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

ChatGPT Images 2.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 472 posts

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#251

Post by _doctor_love »

Surprised there is no mention of the Sketch feature so far. That's very powerful! I do art on the side and I know no better of getting the result I want than passing in a first draft sketch.

I super encourage others to learn just a little bit of art technique and your images are going to go to the next level. You need a little construction, perspective, gesture, anatomy, and you're pretty much off to the races.

Knowing names of illustration styles is great too. Look up "style transfer" if you are not familiar.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#252

Post by emil-lp »

onion2k wrote: post #24
AyanamiKaine wrote: post #12

Omg, I love how the first examples just show how easy you can fake things. Fake being at a party with your friends. Didn't make your bed, no problem, just fake it. The sad part is my mother would love "remixing" my old child photos of me.

Didn't make your bed, no problem, just fake it. Except you need to have taken a photo of the unmade bed, uploaded it to ChatGPT, prompted for the 'fake made bed' version, and downloaded the image. Surely it's less effort to just make the bed?

> Surely it's less effort to just make the bed?

It's not about the bed.

People areaddicted to generating now.

Slopoholics the whole bunch of them.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#253

Post by jjcm »

raincole wrote: post #243
jjcm wrote: post #205

I use gpt image 2 very heavily for my current project (ai UI design tool). The biggest improvement I'm seeing with this is in speed. I've generated around 50k images with gpt-image-2 via api, the the average latency has held at around 104s. It's wild how much of a difference this is - images are coming in at around 35-40s. Very noticable, and makes a difference when you're iterating quickly: https://jjcm.org/gpt-imag…

I'm confused. Isn't diffui using its own model?

It's both. I have several models loaded into diffui. Which one each prompt uses is determined based on user preference over time. Whichever image is currently at the top of any image node stack marks a win for the model that generated it, I assign each model an ELO score based on that, and I bias the chance each model is selected based on their ELO score. Right now gpt-image-2 is better than my own model, and it services around ~96% of the requests in diffui.

I'll also be adding in microsoft's mai-image-2.6 soon, but I need to update my SOC2 to add MS as a provider before I turn that on for other users. The full list of models in rotation is here: https://image.non.io/d53a9760-8b74-4386-b032-d59da2cd5319.we...

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#254

Post by teravor »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #231
EmiDub wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whataboutism isn’t a fallacy and is widely misused online. If someone says “I think x should stop because of y”. It is a valid argumentative response to say “y also occurs with z, so should z also stop?”. It is argumentatively revealing either hypocrisy, or that the original imperative relies on additional, unstated arguments/assumptions/biases.

I don’t think that’s whataboutism? Maybe I’m confused, but I thought whataboutism was more like “you are saying I am doing X bad thing? What about Y bad thing you’re doing, let’s discuss that instead”. It’s a deflection technique, not a check on logical consistency.

    >  “you are saying I am doing X bad thing? What about Y bad thing you’re doing, let’s discuss that instead”.
no one is generally expecting or even asking for "let’s discuss that instead". what they are doing is trying to point out that your lack of of care about Y implies that you never actually cared about X in the first place but rather you only care about me doing X.

often times X is actually bad but human nature is such that no one actually cares about it while wanting to appear to when locked down on it. for this reason arguing about X directly is bad optics.

whataboustism is basically an effort to draw attention to the selective enforcement of norms, laws, morality, whatever. hypocrisy is implied.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#256

Post by cobolcomesback »

bluegatty wrote: post #144
conradludgate wrote: post #18

[flagged]

This an oddly cynical comment, that I think says more about the observer than the observed. People are having fun making images. Like they do all sorts of things on the web. Making an image is as simple as visiting a web-page. That's it.

Yea, “fun”, sure. I’m sure none of those billions of images were used to lie, mislead, or cheat anyone. I’m sure none of those images were used to create fake news narratives, used in advertisements to bait people into buying fake products, or create misleading mockups of rental properties. Definitely not.

Nevermind the fact that the examples in OpenAI’s blog post are examples of creating images that have no plausible purpose other than to fake stuff that didn’t happen.

But yea sure, it’s all just “for fun”. Sure.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#257

Post by furyofantares »

raincole wrote: post #225
furyofantares wrote: post #106

allllll the way at the bottom > Pricing and availability > Images 2.5 is rolling out today to ChatGPT, ChatGPT Work, and Codex users across all tiers on desktop, mobile, and web. > GPT‑Image‑2.5 Sunburst and GPT‑Image‑2.5 Flare are available in the API. See pricing details here. and the link to the pricing details is a page where i am either too dumb to find the pricing details, or they don't exist

https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/pricing#image-tokens

Looks like they updated the link to that page now too. Thanks.

Same price as image-2, and I'm guessing it's not more tokens (given the speedup).

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#258

Post by embedding-shape »

spike021 wrote: post #255
conradludgate wrote: post #18

[flagged]

How many memes/gifs do you think have been created by hand or with generators over the last ~20 years?

Not sure you can compare huge ML clusters of GPUs running models in order to do these images, and the typical "meme generator" which is basically a call to imagemagick passing an image and some text.

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#259

Post by [deleted] »

hmstx wrote: post #240
villish wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate it because I hate having to look at these AI generated images. In fact I want an internet where I have to explicitly opt-in to see AI generated content in general.

I was watching a friend stream a dead game lately. That game was developed before generating images became widespread, and sunset as that "art form" started really taking off (game-as-a-service... probably partly reverse engineered and retooled with AI too). So during its lifetime, it was pretty much AI free. I remember having been seduced by that game's art style at the time. It wasn't "the usual guys with futuristi…

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT Images 2.5

#260

Post by vunderba »

kfarr wrote: post #85
pelzatessa wrote: post #6

The "composite party photo", while impressive, shows that still the miniscule details are being lost, like the teeth structure of the guy in the middle or the fact that the guy on the left is holding the cup with three fingers. Wondering why they chose this edit for the showcase.

I've also found the OpenAI image models to lose fine detail on image edits compared to Nano Banana or Flux models which faithfully retain input source image geometry and details. I was hoping this might be different but it sounds similar to previous OpenAI image models where something is lost in translation during image editing.

I know the API (assuming you're using it) lets you set the output size of the edited images - I haven't done a huge amount of testing with > 1mp, so I'd be curious if this might mitigate some of that.

https://developers.openai.com/api/reference/python/resources...

Post reply on HN