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

No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

oneusefulthing.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 373 posts

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#101

Post by wavemode »

danielbln wrote: post #58
M4v3R wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is in my opinion the biggest limitation of the current gen GPT 4o image generation: it is incapable of editing only parts of an image. I assume what it does every time is tokenizing the source image, then transforming it according to the prompt and then giving you the final result. For some use cases that’s fine but if you really just want a small edit while keeping the rest of the image intact you’re out…

It just means that you comp it together manually. That's still much better than having to set up some inpainting pipeline or whatever.

Is manually comping actually going to be easier (let alone, give better results) than inpainting? I can imagine it working in simple cases, but for anything involving 3D geometry you'll likely run into issues of things not quite lining up between the first and second image.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#102

Post by nasmorn »

flkiwi wrote: post #95
zwnow wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should be good enough to alrdy have established some customers.

The problem with that is that people aren't asking for AI generated images in the style of Raven from Topeka with an Etsy shop. They're asking for Ghibli. So the people whose livelihoods are most directly impacted are (assuming they're not centuries dead) the famous, talented, and trend-making artists, not the lower tier making bad Precious Moments knockoffs. Society's problem is understanding that not wanting to pay…

Couldn’t Ghibli zeitgeist moment lead to them making out hugely with a new release or just a cinema screening of Totoro right now?

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#103

Post by wavemode »

Taek wrote: post #33
probably_wrong wrote: post #12

> Is it okay to reproduce the hard-won style of other artists using AI? Who owns the resulting art? Who profits from it? Which artists are in the training data for AI, and what is the legal and ethical status of using copyrighted work for training? These were important questions before multimodal AI, but now developing answers to them is increasingly urgent. I have to disagree with the conclusion. This was an importa…

I don't think there's consensus around that idea. Lots of people (myself included) feel that copyright is already vastly overreaching, and that AI represents forward progress for the proliferation of art in society (its crap today, but digital cameras were crap in 2007 and look where they are now). Its also not clear for example that Studio Ghibli lost by having their art style plastered all over the internet. I went…

Companies like Studio Ghibli are not being harmed by AI, small freelance artists are.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#104

Post by flkiwi »

nasmorn wrote: post #102
flkiwi wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with that is that people aren't asking for AI generated images in the style of Raven from Topeka with an Etsy shop. They're asking for Ghibli. So the people whose livelihoods are most directly impacted are (assuming they're not centuries dead) the famous, talented, and trend-making artists, not the lower tier making bad Precious Moments knockoffs. Society's problem is understanding that not wanting to pay…

Couldn’t Ghibli zeitgeist moment lead to them making out hugely with a new release or just a cinema screening of Totoro right now?

That is "artists should be grateful to work for exposure" on a grand scale.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#105

Post by SirMaster »

eadmund wrote: post #23
probably_wrong wrote: post #12

> Is it okay to reproduce the hard-won style of other artists using AI? Who owns the resulting art? Who profits from it? Which artists are in the training data for AI, and what is the legal and ethical status of using copyrighted work for training? These were important questions before multimodal AI, but now developing answers to them is increasingly urgent. I have to disagree with the conclusion. This was an importa…

> it's unfair for artists to have their works sucked up I never thought it was unfair to artists for others to look at their work and imitate it. That seems to me to be what artists have been doing since the second caveman looked at a hand painting on a cave wall and thought, ‘huh, that’s pretty neat! I’d like to try my hand at that!’

You don't see a massive difference in the shear number of images that the AI can look at and the speed at which it can imitate it as a fundamental difference between AI and a human copying works or styles?

For a human it took a lot of practice and a lot of time and effort. But now it takes practically no time or effort at all.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#106

Post by esperent »

Retr0id wrote: post #5
x187463 wrote: post #3

This is a before/after moment for image generation. A simple example is the background images on a ton of (mediocre) music youtube channels. They almost all use AI generated images that are full of nonsense the closer you look. Jazz channels will feature coffee shops with garbled text on the menu and furniture blending together. I bet all of that disappears over the next few months. On another note, and perhaps other…

I've never used a stock photo site before, so I suppose it's no surprise I have no real use for "generate any image on demand".

I've used stock photo sites occasionally but I use vector art and icon sites multiple times a week. Even today, I used an few different sites while designing some stuff on Canva.

The reason I don't use AI is because it gives me far less reliable and impossible to specify results than just searching through the limited lists of human made art.

Today, for undisclosed reasons, I needed vector art of peanuts. I found imperfect but usable human made art within seconds from a search engine. I then spent around 15 - 25 minutes trying to get something closer to my vision using ChatGPT, and using the imperfect art I'd found as a style guide. I got lots of "huh that's cool what AI can do" but nothing useful. Nothing closer to my vision than what I started with.

By coincidence it's the first time I'vr tried making art with AI in about a year, but back then I bought a Midjourney account and spent a month making loads of art, then installed SD on my laptop and spent another couple of weeks playing around with that. So it's not like I'm lacking experience. What I've found so far is that AI art generators are great for generating articles like this one. And they do make some genuinely cool pictures, it blows my mind that computers can do this now.

It's just when I sit down with a real world task that has specific, concrete requirements... I find them useless.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#107

Post by empath75 »

card_zero wrote: post #7

Looking at the example where the coffee table is swapped, I notice every time the image is reprocessed it mutates, based on the previous iteration, and objects become more bizarre each time, like chinese whispers. * The weird-ass basket decoration on the table originally has some big chain links (maybe anchor chain, to keep the theme with the beach painting). By the third version, they're leathery and are merging wit…

The vast majority of people wouldn't notice any of that in most contexts in which such an image would be used.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#108

Post by [deleted] »

x187463 wrote: post #3

This is a before/after moment for image generation. A simple example is the background images on a ton of (mediocre) music youtube channels. They almost all use AI generated images that are full of nonsense the closer you look. Jazz channels will feature coffee shops with garbled text on the menu and furniture blending together. I bet all of that disappears over the next few months. On another note, and perhaps other…

[deleted]

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#109

Post by empath75 »

shubhamjain wrote: post #28

The Ghibli trend completely missed the real breakthrough — and it’s this. The ability to closely follow text, understand the input image, and maintain context of what’s already there is a massive leap in image generation. While Midjourney delivered visually stunning results, I constantly struggled to get anything specific out of it, making it pretty much useless for actual workflows. 4o is the first image generation…

I had chatgpt generate a flow chart with mermaid js for something at work and then write a scott mccloud style comic book explaining it in detail and it looked so convincing, even though it got some of the details a bit wrong. It's _so close_ to making completely usable graphics out of the box.

Re: No elephants: Breakthroughs in image generation

#110

Post by zwnow »

flkiwi wrote: post #99
zwnow wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbh you barely have to know anything, most important one is how deep to go with the needle and sanitizing. Everything else is not rlly important.

A friend who is heavily inked has gone on at length to me about understanding skin elasticity--particularly how it changes over a lifetime--as well as the way joints and muscles change and distort visual lines, etc. It sure seems like a skilled trade to me. And, I don't know, depth of penetration of a needle in flesh and sanitation don't strike me as minor things to get right.

People love to make things seem harder than they are. I tattoo people, I am aware about skin types, usually thats not a big issue unless its heavily scarred. The quality of your tattoo machine matters most, as my 70€ eBay makeshift one wasnt nearly as good as a proper one. Amount of ink matters, needle depth, skin type, sweat. But thats stuff you have figured put after your 20th tattoo. Its like knowing datatypes in programming. You just know stuff after some practice.
Post reply on HN