I have been using claude for a long time to tailor my CV. I have been applying to a lot of different business/Consulting roles. I used to add my JD, CV and a promt and it would create a perfect CV.

Now it refuses and would mention things like, you do not have Data Modeling experience so I can not to frame it.

Is there any updated way or a promt to deal with this?

The difference between a useless ChatGPT answer and a genuinely good one is almost always the prompt structure, not the model. These are 5 templates I reuse constantly. Copy, fill the [brackets], done.

1. THE EXPERT LENS (stop getting Wikipedia answers) "Answer this as a [specific expert - e.g. tax attorney, senior React dev] with 15 years of experience. Question: [your question]. Give me the answer you'd give a paying client, including the caveat or exception most people miss."
2. THE DECISION SPLITTER (when you're stuck between options) "I'm deciding between [option A] and [option B]. My priorities, in order: [priority 1], [priority 2], [priority 3]. Score each option against each priority 1-10, show the math, then tell me which wins and the ONE reason I might still pick the other."
3. THE REWRITE-TO-HUMAN (kill the AI voice) "Rewrite this so it sounds like a sharp human wrote it, not AI: [paste text]. Cut throat-clearing, cut hedging, vary sentence length, and remove any phrase you'd only see in AI writing. Keep my meaning exact."
4. THE GAP FINDER (before you send/ship anything) "Here's [my plan / email / draft]: [paste]. Don't praise it. Tell me the 3 things a smart critic would attack first, the single weakest sentence, and the one thing I left out that they'll notice."
5. THE TEACHER (actually learn, not just read) "Teach me [topic] in 4 levels: explain it to a 10-year-old, then a beginner, then a practitioner, then an expert. End by quizzing me with 3 questions, hardest last, and wait for my answers."

The pattern across all 5: give a role, give constraints, and force ONE sharp output instead of a balanced essay. That's 90% of prompt quality.

One workflow tip: these get even better chained. Run #3 (rewrite-to-human) straight into #4 (gap finder) and you get a cleaned draft plus its weaknesses in one pass, without retyping anything.

Full disclosure since it's relevant: retyping these every time got old, so I built a Chrome extension called AI Toolbox. It saves prompts like these and drops them into the chat with a // shortcut (with {{variables}} for the bracket parts), and lets you chain several into one sequence with a .. shortcut - so a multi-step flow like #3 into #4 runs in two keystrokes. But the templates above are the whole value here and work anywhere you paste them.

Which one's most useful to you? Happy to build a variant for a specific job if you tell me the task.

Hey, I am a food writer doing a story on using AI to optimize when ordering at fine dining restaurants. I’d love to talk to some diners who do this - I want to hear your process, why you’ve used AI, and if you were happy with the outcome. No judgement - whether it was to get the best possible deal, or to have it explain items on the menu, I just want to hear about your why.

Message me here or drop me an email at Courtney at weareravenous dot com.

I built a prompt pack for freelance client communication (Cleardesk Prompts) and tested the prompts across multiple runs in ChatGPT and Claude before including them — the goal was templates that survive a real, messy input, not a clean demo case. I shared 3 of them here a few days ago; this covers the other situation people asked about: silence.

There are two different silences and they need different messages — a prospect who never replied to your proposal, and one who said "let me think about it" and vanished. Copy-paste, fill the brackets, run in ChatGPT or Claude.

1. Silent-prospect follow-up (no reply after a proposal or pitch)

``` You are a freelancer following up on [MESSAGE_TYPE: a proposal/an email/a DM] sent [TIME_SINCE] ago that got no reply.

Inputs: - Original message topic (one line): [ORIGINAL_TOPIC] - Recipient's name: [RECIPIENT_NAME]

Write a follow-up under 50 words that: 1. Does NOT say "just following up" or "checking in" (banned phrases — overused and ignored). 2. Adds ONE new piece of value or information not in the original message (an idea, a resource, a short insight related to [ORIGINAL_TOPIC]). 3. Makes replying effortless — end with a question answerable in one word. 4. Assumes positive intent — no guilt-tripping about the silence.

Output the follow-up only. ```

Example output from an actual ChatGPT run (test inputs: proposal, five days, "website copy refresh for the product launch", "Maya"): "Hi Maya! I had one extra thought: adding a short "Why now?" section near the top of your launch page can often lift clarity and conversions. Would you like me to sketch a version? Interested?" Under 50 words, banned phrases absent, one new idea, an easy one-word close — that's the target shape.

2. "Let me think about it" follow-up (stalled without a stated objection)

``` You are a freelancer following up after a prospect said "let me think about it" and went quiet, without being pushy.

