StyleRoom Tech · Vol.08

1,865 Picks That Couldn't Tell
a Lookbook from AI

Three days of a booth game at the Korea E-commerce Fair, and the one number that didn't move no matter what we changed

SeriesTech Teardown · Vol.08
FieldKorea E-commerce Fair 2026 · SETEC
Read5 min
Visitors gathered in front of the StyleRoom booth at the Korea E-commerce Fair
At the StyleRoom booth · Photo: Hong Su-jeong, Fashionbiz
"If I put AI shots on my product page, will customers notice?"

It's the first question sellers ask when they're thinking about bringing in AI images. StyleRoom got a chance to test it not in a lab, but on a floor packed with people: the Korea E-commerce Fair, held September 17 to 19, 2026, at SETEC in Seoul.

StyleRoom had attended conferences like AWS events, but had never run a booth at a trade fair. When the dev team asked what it could contribute, the answer was a game: a way to get people to come up to the booth, whatever it took.

We put that game at the center of the booth. It was called "Find the Real Photo." It mixed lookbook and model photos from brands on the market with photos StyleRoom had made, and asked players to pick out only the real ones. We expected 300 people over three days. The game was played 1,865 times.

And over those three days, we changed the game again and again. We removed the time limit and brought it back, lowered the target round from 10 to 6 and then to 5 on the last day, and added stamps and confetti. This piece reads through the records that piled up along the way. The interesting part: for all those changes, there was one number that never moved.

01 · The Game

648 photos, and one wrong pick ends the game

The game used 648 photos in total.

Each round shows a mix of photos from the two groups, and the visitor has to pick only the real (market lookbook) photos. Get even one wrong and the game ends right there; get them all right and you move up to the next round. When the answer is revealed, a green border marks the real photos, and from the second day on, a "StyleRoom AI" stamp appeared on the AI photos.

RoundShownReal to findChance of passing by guessingTime limit
12150.0%17 s
23133.3%19 s
34125.0%21 s
45210.0%23 s
5626.7%26 s
6732.9%28 s

The "chance of passing by guessing" is the probability of clearing a round by picking at random without looking at the photos. It's the baseline for this piece. If people can actually tell the photos apart, their pass rate should sit clearly above it. The time limits are the values after the adjustment on the morning of day one.

StyleRoom CEO Oh Hyun-seok in front of the booth, with the game monitor and campaign banners behind him
The booth with the game monitor. The banners, the posters, the staff T-shirts and even the business cards all used lookbook cuts made with StyleRoom AI. Visitors were surrounded by AI photos before they even started the game.

02 · The Crowd

We expected 300 people. The game was played 1,865 times

We expected 300 people over three days. We printed 500 business cards to match, then printed 1,500 more and handed out all 2,000. The game ran around 600 plays on each of the three days.

582Thu 9.17 · plays
611Fri 9.18 · plays
672Sat 9.19 · plays
the most of the three days
25 sGap between plays
(median)

A 25-second gap between plays means that as soon as one play ended, the next one started with barely a pause. The records also work as an indirect measure of the crowd in front of the booth.

DateBusiest 30 minBusiest hourShape of the day
Thu 9.1710:30 · 66 plays14:00 · 111 playsTwo rushes: 10:30 a.m. and 2 p.m.
Fri 9.1810:30 · 61 plays15:00 · 104 playsTwo rushes: 10:30 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Sat 9.1910:30 · 12:00 · 70 plays each12:00 · 128 plays126 to 128 plays an hour from 11:00 to 13:00

On all three days, the busiest moment was 10:30, half an hour after the doors opened. On weekdays there was a second rush in the afternoon, and on Saturday the booth stayed full through the lunch hours.

"I looked it up, and it said this was the hottest booth at the fair, so I came."

Booth visitor

"Young people were lining up to play."

Visitor review from day two · Naver Blog

03 · Live Tuning

What we changed over three days

The game didn't end the way it was first designed. Watching visitors' reactions from beside the monitor, we kept changing it with two goals in mind: giving the best possible experience right there on the spot, and leaving the name "StyleRoom AI" in people's heads. Every change went live during the fair.

