Fixing Disappointing Image Results | Follow-Along Exercise

Das entsteht

A text deliverable that fits the task, a fact-check sheet and a reusable prompt.

Das brauchen Sie

• A chat, image or video tool suited to the task (PromptKite does not provide model credits)
• Your own input materials and a folder for saving results

Schritte

1. Define the inputs for this exercise

   The demo inputs for this exercise are: Original prompt: a small cup in a huge garden, background full of flowers, product close-up, wide shot, complex lighting; Problem: the cup is too small and the background overpowers the subject; Expected: the cup fills about half the frame height, with a simple background. First confirm whether these conditions fit your situation; replace “paste your material” in the example with real material. Write the goal as a deliverable you can check against.

2. Run it once for your scenario

   Replace the placeholder material in the example with real material you can provide, then give the complete prompt to a chat tool. Redact personal or business information as needed first; if the model asks about missing facts, supply the material rather than asking it to make things up. Focus of this task: first point out descriptions that conflict or are too vague, separating problems you can judge from the text from those that need the original image to confirm.

3. Check against the criteria and revise

   Check the output against the input: “Does each of the three versions change only one factor? Is each judgment backed by evidence?” Tag each conclusion with its supporting material; move anything unsupported to a “to be confirmed” section. Pick one wording or structural problem to fix and compare the old and new versions, rather than just asking for it to be “more professional.”

4. Save and review

   Save the final result, the prompt, the source of your input material and one reason for a change. Name files with the date plus the task name; save reusable versions to your PromptKite Prompt Pocket. Next time, change one condition and try again, noting whether the result still holds.

Häufige Fehler

• The input is still placeholder text, so the output looks empty — Replace placeholders such as “paste your material” in the example with real material; state clearly that missing facts are unknown instead of asking the model to fill them in.
• The result doesn't meet the standard for this scenario — Check the output against the input: “Does each of the three versions change only one factor? Is each judgment backed by evidence?” Tag each conclusion with its supporting material; move anything unsupported to a “to be confirmed” section. Pick one wording or structural problem to fix and compare the old and new versions, rather than just asking for it to be “more professional.”

Übungsvorlage

Help me diagnose this prompt based on the original ({subject}), the problem (the cup is too small and the background overpowers the subject) and the expected result (the cup fills about half the frame height, with a simple background). First point out descriptions that conflict or are too vague, separating problems you can judge from the text from those that need the original image to confirm. Keep the subject unchanged and give three lightly revised versions, each adjusting only one factor: subject scale, composition or lighting. Use a table to show which sentence changed, why, and what to look for. Don't promise that a given model will follow it exactly; finally, give a comparison test procedure that keeps all other conditions the same.