engineer it?" and then someone sensible says "Maybe start by asking the guy who made it."
Patterns of hyper efficiency emerge as dweebs compete to prove superior digital forensics skill. This is what AI does too, yet an unskilled go player is more likely to beat ai than a skilled one grasshopper. The plane is clearly real for shits and giggles.
yes more downvotes please. Ignore the fact that you are psychologically vulnerable to click bait titles and the need to be right. The plane is 100% real.
That won’t work, the best way to do that is to politely point out what you think is wrong. Having an aggressive or snarky tone will make people get defensive and not consider what you have to say even if you are right
