raw:
1
The image is completely black, indicating no discernible content or detail, which is the lowest possible quality on the given scale.


raw:
1
The image appears to be heavily degraded, with low visibility and a lack of discernible details, likely due to noise or compression artifacts.


raw:
1
The image is heavily blurred and lacks clear details, making it difficult to discern any specific content or features. The lack of sharpness and clarity indicates a low perceptual quality.


raw:
1
The image is heavily blurred and lacks any discernible details, making it impossible to assess any quality beyond the severe degradation.


raw:
1
The image appears heavily degraded with a lack of clear details, likely due to heavy noise or compression artifacts, making it difficult to discern any specific content or features.


raw:
1
The image appears to be heavily degraded, with significant noise and a lack of clarity, making it difficult to discern details or identify the subject.


raw:
1
The image is heavily distorted and lacks clear details, making it difficult to discern any specific content or features. The blurriness and lack of sharpness suggest a low perceptual quality.


raw:
1
The image is heavily distorted, with visible artifacts and a lack of clarity, making it difficult to discern details or identify the subject.


raw:
1
The image is heavily blurred and lacks clear details, making it difficult to discern any specific features or content. The lack of sharpness and clarity indicates a low perceptual quality.


raw:
2

The image appears to have a high level of noise and lacks sharpness, which are common issues in low-quality digital images. The details are not clear, and there is a noticeable lack of fine detail that would be present in a high-quality image.


raw:
3

The image appears to be somewhat blurry and lacks fine detail, which suggests it may have been compressed or has some level of noise. However, the basic shapes and features are still discernible, indicating it is not severely degraded.


raw:
3

The image appears to have some noise and lacks sharpness, which slightly degrades its quality. However, the details are still discernible, and there are no severe artifacts or blurring present.


raw:
1
The image is heavily blurred and lacks clear details, making it difficult to discern any specific features or content. The lack of sharpness and clarity indicates a severe degradation in perceptual quality.


raw:
3

The image appears to have a moderate level of noise and some blurriness, which slightly degrades its quality. However, the details are still somewhat discernible, and there are no severe artifacts or compression issues.


raw:
2

The image appears to have a high level of distortion and artifacts, which significantly degrade the visual quality. The shapes and colors are not clear, and there is a lack of sharpness and detail that would be expected in a high-quality image.


raw:
2

The image appears to have a low resolution and lacks sharpness, which is evident in the blurring of details and the presence of noise. The colors are somewhat muted, and there is a lack of clarity in the edges and textures, which are indicative of a lower perceptual quality.


raw:
1
The image appears heavily distorted with visible artifacts and a lack of clarity, making it difficult to discern details or identify the subject.


raw:
3

The image appears to have some level of distortion or compression, as indicated by the lack of fine detail and the somewhat blurry appearance of the object. The colors are somewhat muted, and there is a lack of sharpness that would be expected in a high-quality image.


raw:
1
The image is heavily blurred and lacks detail, making it difficult to discern specific features or objects. The overall quality is very low, indicating severe degradation.


raw:
4

The image is clear and sharp, with vibrant colors and fine detail visible in the petals and stamens. There are no visible artifacts or noise, indicating a high perceptual quality.


raw:
1
The image is heavily blurred, making it difficult to discern details, and the overall clarity is very low, indicating a severe degradation in perceptual quality.


raw:
2

The image appears to have a low resolution and lacks sharpness, which is evident in the blurry edges and lack of fine detail. The color and lighting are somewhat uniform, but the overall clarity and definition are not high, indicating a perceptual quality of 2.


raw:
3

The image has a soft focus and a somewhat painterly quality, which gives it a stylized appearance rather than a high level of detail. The lighting and color are well-balanced, but the lack of sharpness and fine detail suggests it is not of the highest perceptual quality.


raw:
3

The image appears to have some noise and lacks sharpness, which is why it doesn't quite reach a 5. However, the subject is still recognizable and the overall composition is clear enough to understand the content.


raw:
3

The image has a high level of detail and clarity, with a clear focus on the subject. However, the artistic style and the presence of blood splatters and drips might be considered as a stylistic choice rather than a degradation of quality. The image is clean and sharp, with no visible noise or compression artifacts.


raw:
3

The image appears to have a moderate level of distortion, with some blurring and a lack of sharpness, which is not ideal but not severe enough to be classified as heavily degraded. The structure is somewhat recognizable, but the details are not crisp.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and vibrant colors, but there is a slight blur and the edges are not perfectly sharp, which slightly reduces its quality from a perfect 5.


raw:
3

The image appears to have a moderate level of detail and clarity, with some visible brush strokes and soft edges, which are common in digital paintings. The colors are vibrant, but the overall sharpness and absence of noise or compression artifacts are not at the highest level, hence a rating of 3.


