It seems to still have this gpt image color that you can just feel. The slight sepia and softness.
ChatGPT Images 2.0
91–100 of 1001 posts
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
So do you think there will be a better image model in a year?
I'm honestly unsure what could be improved at this point. Consistency? So it fails less often? Based on the released images, (especially the one "screenshot" of the Mac desktop) I feel like the best images from this model are so visually flawless that the only way to tell they're fake is by reasoning about the content of the image itself (ex. "Apple never made a red iPhone 15, so this image is probably fake" or "Cost…
I'm been impressed when testing this model today, but it still can't consistently adhere to the following prompt: make me an image of a pizza split into 10 equal slices with space in between the them, to help teach fractions to a child.
It doesn't reliably give you 10 slices, even if you ask it to number them. None of the frontier models seem to be able to get this right
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#93If every single image on their blog was generated by Images 2.0 (I've no reason to believe that's not the case), then wow, I'm seriously impressed. The fidelity to text, the photorealism, the ability to show the same character in a variety of situations (e.g. the manga art) -- it's all great!
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#94[deleted]
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#95fal has the endpoint under openai/gpt-image-2
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does it determine they are well known and not just similar looking?
I don't know tbh. I've tried it on 10-20 various level of famous standups and Gemini refuses every time Just for testing, I just tried this https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_KJdP4FLGTo/sddefault.jpg ("Redesign this image in a brutalist graphic design style"). Gemini refuses (api as well as UI), OpenAI does it
It's not super deterministic but it didn't fail once on my attempts. See: https://imgur.com/a/james-acaster-cold-lasagne-1R7fpzQ
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
5.4 thinking says "Just right of center, immediately to the right of the HAM RADIO shack. Look on the dirt path there: the raccoon is the small gray figure partly hidden behind the woman in the red-and-yellow shirt, a little above the man in the green hat. Roughly 57% from the left, 48% from the top." (I don't think it's right).
I tried > please add a giant red arrow to a red circle around the raccoon holding a ham radio or add a cross through the entire image if one does not exist and got this. I'm not sure I know what a ham radio looks like though. https://i.ritzastatic.com/static/ffef1a8e639bc85b71b692c3ba1...
That's excellent. I added it to my post: https://simonwillison.net/2026/Apr/21/gpt-image-2/#update-as...
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#98One of the images in the blog ( https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/4d5dizAOajLfAXkGZ7... ) is a carbon copy of an image from an article posted Mar 27, 2026 with credits given to an individual: https://www.cornellsun.com/article/2026/03/cornell-accepts-5... Was this an oversight? Or did their new image generation model generate an image that was essentially a copy of an existing image?
That has to be the wrong stock image included or something, bloody hell. magick image-l.webp image-r.jpg -compose difference -composite -auto-level -threshold 30% diff.png It's practically all dark except for a few spots. It's the same image just different size compression whatever. I can't find it in any stock image search, though. Surely it could not have memorized the whole image at that fidelity. Maybe I just did…
Or the image was generated with AI in the first place and a test for Images 2.0
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#99do they have anything similar to SynthID, or are they just pretending that problem doesn't exist? I know this is probably mega cherry-picked to look more impressive, but some of the images are terrifyingly realistic. They seem to have put a lot of effort into the lighting.
> Integrating an imperceptible, robust, and content-specific watermark From the system card someone linked elsewhere in the discussion
Zhao et al. 2023 showed any imperceptible watermark is provably removable by generative regeneration: pass the image through an img2img or VAE, the model reconstructs it visually identical but starts from a different latent. Watermark gone.
SynthID and similar schemes do hold up well against normal sharing: recompression, crops, color tweaks, Twitter's pipeline. That covers most users.
But the asymmetry is stuck — normally a GPU and a bit of motivation should be enough to strip it. Right?
Got a tool to share? ;-)
Re: ChatGPT Images 2.0
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does it determine they are well known and not just similar looking?
I don't know tbh. I've tried it on 10-20 various level of famous standups and Gemini refuses every time Just for testing, I just tried this https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_KJdP4FLGTo/sddefault.jpg ("Redesign this image in a brutalist graphic design style"). Gemini refuses (api as well as UI), OpenAI does it
What if you change the prompt to tell it specifically its not a famous person? Or try it without text?