CASE STUDY
CASE STUDY 01 |
Reference Preservation
Evaluating whether a requested image edit was successfully integrated without introducing unintended changes to the supplied source image.
| THE CHALLENGE
The image-editing task requested a single addition: place a large stainless-steel stockpot on the existing stovetop. The surrounding kitchen and existing elements were expected to remain unchanged.
The generated result included the requested stock pot, but evaluating the edit required more than confirming that the new object was present. Comparison with the source image revealed changes to the scale, perspective, and underlying appliance that affected the edit's success.
| SOURCE + GENERATED RESULT
ORIGINAL IMAGE
GENERATED IMAGE
| THE PROMPT
Add a photorealistic stock pot to the stovetop. Be sure it is appropriate in size. Be sure to take into account perspective and adjust the pot's dimensions so it appears as realistic in the space as possible.
| VIVA EVALUATION
Image partially meets prompt requirements.
COMPOSITION | 4 · Major
The stock pot is dramatically oversized relative to the existing stovetop and surrounding kitchen. Its scale and perspective do not integrate naturally with the source scene.
COMPOSITION | 4 · Major
The original stove/range was materially altered and extended to accommodate the oversized pot. The prompt requested adding a stock pot to the existing stovetop, not modifying the underlying appliance.
| OVERALL ASSESSMENT
The requested stock pot was added, but the edit does not fully align with the prompt. The pot is substantially oversized and does not follow the scale and perspective of the existing kitchen. The source stove was also materially reshaped and extended to accommodate the generated pot.
| WHAT VIVA IDENTIFIED
-
The requested object was present, so the edit was not a complete failure.
-
The dominant errors were compositional: scale, perspective, dimensions, and spatial integration.
-
Comparison with the source revealed a second material issue: the AI changed the stove itself to accommodate the oversized pot.
-
Both findings were rated 4 · Major because the intended edit remains recognizable, but the correction is required for full prompt alignment.
| METHOD IN PRACTICE - REFERENCE PRESERVATION
When modifying a supplied image, material changes to elements that were not requested to change may constitute findings. This case demonstrates why prompt adherence alone is not enough for image-edit evaluation. The evaluator must also determine whether the requested change was integrated without introducing unintended alterations to the source.
| CASE STUDY TAKEAWAY
A successful edit must preserve what was not requested to change.
The requested stockpot was added, but its scale and perspective affected the surrounding composition, and the original stove was materially altered to accommodate it. This case demonstrates why reference-based evaluation must consider both the requested change and the preservation of existing source elements.