raw:
3

The image appears to have some noise and lacks sharpness, which slightly degrades its quality. However, the subject is still recognizable and the details are discernible, indicating it is not severely degraded.


raw:
4

The image appears to have a high level of detail and vibrant colors, which are characteristic of high-quality astronomical images. However, there is a slight presence of noise and graininess, which slightly reduces the overall quality from a perfect 5. The image is not severely degraded, and the details are still quite clear and distinguishable.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of good quality with clear details and sharp edges, but there is a slight lack of depth and the lighting seems a bit flat, which might slightly lower the score. However, the overall quality is still quite high.


raw:
3

The image has a soft focus and a somewhat dreamy quality, which might be intentional for artistic effect. However, the lack of sharpness and the presence of what appears to be noise or graininess detract from the overall quality. The lighting and color are well-balanced, but the lack of crisp detail brings it down from a higher rating.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with sharp details and clear textures, particularly in the feathers and the eye. The colors are vibrant and the contrast is well-balanced, which suggests that the image is not heavily degraded. However, the background is somewhat blurred, which might slightly lower the overall quality to a 4.


raw:
4

The image is clear and well-defined, with vibrant colors and smooth lines. There are no visible artifacts or blurriness, indicating a high perceptual quality.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of good quality with clear details and vibrant colors. However, there is a slight lack of sharpness and some minor noise, which prevents it from being rated as a perfect 5.


raw:
2
The image is blurry and lacks sharpness, which affects its overall quality. The details are not clear, and the image appears to be out of focus, which is why it is not rated higher.


raw:
4

The image is clear and well-lit, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The details of the mirror frame and the reflection are sharp, indicating a high perceptual quality.


raw:
3

The image has a moderate level of blur and lacks sharpness, which affects its overall quality. The lighting and color are somewhat muted, and there is a lack of fine detail that would typically be present in a high-quality image. The subject is not clearly defined, and the background is not distinct, which further contributes to the lower quality rating.


raw:
3

The image appears to have a soft focus and some noise, which slightly degrades its quality. The colors are muted and the details are not very sharp, which is why it doesn't quite reach a 5. However, the image is not severely degraded and the overall composition is clear.


raw:
3

The image appears to have a soft focus and some motion blur, which slightly degrades the sharpness and detail. However, the colors are vibrant and the subject is recognizable, indicating a moderate level of quality.


raw:
3

The image appears to have some compression artifacts and a lack of sharpness, which slightly degrades its quality. However, the main subject is still recognizable and the overall composition is clear.


raw:
3
The image appears to have some noise and compression artifacts, which slightly degrade the quality, but the details are still discernible.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and clarity, with a well-defined subject and background. The lighting and colors are vibrant, and there are no visible artifacts or blurring that would detract from the overall quality. However, the image appears to be digitally manipulated, which slightly reduces its quality from a purely photographic standpoint.


raw:
4

The image appears to have a good level of detail and clarity, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The lighting is even, and the subject is in focus, which contributes to a high-quality perception. However, the background is somewhat plain and does not add much to the overall quality, which is why it is not a perfect 5.


raw:
4

The image appears to have a high level of detail and clarity, with vibrant colors and smooth gradients. There are no visible artifacts or distortions that would typically indicate lower quality. The composition is well-defined, and the image seems to be of good resolution.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of good quality with clear details and sharp edges, but there is a slight softness in the lighting and the background is not as sharp as the subject. The subject and the goose are in focus, and there are no visible artifacts or noise.


raw:
3

The image appears to have some distortion and a lack of sharpness, which is evident in the edges and overall clarity. The colors are vibrant, but the image does not meet the criteria for high quality due to the visible distortions.


raw:
3

The image has a moderate level of detail and clarity, with some areas appearing slightly pixelated or lacking in sharpness. The colors are vibrant, but the overall image quality is not the highest, indicating some degradation in the perceptual quality.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of good quality with clear details and vibrant colors, but there is a slight softness in the edges and some minor noise, which prevents it from being rated as a perfect 5.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and vibrant colors, but there is a slight softness in the edges and some areas appear a bit blurry, which slightly reduces the overall quality. However, the image is not severely degraded and the details are still quite clear.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with clean details and sharp edges, though there might be a slight softness in the lighting which could be considered a minor flaw. However, the overall quality is still quite good.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and clarity, with a smooth gradient and well-defined edges. The colors are vibrant and the overall composition is visually appealing. However, there is a slight hint of noise or graininess, which slightly reduces the quality from a perfect 5.


