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

Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 593 posts

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#12

Post by minimaxir »

Google updated it early in AI Studio so I've been experimenting:

- Base pricing for a 1024x1024 image is almost 1.6x what normal Nano Banana is ($0.067 vs. $0.039), however you can now get a 512x512 image for cheaper, or a 4k image for cheaper than four 1k images: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing#gemini-3.1-fla...

- Thinking is now configurable between `Minimal` and `High` (was not the case with Nano Banana Pro)

- Safety of the model appears to be increased so typical copyright infringing/NSFW content is difficult to generate (it refused to let me generate cartoon characters having taken psychedelics)

- Generation speed is really slow (2-3min per image) but that may be due to load.

- Prompt adherence to my trickier prompts for Nano Banana Pro (https://minimaxir.com/2025/12/nano-banana-pro/) is much worse, unsurprisingly. For example I asked it to make a 5x2 grid with 10 given inputs and it keeps making 4x3 grids with duplicate inputs.

However, I am skeptical with their marquee feature: image search. Anyone who has used Nano Banana Pro for awhile knows that it will strongly overfit on any input images by copy/pasting the subject without changes which is bad for creativity, and I suspect this implementation appears the same.

Additionally I have a test prompt which exploits the January 2025 knowledge cutoff:

    Generate a photo of the KPop Demon Hunters performing a concert at Golden Gate Park in their concert outfits.
That still fails even with Grounding with Google Search and Image Search enabled, and more charitable variants of the prompt.

tl;dr the example images (https://deepmind.google/models/gemini-image/flash/) seem similar to Nano Banana Pro which is indeed a big quality improvement but even relative to base Nano Banana it's unclear if it justifies a "2" subtitle especially given the increased cost.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#16

Post by yakattak »

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.”

You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale.

Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in front of millions. I understand the appeal for smaller businesses where they probably weren’t going to pay an artist anyway.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#17

Post by nickandbro »

These image gen models are getting so advanced and life like that increasingly the general public are being duped into believing AI images are actually real (ex Facebook food images or fake OF models). Don't get me wrong I will enjoy the benefits of using this model for expressing myself better than ever before, but can't help feeling there's something also very insidious about these models too.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#18

Post by WarmWash »

vessenes wrote: post #10

Interesting they get to rev this with the release of a new flash model. I'm speculating part of the distil pipeline includes the image gen stuff; that seems like internal tooling that will pay dividends over time, if true. New frontier model -> automatic new image model. Even if it's just incremental updates, it's good for both the product cadence and compounding improvements.

The confusion here is dense, 3.1 Flash Image is not 3.1 Flash.

The banana models (image) are a different than the mainline models, but the confusingly leverage the same naming scheme.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#20

Post by bonoboTP »

yakattak wrote: post #16

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

Drafting, iteration, mockups. Quite useful during ideation.
Post reply on HN