#
Image Capability Review Gallery

Image/model comparisons, screenshots, prompt galleries, portfolio-style evidence reviews.

Derived from current single-html gallery sample

## Visual review as a portable evidence pack

Use this option when the report needs image-first scanning plus source-backed detail. The packaged page keeps every figure, rubric note, and review comment available from a single file.

quality Instruction following 88/100

Prompt follows the target scene, count constraints, and object relationships.

Review notes
quality Text rendering 84/100

Checks whether generated text remains legible and faithful to the prompt.

Review notes
quality Style transfer 80/100

Compares requested design language with visible output traits.

Review notes
governance Safety refusals 76/100

Captures model limits and refusal behaviour for risky visual prompts.

Review notes
governance Prompt provenance 72/100

Keeps prompt, seed, model, source path, and reviewer notes close to the figure.

Review notes
limits Rubric scoring 68/100

Shows how inspection criteria translate into a repeatable review record.

Review notes

###
Instruction following

Category: quality. Score: 88/100.

Prompt follows the target scene, count constraints, and object relationships.

Implementation pattern: keep prompt text, source file path, generation settings, and evaluator comments in this detail section, not in a detached text download.

Back to figure

###
Text rendering

Category: quality. Score: 84/100.

Checks whether generated text remains legible and faithful to the prompt.

Implementation pattern: keep prompt text, source file path, generation settings, and evaluator comments in this detail section, not in a detached text download.

Back to figure

###
Style transfer

Category: quality. Score: 80/100.

Compares requested design language with visible output traits.

Implementation pattern: keep prompt text, source file path, generation settings, and evaluator comments in this detail section, not in a detached text download.

Back to figure

###
Safety refusals

Category: governance. Score: 76/100.

Captures model limits and refusal behaviour for risky visual prompts.

Implementation pattern: keep prompt text, source file path, generation settings, and evaluator comments in this detail section, not in a detached text download.

Back to figure

###
Prompt provenance

Category: governance. Score: 72/100.

Keeps prompt, seed, model, source path, and reviewer notes close to the figure.

Implementation pattern: keep prompt text, source file path, generation settings, and evaluator comments in this detail section, not in a detached text download.

Back to figure

###
Rubric scoring

Category: limits. Score: 68/100.

Shows how inspection criteria translate into a repeatable review record.

Implementation pattern: keep prompt text, source file path, generation settings, and evaluator comments in this detail section, not in a detached text download.

Back to figure

##
Rubric

Score visual examples against instruction following, legibility, source traceability, risk handling, and evidence value. CSV export is acceptable when the table must be reused elsewhere, but the readable rubric belongs in the HTML.

##
Source and provenance

Every source prompt, reviewer note, and local text artifact should be rendered inside this page. Only binary or tabular artifacts that need separate distribution should be materialized as downloads.