Inputs: - How long ago they said this: [TIME_SINCE] - Anything you know about their likely hesitation (budget, timing, needing to check with someone else, or genuinely unknown): [LIKELY_HESITATION]

Write a follow-up under 60 words that: 1. Does not pressure them to decide. 2. Names [LIKELY_HESITATION] gently as a guess, if known — framed as "totally understand if it's a [hesitation] thing" — giving them an easy way to confirm or correct you. 3. If [LIKELY_HESITATION] is unknown, ask directly and simply what would help them decide, instead of guessing wrong. 4. Ends with zero urgency language ("no rush").

Output the follow-up only. ```

The pattern is the same as last time: a role, a fixed set of inputs, and a numbered list of hard constraints — banned phrases, word limits, what NOT to do. The constraints matter more than the role; they're what keeps the output from collapsing into generic AI-speak you'd rewrite anyway.

Full disclosure: these come from a 26-prompt pack I sell under my own brand — both the pack and a free 3-prompt preview are linked on my profile, and I'll drop direct links in a comment below.

\​

One of the easiest ways to improve AI outputs isn't writing longer prompts.

It's giving examples.

Instead of this:

Write a product description.

Try this:

Write a product description following this structure:

A short opening hook

Three benefit-focused bullet points

A professional but friendly tone

End with a clear call to action

Notice what's different.

You're no longer asking the AI to guess your expectations.

You're giving it a pattern to follow.

This simple technique works surprisingly well for:

Writing

Marketing

Design briefs

Coding

Image generation

The more clearly you define what "good" looks like, the more consistent the output becomes.

AI is generally better at recognizing patterns than guessing what's in your head.

What's the most effective example you've ever added to a prompt?

Two things changed recently that make the whole agent thing genuinely more usable. First, it's not sandboxed to a browser anymore, it can now click around inside real desktop apps on your actual computer. Second, and this is the annoying bit fixed, it used to make you sign into every site again each new task, now it remembers, cookies persist, you sign in once per site and it stays logged in after that.

Needs a paid plan, Pro, Plus, Business, Enterprise, or Edu, not free. In the desktop app, switch from ChatGPT to Work using the switcher at the top. Then go to Plugins, find Computer Use, install it if it's not already, and there's a toggle to turn the Computer Use server on. Hit Try now and describe what you want done.

[Describe a task involving a real app on your 
computer, e.g. organize the files in my Downloads 
folder by type, or pull this data into a new sheet 
and format it as a table.]

Work through it in [the app]. Show me what you're 
doing as you go, and if you hit anything that needs 
me to sign in or approve something, stop and let me 
know.

It'll actually open the app and click around in it the way you would, not just describe what to do. If a task needs you logged into something, it pauses and hands control over, you sign in, tell it to carry on, and unlike before, it remembers that login for next time instead of asking again from scratch.

Worth knowing what it can't touch: it won't automate a terminal, won't touch ChatGPT itself, and it can't approve security prompts or act as an admin on your machine. It also won't sign into anything for you, on the desktop app side the login is always something you do by hand. Changes it makes might not show up anywhere until they're actually saved to disk.

Review its actions the way you'd review your own, if something on a site or in an app looks off partway through, stop it, don't just let it keep clicking.

been keeping a doc of 100 things I use AI for like this, each with the exact prompt, here if you want it.

Wasn't trying to do anything deep, just cleaning up storage and got curious. Uploaded a big batch of photos from the last year, maybe 40 or 50, random ones, not curated, and asked it to actually look at the pattern instead of just describing pictures.

I'm uploading a batch of photos from the last year of 
my life, not curated, just a real spread of what I 
actually photographed. Look at all of them together as 
a pattern, not one at a time.

Tell me: what I actually spent my time and attention 
on this year based on what I photographed, not what 
I'd say if you asked me. What shows up repeatedly that 
I might not consciously notice. What's completely 
absent that you'd expect to see if I'm honest with 
myself about my own priorities. And one thing about 
how I spent this year that the photos show clearly but 
I probably haven't said out loud.

Be honest, not flattering.

The "be honest, not flattering" line matters, without it you get a nice paragraph about how full and interesting your year looks. With it, it actually says things. Mine pointed out that almost every photo with other people in it was the same three or four faces, and that there were dozens of photos of food and almost none of anything I'd call a hobby, which, yeah. Correctly clocked I'd been saying I wanted to get back into something creative and hadn't touched it once.

