People Can Spot AI Slop. That’s Actually a Good Thing

I saw a brilliant little example of the AI debate playing out locally this week. Llandeilo Service Station posted four potential new logos and asked people which one they preferred. The problem was that the designs had clearly been generated using AI, and the comments section spotted it almost immediately. People called them “AI slop”, questioned why a local designer had not been used and, perhaps most importantly, recognised that the designs did not really represent the business or the place.

I actually find that quite encouraging. As AI-generated imagery becomes easier to produce, people are becoming increasingly good at recognising the visual fingerprints it leaves behind. The overly polished illustration style, strange details, generic compositions and slightly artificial feeling are becoming familiar. It suggests that simply generating something that looks impressive for a few seconds is not enough to build a distinctive brand.

But I also think the business deserves some credit for what happened next. Rather than becoming defensive, they listened. They took the most popular AI concept as inspiration, got the paints and pens out and created their own version. Suddenly there was a story behind the logo. It became something connected to the person running the business, the local community and the place itself. Whether that hand-drawn version ultimately becomes the finished professional logo almost feels secondary. They responded brilliantly.

And this is also where I think AI genuinely belongs in the creative process. Using AI to rapidly explore four completely different directions was not necessarily the mistake. In fact, that is exactly the kind of ideation work AI can be incredibly useful for. Within minutes you can experiment with layouts, styles, imagery and concepts that might otherwise take hours to sketch out.

The mistake comes when we confuse an AI-generated idea with a finished piece of design. AI can be the sketchbook, the brainstorm or the starting point. A designer, artist or creative still brings judgement, originality, local understanding and the hundreds of tiny decisions that turn an idea into a brand.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about this story is that everyone involved got something right in the end. The public recognised something that felt generic, the business listened rather than ignored them, and AI still played a useful role in helping generate the initial direction. That feels like a much healthier future for creativity than either “AI replaces designers” or “AI has no place in design at all.”

• 

• 

• 

•