As I looked through the images I was unimpressed entirely, at first. But, then I started thinking, these look a little... "childish" to me.

Childish as in... A newish artist who is drawing a concept rather than light / forms (Which is something artists typically do as they understand drawing more and more).

The rose in the vase specifically - some models understood that there was supposed to be shading, reflections, the concept of refraction - others just drew "blue = glass" and "green = stem" and "red = rose".

Really odd to look at, considering if I saw any of these drawings from a human kid, I would say "good job buddy" and put it on the fridge. I'm expecting these to get better as models improve, and perhaps the artistic progression will be there along with it...

Really odd to look at, considering if I saw any of these drawings from a human kid, I would say "good job buddy" and put it on the fridge.

The Grok ones in particular gave me that thought. Most of them really look like what a kid would do when given the same tools, while the other models' output have distinctly more "AI-ness" to them (for lack of a better term.)

What's interesting is that the way in which they're childish is actually extremely human. In fact, one of the ways that you're often taught to draw more realistically is to stop thinking of the concepts as icons you're drawing the outlines of, and instead sort of blur your eyes and see things as they are: hues and values. In other words, become a camera or a printer that has no idea what it's capturing or printing other than a grid of values. That is how you achieve realism.

The fact that it has clearly iconified these concepts in its mind and is tracing the outlines of the things it thinks/expects to go where is very human.