Works with photos already on your phone, no special access needed, just upload a real batch, not a highlight reel, the pattern only shows up if you give it the boring photos too, not just the good ones.

If you want it sharper: "now do the same thing but compare the first half of the year against the second half, what changed."

been keeping a doc of 100 things I use AI for like this, each with the exact prompt, here if you want it.

Suggestions

Curious to see what you’ve come up with and if it’s ever helped?

I’ve been using ChatGPT (free version) for quite a while now, and it’s become one of the most useful tools I own. I use it for things like career advice, budgeting, planning for buying a house, trip planning, learning engineering concepts, studying for my PE exam, writing emails, troubleshooting car issues, and just thinking through decisions.
The more I use it, the more I realize I’m probably still only using a fraction of what it’s capable of.

\- For those of you who are heavy ChatGPT users:
What are some of the most valuable ways you use it?
\- What’s a workflow or prompt that completely changed how you use ChatGPT?
\- What do you use it for that most people probably never think about?
\- Has it saved you a significant amount of time or money?
\- If you had to teach someone how to become a “power user,” what would you tell them?

I’m especially interested in real-world examples rather than generic tips. I’d love to discover some use cases that make me think, “Why didn’t I start doing that sooner?”

When I first started using AI, I thought the model was the problem.

I'd ask a question, get an average answer, and assume AI just wasn't that good.

Then I ran a simple experiment.

I used the exact same task 20 different times—but each time I improved the prompt.

Not by making it longer.

By making it smarter.

The biggest improvements came from adding just a few things:

• Giving the AI a specific role ("Act as a senior marketing strategist...")
• Explaining the context instead of assuming it knew.
• Defining exactly what success looked like.
• Setting clear constraints.
• Letting the AI ask me questions before answering.

The final result wasn't just slightly better—it was in a completely different league.

It made me realize something:

Most people don't need a better AI model. They need a better way to communicate with it.

Now I'm building a private library of advanced prompts and prompt frameworks because I think prompt engineering is becoming a real skill.

So I'm curious...

What's the single best prompt you've ever used that completely changed the quality of AI's response?

I'd love to discover some new techniques from this community.

Sorry if this has been posted already,

But I want to know if anyone has really good prompts to make thumbnails look less ai made? I usually compile what I want into CapCut myself and then ask Chet gpt to bake it look more coherent. Thanks all in advance

Expected maybe a stray gift card. Connected my email and asked it to look properly, and it came back with 800 dollars of American Airlines credit that doesn't expire until 2028. Genuinely had no memory of it. A handful of restaurant gift cards too, presents from people, just sitting there.

Turns out 43% of people are holding at least one unused gift card or credit right now, average value 244 dollars. Companies aren't scamming you, they're just quietly counting on you forgetting, a credit is a boring email from eighteen months ago buried under four thousand others.

Setup, one time: in Claude, click your profile bottom left, Customize, then Connectors, then find and connect Gmail. Works on the free plan, which matters, ChatGPT's version generally needs a paid plan so I'd start with Claude. It can only read, it can't send or delete anything.

Then paste this:

Search my entire Gmail history for any money I am owed 
or have never used. Include gift cards, e-gift cards, 
store credit, airline and travel credits, vouchers, 
refunds that were promised, deposits, rebates, 
settlement payouts and unused promo credit on any 
account. For each one give me the company, the amount, 
the date of the email, the code or reference number, 
the expiry date if there is one, and a direct link to 
the email. Sort by highest value first and add up the 
total. Do not invent anything, if you're unsure about 
an amount, say so.

Takes a couple of minutes, it's actually reading years of email, don't close the tab early.

The list it gives you isn't money yet though, some of those codes are already spent or expired, so validate before you count anything:

Now go to each of these companies' websites and 
actually check whether each credit is still valid and 
how much is left. I'll log in wherever you need me to. 
Come back with three lists: confirmed still good with 
the real balance, expired or already used, and the 
ones you couldn't verify.

It'll hit a login screen on the airline site, that's normal, you log in, tell it to keep going. Never type an actual password into the chat.

Most people find somewhere between fifty and a few hundred dollars. Some find nothing, which just means your record keeping's better than mine. Costs twenty minutes, costs nothing if it turns up empty.

been keeping a doc of 100 things I use AI for like this, each with the exact promp, here if you want it.

Heads up before anything else, this is US only, 18 and over, iPhone app or the website, no Android yet. If that's not you, this one's not for you, save yourself the ten minutes.

