Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

genai-showdown.specr.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 83 posts

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#31

Post by vunderba »

minimaxir wrote: post #4

Everyone is sleeping on Gemini 2.5 Flash Image / Nano Banana. As shown in the OP, it's substantially more powerful than most other models while at the same price-per-image, and due to its text encoder it can handle significantly larger and more nuanced prompts to get exactly what you want. I open-sourced a Python package for generating from it with examples ( https://github.com/minimaxir/gemimg ) and am currently wor…

> That said, I am surprised Seedream 4.0 beat it in these tests.

OP here. While Seedream did have the edge in adherence it also tends to introduce slight (but noticeable) color gradation changes. It's not a huge deal for me, but it might be for other people depending on their goals in which case NanoBanana would be the better choice.

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#32

Post by ineedasername »

Kontext is very good. Get yourself a 5060 ti 16GB and never have to pay for API calls again for this purpose, at least not when you have the time spare. If you need this sort of editing at the speed of gui-clicking + 10s, then you'll need to pay API tolls, or capex for > 5070/80.

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#35

Post by meowface »

wawayanda wrote: post #33

This is not the point of this post, but is anyone else getting tired of this front end style that Claude creates? I see it on web apps everywhere and (just like with AI writing and images) I get that funny "is this slop?" feeling

Yes, though it might be GPT-5 UI.

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#36

Post by shridharathi »

Here's a post I wrote on the Replicate blog putting these image editing models head-to-head. Generally, I found Qwen Image Edit to be the cheapest and fastest model that was also quite capable of most image editing tasks.

If I were to make an image editing app, this would be the model I'd choose.

https://replicate.com/blog/compare-image-editing-models

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#37

Post by zamadatix »

ineedasername wrote: post #32

Kontext is very good. Get yourself a 5060 ti 16GB and never have to pay for API calls again for this purpose, at least not when you have the time spare. If you need this sort of editing at the speed of gui-clicking + 10s, then you'll need to pay API tolls, or capex for > 5070/80.

You have to REALLY be into AI to do this for generation/API cost reasons (or willing to have this as a hacking project of the month expense). Even ignoring electricity, a 16 GB 5060 Ti is more expensive than 16,000 image generations. Assuming you do one every 15 seconds, that's 240,000 seconds -> more than 2 months of usage at an hour a day of generations.

If you've already got a decent GPU (or were going to get one anyways) then cost isn't really a consideration, it's just that you can already do it. For everyone else, you can probably get by just using things like Google's AI Studio for free.

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#38

Post by zamadatix »

I still feel varying the prompt text, number of tries, and varying strictness combined with only showing the result most liked dilute most of the value in these test. It would be better if there was one prompt 8/10 human editors understood and implemented correctly and then every model got 5 generation attempts with that exact prompt on different seeds or something. If it were about "who can create the best image with a given model" then I'd see it more, but most of it seems aimed at preventing that sort of thing and it ends up in an awkward middle zone.

E.g. Gemini 2.5 Flash is given extreme leeway with how much it edits the image and changes the style in "Girl with Pearl Earring" only to have OpenAI gpt-image-1 do a (comparatively) much better job yet still be declared failed after 8 attempts, while having been given fewer attempts than Seedream 4 (passed) and less than half the attempts of OmniGen2 (which still looks way farther off in comparison).

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#39

Post by ec109685 »

minimaxir wrote: post #27
daemonologist wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think people are really sleeping on it - nano-banana more or less went viral when it first came out. I'd argue that aside from the capabilities built into ChatGPT (with the Ghibli craze and whatnot) craze it's the best known image editing model.

It's a weird situation where the Gemini mobile app hit #2 on the App Stores because of free Nano Banana, but no one ever talks about it and most disclosed image generations I've seen are still ChatGPT.

Google photos should just include the feature. It’s kinda buried in Gemini.

Google is so weirdly non-integrated.

Re: Generative AI Image Editing Showdown

#40

Post by cttet »

zamadatix wrote: post #38

I still feel varying the prompt text, number of tries, and varying strictness combined with only showing the result most liked dilute most of the value in these test. It would be better if there was one prompt 8/10 human editors understood and implemented correctly and then every model got 5 generation attempts with that exact prompt on different seeds or something. If it were about "who can create the best image wit…

A "worst image" instead of best image competition may be easy to implement and quite indicative of which one has less frustration experience.
Post reply on HN