Goldfish in a Round Bowl

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The fish and bowl are convincing, but the requested magnified near-wall effect is restrained.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The fish and bowl refraction are excellent, with only subtle room inversion ambiguity.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

Strong photographic bowl portrait, but the flipped background effect is not clearly achieved.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

A strong prompt match with prominent inverted refraction, softened only by slight film-like softness.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The added plants and gravel make the bowl setup noticeably less plain than requested.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The room visibly bends through the bowl and the centered photographic composition is very strong.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

A beautiful clear photograph with strong bowl optics, but the fish is implausibly cramped in the bowl.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Detailed fish and convincing room distortion are held back only by an oversized, too-perfect subject.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★5.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

Exceptionally clean photographic rendering with convincing magnification and inversion.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Excellent close-up texture and refraction, though the bowl is too tightly cropped and the fish is oversized.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Excellent fish detail and curved-glass refraction, with a slightly idealized studio finish.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The flipped room and strong body magnification are barely present.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

The image misses the required 3:2 format despite strong optical detail.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The plain background omits the required flipped room through the water.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

Detailed magnified fish and refracted room, but the frame is square rather than 3:2.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

It closely follows the prompt, though visible grain and softness reduce technical quality.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Realistic bowl refraction, but gravel and the base clutter the plain-table prompt.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Warm, sharply rendered bowl scene with effective refraction, but it remains noticeably stock-photo idealized.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Strong bowl refraction and a clearly distorted room closely match the brief.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Convincing inverted room refraction is the standout strength.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The tabletop photograph is clean and readable, but its fish and refraction look too perfectly staged.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Square crop and simplified refraction miss the requested optical effect.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Text rendering—

The flipped, magnified refraction effect is largely absent.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The requested flipped room background and pronounced magnification are absent.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Sharp near-3:2 photo with especially convincing curved-glass room distortion.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The overly wide crop and unclear inversion miss key prompt specifics.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★1.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★1.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★2.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Text rendering—

A portrait crop and impossible central seam ruin the intended bowl view.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Portrait framing and weak flipped-background refraction miss key prompt requirements.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Text rendering—

The bright room and balanced framing work well, but the fish is weakly integrated with the refraction.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Text rendering—

Strong bowl rendering, but the result has a polished CGI look rather than a straight photograph.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

A clean, convincing fishbowl photograph, though the bowl and refraction are overly pristine.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Text rendering—

The squared crop and generic refraction weaken the requested photographic setup.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Strong image quality is undermined by the square crop and simplified optics.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

Clean, balanced photo with convincing refraction, though it uses 4:3 rather than 3:2.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Natural materials and clean framing are strong, though the flipped room is subtle.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Soft, hazy rendering and weak flipped room detail miss the requested optical effect.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

The cropped bowl and weakly legible inversion reduce prompt precision.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

Convincing photographic bowl scene, but it is square instead of the requested 3:2.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.5
• Text rendering—

Strong bowl refraction and magnification, but the output is square rather than 3:2.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Text rendering—

The clean render lacks the required flipped-room refraction and magnification.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★2.5
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Text rendering—

It omits the conspicuous flipped room behind the bowl.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★2.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★2.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★3.5
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Text rendering—

Stylized glass and weak optical distortion fail the core refraction request.

• Prompt adherence★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Style fidelity★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Quality & detail★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Realism & anatomy★★★★★★★★★★3.0
• Composition & framing★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Look & lighting★★★★★★★★★★4.0
• Text rendering—

Goldfish and bowl are attractive but scale feels artificial.