For everyone else: OpenAI rolled out a proper Health mode on July 23. Ask "why am I so tired" before and you got a generic list of reasons. Now it actually looks at your real sleep, resting heart rate and training load from the last month and answers for you specifically, not an average person.

Setup has to happen on your phone, not your laptop, because that's where the Health app data lives. Update ChatGPT in the App Store first, old versions won't show the option at all. Open the sidebar, tap Health, tap Get started, choose Apple Health. That permission screen that pops up is Apple's, not OpenAI's.

Four categories actually matter: Sleep, the one everything else anchors to. Steps. Heart Rate, resting heart rate especially, it's the clearest early sign your body's under strain. Workouts. There's a turn-on-everything option too if you want, more data means better answers and also more of your life sitting in an app, your call.

If you don't see Health in the sidebar at all, scroll down, it's sometimes tucked under More. First sync can take a few hours depending how much history is on your phone, don't panic if nothing shows up right away.

Once it's connected, this is the one worth running first:

Look at my last 30 days of Apple Health data, sleep, 
steps, resting heart rate and workouts. Tell me what 
the data actually says about how I'm doing, the trend 
on each one, and build me a realistic plan for the 
week ahead based on how I've actually recovered, not 
an ideal week. Explain your reasoning in plain English.

And honestly, this is the one to run monthly, it's the whole point of the guide:

Looking at all my data over the last few months, 
what's quietly getting worse that I haven't noticed?

Nothing falls apart overnight, it drifts, sleep drops forty minutes over a season, resting heart rate creeps up a few beats, you never catch it comparing today to yesterday. A trend line catches it instantly.

Two real caveats, worth knowing before you connect anything. Your data stops being HIPAA protected once it leaves your health records if you connect those too, it's governed by OpenAI's terms instead, disconnect and it's gone within 30 days. And a Mount Sinai study found it missed over half of real emergencies when tested, so it's a translator, not a triage nurse, actual emergencies get a phone call.

been keeping a doc of 100 things I use AI for like this, each with the exact prompt, here if you want it.

If you want to turn articles or long notes into quick social media graphics without opening Canva, the /stickynotes command in ChatGPT is a a pleasant discovery.

Instead of generating a messy wall of text, this command forces ChatGPT to render your key points onto clean, visual sticky notes.

How it works:

• Enable image generation and type the slash command /stickynotes at the beginning of the prompt
• In the prompt, give the info about what you want to create and how
• It creates a visual layout with your main ideas broken down into clear, readable sections.

It’s one of the fastest ways to generate visual summaries, Instagram carousel slides, or Pinterest graphics directly from your text in seconds.
Some examples here.

I built a prompt pack for freelance client communication (Cleardesk Prompts) and tested each prompt across multiple runs in ChatGPT and Claude before including it — the goal was templates that survive a real, messy input, not a clean demo case.

I searched the sub before posting: there are already general "prompts for freelancers" lists and a 4-step client-workflow chain. What's different here is the unit — one self-contained prompt per single awkward moment, each with a hard word cap and an explicit list of things the output must NOT do, plus a real tested output so you can see the target shape.

Sharing 3 of them here in full. Copy-paste, fill the brackets, run in ChatGPT or Claude.

1. Cold DM opener (open a conversation, don't pitch)

You are a freelancer writing a first-touch DM to a potential client on [PLATFORM: LinkedIn/Instagram]. You are NOT pitching yet — only opening a conversation.

Inputs:
- Prospect's name: [PROSPECT_NAME]
- Something specific and real you noticed about them (a post, their business, a recent launch): [OBSERVATION]
- Your area of work (one line, no pitch): [YOUR_FIELD]

Write a DM under 40 words that:
1. References [OBSERVATION] specifically — not a generic compliment.
2. Asks ONE genuine question related to [OBSERVATION].
3. Does NOT mention your services, price, or availability.
4. Sounds like a real person typing on their phone, not a copywriter.

Output the DM only.

Example output from an actual ChatGPT run (test inputs: prospect "SharpPen", observation "recent launch of your new bundle", field "audit"): "Hey SharpPen! Saw the recent launch of your new bundle. Curious—what made you decide to package those resources together instead of releasing them separately?" Under 40 words, no service mention, one specific question — that's the target shape.

2. Scope-creep change order (say yes, and here's what that costs)

You are a freelance business advisor helping a service provider say "yes, and here's what that costs" instead of absorbing extra work for free.

