Quality · 6 min read

How to compare AI image candidates without losing the brief

Review candidates against product truth, composition, copy space, visual direction, and placement fit before selecting an asset.

Published 2026-08-25
Original Retake editorial

Same sunlit living room before and after a colorful styling refresh

In this guide

A reviewable path, not a bag of tips.

A candidate grid encourages taste-based picking. A better comparison keeps the original brief and placement visible so the team can distinguish “beautiful” from “usable for this job.”

01Keep the source and brief in view
02Reject truth failures first
03Score composition for the actual page
04Make selection an explicit command

Keep the source and brief in view

Visual memory is unreliable. Compare candidates beside the approved product reference, required facts, intended placement, and copy hierarchy.

Reject truth failures first

Changed packaging, missing parts, invented features, wrong scale, or altered identity should remove a candidate before subjective style review begins.

Score composition for the actual page

Check subject position, crop tolerance, contrast, and copy-safe space at the target aspect ratio. A strong standalone image may still be the wrong layout asset.

Make selection an explicit command

The compare view stays read-only. Selecting a candidate updates one ImageLayer asset reference and leaves source and alternatives intact.

Worked example

Choose a launch image for a portrait ad

Compare four product worlds for a portrait design that needs headline space above the product.

01
Reject candidates that change the product or package identity.
02
Check whether the focal subject survives the portrait crop.
03
Evaluate quiet space behind the editable headline.
04
Select one candidate without deleting the source or alternatives.

Outcome

A deliberate asset choice tied to the brief, with every reviewed candidate preserved.

FAQ

Questions to carry into review.

Should the team score candidates numerically?

A lightweight rubric can help, but hard failures such as product inaccuracy should remain explicit gates rather than being averaged away.

Can we delete the rejected images immediately?

Keep them until a fresh reference audit confirms they are unused by documents, versions, or Brand Kits.