raw:
4

The image appears to have a high level of detail and clarity, with a clean and sharp appearance. The lighting and contrast are well-balanced, and there are no visible artifacts or distortions. The subject is well-defined, and the overall composition is aesthetically pleasing.


raw:
4

The image is clear and well-lit, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The details of the equipment and the individuals are sharp, indicating a high-quality image.


raw:
4

The image appears to have a high level of detail and clarity, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The lighting and shading are well-executed, giving the image a clean and sharp appearance. The textures on the rock and the water are distinct, and the overall composition is well-balanced.


raw:
4

The image is clear and sharp, with good focus on the subject, the mouse. The lighting is even, and there are no visible artifacts or noise. The background is slightly out of focus, which helps to emphasize the subject, but the overall quality is high.


raw:
3

The image has a soft focus and a painterly quality, which gives it a certain artistic appeal but also results in a lack of sharpness and detail that would be expected in a high-quality image. The colors are muted and the overall composition is somewhat abstract, which might be intentional for artistic effect, but it does not contribute to the image's clarity or sharpness.


raw:
4

The image appears to have a high level of detail and clarity, with smooth gradients and a lack of visible noise or compression artifacts. The lighting and color are well-balanced, contributing to a high-quality visual experience. However, the image is not perfect and may have slight imperfections that prevent it from being rated a 5.


raw:
3

The image has a moderate level of noise and graininess, which slightly degrades the overall quality. The lighting is uneven, and the details are not very sharp, which further reduces the image quality. However, the image is not severely degraded, and the main elements are still discernible.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with vibrant colors and clear details, but there is a slight softness in the edges of the spiral structure, which might be due to the nature of the astronomical image or the resolution. However, it does not have any visible noise, compression artifacts, or blurring that would significantly degrade its quality.


raw:
3

The image has a clear subject and a distinct background, but the lighting and reflections create some glare and the image appears slightly overexposed in certain areas, which slightly reduces its quality. The details are not entirely sharp, and there is a slight lack of clarity in the edges of the subject and the background.


raw:
3

The image appears to have some noise and lacks sharpness, which slightly degrades its quality. However, the details are still discernible, and there are no severe artifacts or blurring present.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with clean lines and vibrant colors. The details in the character's attire and the background are sharp, and there are no visible artifacts or blurring that would typically indicate lower quality. However, the image does not have the absolute highest level of detail and clarity that would earn a perfect score of 5.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with clean lines, sharp details, and a lack of visible noise or compression artifacts. The lighting is soft and even, contributing to the overall clarity and natural appearance of the subject.


raw:
4

The image is clear and well-defined, with good color saturation and sharp details. However, there is a slight softness in the edges, which prevents it from being rated as a perfect 5.


raw:
4

The image is clear and well-lit, with good detail visible in the tuk-tuk and the surrounding environment. The colors are vibrant, and there is no noticeable noise or compression artifacts. However, the image could be slightly sharper, which would elevate the rating to 5.


raw:
4

The image is vibrant and clear, with well-defined colors and details. However, there is a slight softness in the edges and a lack of fine detail that might be expected in a high-quality image, which prevents it from reaching a perfect score.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and clarity, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The lighting and color are well-balanced, and the overall composition is visually appealing. However, the image is not perfect and could be rated slightly higher if it were completely free of any minor imperfections or distractions.


raw:
4

The image is of high quality with clean lines, sharp details, and vibrant colors. The lighting is well-balanced, and there are no visible artifacts or noise. The composition is also well-executed, contributing to the overall high perceptual quality.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and clarity, with a well-defined subject (the jellyfish) and a clean background. The lighting and color are vibrant, and there are no visible artifacts or blurring that would detract from the overall quality.


raw:
4

The image is clear and the details of the flowers are well-defined, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The lighting is even, and the colors are vibrant, contributing to a high-quality appearance.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of good quality with a painterly style, but there is a slight lack of sharpness and detail, which is characteristic of the artistic style rather than a degradation in quality. The colors are well-defined, and the subject is clear, indicating a high-quality image in terms of its artistic representation.


raw:
3

The image has a stylized, artistic quality with a clear subject (the Eiffel Tower) and distinct color contrasts. However, the red splatter effect and the lack of fine detail suggest it is not a photograph but rather a digital illustration or painting. The edges are somewhat soft, and there is a lack of fine detail that would be expected in a high-quality image.


raw:
4

The image is clear and the details of the frog and the hat are well-defined. The lighting is good and the colors are vibrant, which contributes to a high-quality appearance. However, there is a slight softness in the edges, which prevents it from being a perfect 5.


raw:
4

The image is clear and detailed, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The lines are sharp, and the colors are vibrant, indicating a high-quality image.