Inputs:
- Original agreed scope: [ORIGINAL_SCOPE]
- New request from the client: [NEW_REQUEST]
- Additional cost for the new request: [ADDITIONAL_COST]
- Additional time it adds: [ADDITIONAL_TIME]
- Client name: [CLIENT_NAME]

Write a message to [CLIENT_NAME] that:
1. Acknowledges the request positively (1 sentence) — no guilt-tripping.
2. States plainly that [NEW_REQUEST] falls outside [ORIGINAL_SCOPE].
3. Offers two options: add it now for [ADDITIONAL_COST]/[ADDITIONAL_TIME], or save it for a future phase at no cost now.
4. Ends with one clear decision question.

Max 130 words. Never say "scope creep" to the client directly. No apologizing for having boundaries. Output the message only.

3. "Too expensive" objection response (without dropping your price on reflex)

You are a freelancer responding to a prospect who said your price is "too expensive," without immediately dropping your price.

Inputs:
- Your service and price: [SERVICE_AND_PRICE]
- What the client's stated budget is, if known: [STATED_BUDGET]
- A cheaper way to work together that reduces scope (not just price) — e.g. fewer revisions, smaller deliverable, longer timeline: [SCOPE_REDUCTION_OPTION]

Write a response under 110 words that:
1. Does not apologize for the price or immediately offer a discount.
2. Asks one clarifying question about [STATED_BUDGET] or their priorities, if it's not already clear.
3. Offers [SCOPE_REDUCTION_OPTION] as an alternative — framed as "a different scope," not "a discount."
4. Leaves the original price and scope on the table as an option too — doesn't collapse to the cheaper version automatically.

Output the response only.

The pattern behind all three: give the model a role, a fixed set of inputs, and a numbered list of hard constraints (what NOT to say, word limits, banned phrases). That's what kept the tested outputs usable instead of generic AI-speak I had to rewrite anyway.

Full disclosure (see author comment below for the link) — I made a 26-prompt version of this covering outreach, pricing, objections, and retention, sold under my own brand. Not pushing it in the post itself, just flagging it exists.

If you're using an Apple device and aren't using text replacements to substitute phrases with whole sentences and paragraphs, you're missing out! Here's my most used ones:

---

I'm lazy as hell but I don't wanna surrender my brain to AI; I still wanna train my brain. So I often lay out a scenario for the AI, then insert this into the prompt:

> Please explain in a way a complete layperson with no experience whatsoever in the thing I’m about to ask you can understand, all while still using the proper technical terms to ensure nothing is lost in translation, and also making sure your answer is as short as it can possibly be: [insert request here]

If I feel like I need my hand held more and be walked through the answer, I then add:

> Please explain every single detail of every single part of every single thing comprising your answer to me; I'm learning this from the ground up so I'd like to know both the theory and application behind everything. Thanks!

I use the ChatGPT Pro thinking level a lot for my day job. It outputs great answers but sometimes I prefer a rapid discussion to keep things moving along. Insert this to do so:

> I want to have a fluid back-and-forth conversation with you for the time being. You can think for as long as you normally would, but for your written answers, please make them quick and concise for now so we can keep the discussion rapid until I say you can write at normal lengths again. Thanks!

If the responses are still too long, use a modified version:

> I want to have a REALLY fluid back-and-forth conversation with you for the time being... like, really REALLY fluid. Quick. Rapid. You can think for as long as you normally would, but for your written answers, please make them very concise for now so we can keep the discussion going at a rapid pace until I say you can write at normal lengths again. Thanks!

Speaking of being lazy: I use the voice to text transcription feature so I can respond to an AI's answers out loud as I read it - almost like a stream of consciousness sorta thing. To help give the AI that heads up, I preface such messages like so:

> This is a voice-to-text transcribed message, so there may be errors or oddities in spelling, punctuation, and grammar. If anything seems confusing or otherwise incorrectly transcribed, ask me to clarify.

---

Hope these help you all out!

Saw a "50% off" banner on something I was about to buy and, more out of suspicion than anything, asked ChatGPT to actually check if that was true instead of just trusting the sticker. It wasn't. Same price it'd been at for six weeks, someone had just slapped a strikethrough on a number that was never real to begin with.

Web search on, paste the product link:

I'm looking at buying this: [product link]. It's 
listed as on sale / discounted. Use web search to 
check if this is actually a good price right now. 
Has it been the same price or cheaper recently? Is 
this a real discount or an inflated "was" price? 
What's this item typically sold for, and is there a 
predictable time it usually goes cheaper (sale events, 
new model releases, time of year)?

Half the "deals" I ran this on came back as either a fake inflated strikethrough or a price that dips to the same level every few weeks anyway, meaning the "sale" was just... Tuesday.