DeployedWhat we changedWhy
Before openingDesignPrizes for clearing, not for ranking. A Stanley tumbler for everyone who cleared the target round. Photos at full original resolution, with the next round preloadedPrizes were based on clearing a round from the start, and shrinking the photos would blur the details needed to judge them
9.17 10:40Day oneTime limit briefly turned off, and instant retry after losing. Removed the result screen so one button restarts from round 1The venue internet was slow, so the timer ran down while photos loaded, and we wanted people to be able to try again right after losing
9.17 10:57Day oneTime limit restored at 1.5× the default (round 1: 11 s → 17 s)Instead of removing the time limit altogether, we decided to bring it back with more room
9.18 10:13Day twoTarget round 10 → 6, confetti for clearing the whole game, a StyleRoom QR code on one side of the screen, zoom button removedNo visitor reached round 10 on day one
9.18 10:19Day twoAn "Out!" stamp in the center of the screen after a wrong pickTo make the moment of losing clearer on screen
9.18 10:36Day twoA "StyleRoom AI" stamp on the AI photos when the answer is revealedTo show at a glance which photos were AI, and that StyleRoom made them
9.18 11:21Day twoA diagonal "StyleRoom AI" watermark in the backgroundIn rounds with few photos, the white space looked empty
9.19Last dayTarget round 6 → 5 (applied through on-site operation), first Stanley tumbler winnerRound 6 was still too high a bar for visitors

The deployed time is when the code went up. The booth devices only picked up the new version after a refresh, so the screens actually changed a little later than this.

04 · The Constant

Whatever we changed, 55%

With this many changes, we can slice the records at each change. The first thing we checked was the round 1 pass rate: picking the one real photo out of two, the easiest round in the game.

Removing the time limit, stretching it to 1.5×, lowering the target round and adding effects, even the weekend: none of it moved the round 1 pass rate much from around 55%. Split by day, it's 57.0% · 54.7% · 55.7%.

What we changed was the flow and the mood of the game. We cut the waiting, made losing clearer, and added touches that left our name behind. But the fact that it's hard to tell which photo is real when two sit side by side didn't change with any of it. The one thing in this game that never changed was the photos themselves.

05 · Result

55.8% in the easiest round
55.8%Round 1 pass rate
(1 real out of 2)
50.0%Chance of passing
with eyes closed
1,865Plays that attempted
round 1

Across all three days, the round 1 pass rate was 55.8%. That's only 5.8 percentage points above picking at random. More than four times out of ten, people picked the StyleRoom cut as the real lookbook. The line we heard most at the booth was "Is this one really real?", and it wasn't unusual for a whole group to try together and all go out in the first round.

Reading it statistically

With 55.8% over 1,865 plays, the 95% confidence interval is 53.5 to 58.0%. It's clearly above random (50%), so people weren't entirely without clues. But the gap is about 6 percentage points, too small to call an ability to tell them apart.

06 · The Few

Only a few could tell them apart

In rounds 2 and 3, too, pass rates were only about 7 percentage points above guessing. Things change from round 4. In round 4, where you pick 2 out of 5, the pass rate was 25.7%, more than double the guessing rate (10.0%).

But only 136 plays reached round 4, and those were people who had already gotten three rounds right in a row. They were a sharp-eyed few, filtered up from the rest. Even for them, the bar was high. Not a single visitor cleared round 6 (3 out of 7) in three days, and the first tumbler winner only appeared after we lowered the target to round 5 on the last day.

07 · What People Asked

The questions that came after the game

The questions we got most often at the booth tie back to the question of this piece: can people recognize AI photos?

08 · Conclusion

Accepted as the same kind of photo

The market photos in the game were lookbooks and model cuts shot in studios and on location: the kind of results sellers would hold up as the standard for "well-shot photos." Next to them, we placed cuts made by the StyleRoom pipeline.

At a venue full of online sellers, looking at two photos side by side under the best possible conditions, the result was 55.8%. We changed the game's rules and effects many times over three days, but this number stayed put. At this fair, StyleRoom cuts were accepted as the same kind of photo as market lookbooks.

Shoppers on a product page usually look at photos for less time than game players did, and on smaller screens. If players couldn't spot the difference even when their task was literally "find the real one," a shopper scrolling down the page is even less likely to notice it.

Field operation notes · Protecting the photos on a slow network
  • We didn't touch the resolution. Shrinking the photos would blur the details needed to judge them, and the game wouldn't work. We kept the original dimensions and only switched the file format to WebP, cutting a 3.8 MB original down to about 990 KB.
  • We preloaded the next round. While a player worked on one round, the photos for the next round downloaded first, cutting the wait between rounds.
  • We kept saving from blocking the game. Each play leaves a record when it ends, but the next play starts right away without waiting for the save to finish. That way "Try again" doesn't stall, even on a slow connection.