raw:
4

The image is clear and well-defined, with no visible noise, compression artifacts, or blur. The lines are sharp, and the colors are vibrant, indicating a high-quality image.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with good clarity and sharpness. The details in the clothing and the background are well-defined, and there are no visible artifacts or compression issues. The lighting is even, and the subject is in focus, contributing to the overall high perceptual quality.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with clean lines and sharp details, though there is a slight softness in the lighting which might be intentional to give a more cartoonish or stylized look. The colors are vibrant and the overall composition is well-defined.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and clarity, with vibrant colors and a well-defined underwater scene. The lighting and reflections are well-handled, and there are no visible artifacts or blurring that would detract from the overall quality. However, it does not quite reach the highest possible score due to the slight presence of noise and the somewhat artificial appearance of the underwater environment, which might be due to the nature of the image or the post-processing involved.


raw:
4

The image is of high quality with clean lines and vibrant colors, but there is a slight lack of sharpness and detail in the fur texture, which prevents it from being a perfect 5.


raw:
4

The image is vibrant and detailed, with a high level of clarity and smooth transitions between colors. The illustration is clean and there are no visible artifacts or distortions, indicating a high perceptual quality.


raw:
4

The image is clear and well-lit, with good focus on the subject. The details of the donut and its toppings are sharp, and the colors are vibrant. There are no visible noise or compression artifacts, indicating a high-quality image.


raw:
4

The image is clear and sharp, with good lighting and a well-composed subject. There are no visible noise, compression artifacts, or blurring that would detract from its quality. The lighting is soft and even, which enhances the overall perception of the image.


raw:
4

The image is very clear and sharp, with vibrant colors and fine details visible on the gecko's skin. There are no noticeable artifacts or compression issues, indicating a high quality image.


raw:
4

The image is clear and sharp, with good lighting and detail. The textures of the stones and plants are well-defined, and the overall composition is pleasing. There are no visible artifacts or compression issues.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with clean lines and sharp details, though it is not perfectly clean with some minor imperfections. The texture and shading are well-rendered, suggesting a high level of detail and quality.


raw:
4

The image appears to be of high quality with a clean and sharp appearance. The details in the subject's face and clothing are well-defined, and there are no visible compression artifacts or noise. The lighting is even, and the colors are vibrant, contributing to the overall high-quality perception of the image.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and clarity, with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The lighting and color saturation are well-balanced, and the subject is in focus, making it a high-quality image.


raw:
4

The image is of high quality with clean lines, sharp details, and vibrant colors. The lion's fur texture and facial features are well-defined, and there are no visible artifacts or compression issues.


raw:
4

The image is clean and sharp with no visible noise or compression artifacts. The details in the furniture and the reflections in the windows are clear, indicating a high-quality render.


raw:
3

The image appears to have a moderate level of detail and clarity, with some visible noise and compression artifacts, particularly noticeable in the background and the astronaut's suit. The text is somewhat legible, but the overall quality is not high due to these imperfections.


raw:
4

The image is clear and sharp, with good detail in the cat's fur and the leaf. The colors are vibrant, and there is no visible noise or compression artifacts. The focus is on the cat's face, which is well-defined. The background is slightly blurred, which helps to emphasize the subject. Overall, it is a high-quality image.


raw:
4

The image is clear and detailed, with a high level of sharpness and no visible noise or compression artifacts. The colors are vibrant, and the contrast is well-balanced, contributing to a high-quality visual experience.


raw:
3

The image is clear and well-lit, with good contrast and sharpness. However, there are some minor artifacts and noise present, which slightly reduce its quality. The details in the clothing and background are discernible, but not perfectly crisp.


raw:
4

The image is of high quality with clean and sharp details, but there is a slight softness in the lighting which might be intentional for a certain effect. The skin appears smooth and the colors are well-balanced, indicating a good level of quality.


raw:
4

The image has a high level of detail and vibrant colors, but there is a slight blur and some noise, which slightly reduces its quality. The overall composition is visually appealing, but the lack of sharpness and some noise bring it down from a perfect 5.


raw:
4

The image is visually appealing with vibrant colors and a clear focus on the butterflies. The background is slightly blurred, which helps to emphasize the butterflies, and the lighting is soft and natural, contributing to the overall high-quality appearance. However, there are some minor artifacts and noise, which slightly reduce the score to 4.


raw: 4. The image is clear and sharp, with good contrast and detail, but there is a slight graininess which might be due to the black and white format or the artistic choice. It does not have any obvious compression artifacts or blurring.


raw:
4

The image is clear and sharp, with good lighting and a well-composed subject. The details in the hair and the texture of the dress are visible, and there are no noticeable artifacts or compression issues. The background is slightly blurred, which helps to emphasize the subject, but the overall quality is high.