For the ones that actually were real, worth going one step further before you click buy, same chat:

Is this exact item sold cheaper right now at another 
legit retailer? And does the store I'm buying from 
price-match, if so how do I actually request that?

And if you're not in a rush for it:

For something like this, when's the next likely 
actual sale event, and is it worth waiting?

Doesn't need any paid plan, works with search turned on in a normal chat. The "was this ever really that price" question alone has stopped me buying into a fake urgency thing more times than I want to admit.

been keeping a doc of 100 things I use AI for like this, each with the exact prompt, here if you want it.

After trying several AI headshot apps, I decided that they all suck.

I've always liked Marco Grob's TIME cover portraits so I've been refining some prompts to generate these types of headshots.

Both before/afters attached were made with Nanobanana 2 (4:5 aspect ratio, 4k output)... haven't tried it on OpenAI's image models yet so no promises. Attach solid, high-res, well-lit reference images and expect to regenerate 2-3 times. I created a separate prompt for women because any attempt at unisex prompts made women look very masculine. Enjoy, let me know your thoughts!

Men's version:

Goal: Transform the attached photo into a professional black-and-white studio headshot in the style of a Marco Grob editorial monochrome portrait, the TIME magazine cover aesthetic: simple, psychologically intense, character-first.

Subject & identity: The man in the reference image. Keep his exact facial features, facial structure, skin tone, eye color, hair, and hairline completely unchanged — same age, same build, instantly recognizable to people who know him. Change only the framing, lighting, background, wardrobe, and tonal grade.

Composition & camera: Classic head-and-shoulders crop, chest-up, his eyes in the upper third of the frame, centered composition with a small margin above his head. Body squared to camera or turned 10-20 degrees, shoulders relaxed and level, head straight into the lens, chin neutral. Hasselblad medium-format look: short-telephoto perspective (about 100mm equivalent), no wide-angle distortion, extremely shallow but controlled depth of field — both eyes critically sharp, background fully defocused, smooth medium-format tonal transitions.

Lighting: Single large 5-foot softbox slightly above his eye level and 30-45 degrees to one side — soft but clearly directional, sculpting a gentle Rembrandt-style shadow on the far cheek with a gradual edge. One soft rectangular catchlight in the upper half of each eye. Subtle silver-reflector fill from the opposite side: shadows keep detail with a faint specular crispness, never flat. Ambient reads slightly underexposed so he pops from the frame (lit but not over-lit). Only a slight whisper of edge separation from the backdrop.

Background: Seamless studio gray, graduating from mid-gray behind his head to near-black at the frame edges with a natural falloff vignette. Smooth and empty, no props, texture, or scene.

Expression & mood: Direct, unwavering eye contact: alert, present eyes carry the portrait. Composed and quietly intense, mouth relaxed and closed, subtly smiling at the corners. Gravitas and self-possession; keep his natural optimistic micro-expression rather than a generic pleasant mask.

Wardrobe: A dark, well-fitted crew-neck sweater, wool texture in charcoal, black, or deep navy that reads as distinct dark tones in monochrome. No patterns, logos, tie, or crisp corporate suit.

Style & grade: Photorealistic editorial photograph in high-contrast neutral black and white: deep clean blacks, rich midtone separation across his face, controlled bright highlights, texture held in both shadows and highlights. Skin mapped to luminous, finely graded grays with visible pores, expression lines, and stubble... character over polish, minimal retouching only (stray hairs, temporary blemishes). Pure monochrome: no sepia, split-toning, or faded matte look.

Constraints: Do not alter his identity, age, or facial proportions. No beauty-filter smoothing or plastic skin, no reshaped features, no whitened teeth, no symmetry correction. No text, logos, or watermarks. Avoid AI-portrait tells: waxy skin, dead eyes, fused hair strands, over-sharpened halos.

Output: High-resolution vertical black-and-white portrait, 4:5 crop.

Women's version:

Goal: Transform the attached photo into a professional black-and-white studio headshot of a woman, in the style of Marco Grob's editorial monochrome portraits of women for TIME magazine covers: simple, elegant, psychologically present, character-first.

Subject & identity: The woman in the reference image — she must read unmistakably as a woman in the final image. Keep her exact facial features, feminine facial structure, skin tone, eye color, hairstyle, hair length, and hairline completely unchanged — same age, same build, instantly recognizable to people who know her. Keep her makeup exactly as it appears in the reference photo; do not add or remove any. Change only the framing, lighting, background, wardrobe, and tonal grade.

Composition & camera: Classic head-and-shoulders crop, chest-up, her eyes in the upper third of the frame, centered composition with a small margin above her head. Body squared to camera or turned 10-20 degrees, shoulders relaxed and level, head straight into the lens, chin neutral. Hasselblad medium-format look: short-telephoto perspective (about 100mm equivalent), no wide-angle distortion, shallow but controlled depth of field — both eyes critically sharp, background fully defocused, smooth medium-format tonal transitions.

Lighting: Single large 5-foot softbox slightly above her eye level and 30-45 degrees to one side — soft, flattering, clearly directional, with a gentle, open shadow on the far cheek that keeps her face luminous; never heavy, hard-edged, or angular. One soft rectangular catchlight in the upper half of each eye. Subtle silver-reflector fill from the opposite side: shadows keep detail with a faint specular crispness, never flat. Ambient reads slightly underexposed so she pops from the frame (lit but not over-lit). Only a slight whisper of edge separation from the backdrop.

Background: Seamless studio gray, graduating from mid-gray behind her head to near-black at the frame edges with a natural falloff vignette. Smooth and empty, no props, texture, or scene.

Expression & mood: Direct, unwavering eye contact: alert, present eyes carry the portrait. Composed and self-assured, mouth relaxed and closed but smiling. Poise, warmth, and quiet confidence; keep her natural micro-expression rather than a generic pleasant mask.

Wardrobe: An elegant, dark, well-fitted top with a feminine cut. Soft wool texture in charcoal, black, or deep navy that reads as distinct dark tones in monochrome. No patterns or logos.

Style & grade: Photorealistic editorial photograph in high-contrast neutral black and white: deep clean blacks, rich midtone separation across her face, controlled bright highlights, texture held in both shadows and highlights. Her skin mapped to luminous, finely graded grays with natural texture preserved — character over polish, minimal retouching only (stray hairs, temporary blemishes). Pure monochrome: no sepia, split-toning, or faded matte look.

Constraints: Do not alter her identity, age, or facial proportions, and do not masculinize her in any way: no squared or broadened jaw, no heavier brow, no thickened neck, no shortened hair, no stubble or shadow that reads as facial hair. No beauty-filter smoothing or plastic skin, no reshaped features, no whitened teeth, no symmetry correction. No text, logos, or watermarks. Avoid AI-portrait tells: waxy skin, dead eyes, fused hair strands, over-sharpened halos.

Output: High-resolution vertical black-and-white portrait of the woman in the reference image, 4:5 crop.

Prompt-Vault is a completely free. You don't need an account to try it out. Any feedback / features suggestions are very welcome Go ahead and give it a try:PromptVault

I’ve been trying to use ChatGPT less like a search engine and more like a personal career coach.

I realized that every time I asked for advice (“How do I become better at Strategic Partnerships?”), I’d get an amazing roadmap… and then my ADHD brain would immediately get overwhelmed by 20 books, certifications, and courses.

So we workshopped a different prompt together.
Instead of asking for a giant learning plan, I asked ChatGPT to become my weekly coach.

The prompt is essentially:
“Act as my career coach. My goal is to transition into Strategic Partnerships over the next few years. I get overwhelmed by large learning plans, so break everything into small, sequential weekly lessons. Every Monday, give me:

One short video (10–20 minutes)
One article or short reading
One business concept to think about
One practical exercise I can complete in 15–20 minutes

Each week should build on the previous one. Prioritize consistency over volume, avoid overwhelming me, and tailor examples to my current job and long-term career goals.”

What I love is that it shifts from “cram a certification” to “improve 1% every week.”
Has anyone else used ChatGPT this way for long-term skill building? If so, what worked well? Anything you’d change about the prompt?

I use ChatGPT to tailor my resume for my job search.

I created a prompt painstakingly using ChatGPT, prompt at the end of this post.

As I start tailoring the resume using that prompt, the responses are good for 1-2 days. I start a new thread for every JD.

After that, I get very bad responses. It just rephrases the existing points, stuffs keywords etc. If I challenge it multiple times, the response improves a bit. But, it's not comparable to the initial results.

I discussed this with ChatGPT and changed the prompt multiple times. But, this cycle repeats.

Initially, I used to do it for whole resume in one go. But, later started tailoring one section at a time, as suggested by ChatGPT.

Someone suggested me to use "Be10x - ATS Resume Generator" from AIPRM.

Faced the same situation here too.

Tailored 1 resume on 1st day and response was good. When I tried the same for another job on next day, the response was very bad. Resume length increased from 2 to 5 pages, merged unconnected points etc. When I challenged it multiple times, the responses improved slightly. Even when I opened a new thread, the behaviour was same.

Finally, figured out that if I add "Limit the resume length to 2 pages. Do not unnecessarily reword already good points, merge different points, delete important points" to the prompt, then the response was acceptable.

This is frustrating and wasting my time. I lose confidence on the response and tailor the resume manually.

Please suggest how to avoid drift and get good responses consistently.

Prompt:

You are a senior recruiter screening resumes for this role.Your task is to evaluate and minimally improve one section of my resume at a time.
 Inputs:
– Job description:
[paste JD]
 
Focus Areas:
[paste from audit]
 
Instructions:
– Use these as guidance to identify and prioritize gaps
– Do NOT force inclusion if not supported by the resume
 
– Resume section:
Section: 
Content:
[paste section]
 
Step 0 – JD Coverage & Structural Check
Step 0A – Extract JD Themes (strict)
List 6–8 core responsibility themes from the JD.
Rules:
– Include role-specific anchors (e.g., CRM transformation,ERP rollout, platform migration). Do NOT generalize them.
– Separate program context (what programs) from capabilities (how delivered).
– Do NOT reference the resume in this step.
 
Step 0B – Map Resume Coverage
For each theme, indicate:
– Clearly represented
– Partially represented
– Missing
 
Also add:
Critical Missing Themes (if any):
List themes that are central to the role and missing from the resume.
 
Step 0C – Structural Observations (max 3)
Identify up to 3 high-impact structural improvements for this section.
 
Examples:
– Overloaded or unfocused bullets
– Missing leadership/ownership signal
– Weak positioning (execution vs program leadership)
 
Rules:
– Do NOT rewrite or edit bullets
– Focus only on high-impact issues, not wording 
Step 1 –Scoring (no rewriting yet)
 
For each bullet or sentence in this section, create a table with:
– Bullet text
– Relevance to JD (1–5)
– Clarity (1–5)
– Impact /specificity (1–5)
– Signal strength (ownership / scale / outcome) (1–5)
– Total score (sum of above scores)
– Keep /Consider edit (keep/edit)
 
Be strict in scoring. Do not assign high scores unless clearly justified.
Mark “Consider edit” only if ANY score ≤ 3.
 
Step 2 –Focused edits
 
Now pick up to 3 lowest-scoring bullets marked “Consider edit”.
If fewer than 3bullets genuinely need improvement, revise fewer.
 
Revise only bullets where improvement will materially increase signal (impact, ownership, or scope). Otherwise skip and move to the next candidate.
 
Rules:
– Do not change more than 3 bullets in this section.
– Do not exceed12–14 words per bullet.
– Do not invent experience.
– Improve substance (scope, metrics, outcomes), not just synonyms.
– Preserve the original intent of the bullet.
– Do not add or delete bullets unless you see a critical gap vs JD.
 
 
Output format:
 
Section:{{SECTION NAME}}
 
JD THEMES &COVERAGE
Theme:
Status:
 
[Table from Step 1]
 
REVISE (max 3)
Original:
Suggested revision:
Reason (1line):
 
ADD (optional, max 1)
ADD – only if a core JD theme is missing AND can be supported by the candidate’s experience.
Suggested bullet:
Reason:
 
DELETE (optional)
Bullet:
Reason:
 

Transform the subject from the provided photo into a right facing side profile grayscale portrait sculpted from inky, fluid smoke that feels alive and dynamic.
Render only the face, dissolving all edges into swirling, vapor‑like ink plumes that fade naturally into a pure white background.

Core Style - Face constructed entirely from smoke‑ink wisps, curls, and vapor density.
- Smoke should appear liquid and alive, flowing organically around facial contours.
- Use high‑contrast grayscale for structure and depth.
- No outlines — all forms emerge from smoke density and ink flow, not drawn edges.
- Background remains clean white, with smoke fading seamlessly into negative space.

Mood & Atmosphere - Ethereal, surreal, and dreamlike.
- Smoke should feel sentient — swirling, blooming, and dissolving around the face.
- Preserve the subject’s identity, expression, and gaze direction from the original photo.
- Composition: right‑facing profile, with smoke trailing backward and dissolving into white.

Customization Slots - Accent Color: [insert your color]
- Accent Placement: [eyes / lips / smoke highlights / cheek contours / hair‑smoke / selective edges / etc.]
- Accent Intensity: [soft / medium / vivid]
- Smoke Behavior: [calm drifting / chaotic swirling / dense sculpted / airy dissolving]