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

Google Imagen 2

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 194 posts

Re: Google Imagen 2

#121

Post by karmasimida »

simonw wrote: post #106
karmasimida wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why stable diffusion won? Dalle3 and this is miles ahead in understanding scene and put correct text at the right place. This makes the image much more usable without editing.

DALL-E 3 doesn't have Stable Diffusion's killer feature, which is the ability to use an image as input and influence that image with the prompt. (DALL-E pretends to do that, but it's actually just using GPT-4 Vision to create a description of the image and then prompting based on that.) Live editing tools like https://drawfast.tldraw.com/ are increasingly being built on top of Stable Diffusion, and are far and away t…

Saying SD is losing or not useful isn't my position.

But it clearly didn't win in many scenarios, especially those require text to be precise, and that happens to be more important in commercial setting, to clear up those gibberish texts generated by OSS stable diffusion seems tiring by itself.

Re: Google Imagen 2

#122

Post by tomComb »

dissident_coder wrote: post #96
tomComb wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Translation is that the government engaged in a shakedown of Google, on behalf of Bell and Rogers: Bill c-18. It was disgusting and corrupt and I’m glad that Google and Facebook pushed back. This has recently been resolved though, with a compromised deal, so hopefully these services will soon be available here

Unfortunately Google caved and are giving away 100 million dollars. I wish they had a spine like Meta. I generally despise both companies (Meta more than Google) but the enemy of my enemy can be my friend at arm's length.

The amount and terms agreed upon are what Google originally offerred, so I've mostly seen it reported as the gov't caving.

But I still agree with you - would rather have seen Google not give in to this sort of thing at all.

It was very different for Meta - they already don't like sending people away from their site so it was much easier for them to hold out.

Re: Google Imagen 2

#123

Post by jdewerd »

JAlexoid wrote: post #115
jefftk wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked at Google from 2012 to 2022 and this didn't match my experience, for what it's worth. There were some people who coasted, but it was not common. There were a lot of people who got much less done than you might expect due to bureaucratic friction, but my coworkers were generally very enthusiastic to take on important things.

Important things and delivery of features are two very different things. Rewriting a Linux kernel module is "important", but rarely impactful.

Right, but the engineering output exists... in the google graveyard.

Re: Google Imagen 2

#125

Post by jsnell »

doctoboggan wrote: post #117
knodi123 wrote: post #32

The prompt "A shot of a 32-year-old female, up and coming conservationist in a jungle; athletic with short, curly hair and a warm smile" produced an impressive image. But I ran the same prompt 3 times on my laptop in just a few minutes, and got 3 almost-equally impressive images. (using stable diffusion and a free model called devlishphotorealism_sdxl15) https://imgur.com/a/4otrN17

I really don't understand how they came up with the _exact_ same image. This goes against my previous understanding of how these technologies work, and would appear to lend credence to the "they just regurgitate training material" argument.

Pretty sure they didn't come up with the same image. Images 1, 3, and 4 are the three images the GP generated and they put the Imagen-generated image (2) into the set for ease of comparison.

Re: Google Imagen 2

#126

Post by RobinL »

zirgs wrote: post #54
arthurdenture wrote: post #39

I asked imagen 2 to generate a transparent product icon image, and it generated an actual grey and white square pattern as the background of the image... https://imgur.com/a/KA2yWHp

That's because it was trained on RGB images without an alpha channel. There is currently no public image generator that understands alpha channel.

As a user, this really frustrates me. Promoting is not precise enough to compose a bunch of specific elements, so the obvious solution is to do several prompts each with transparency and then combine in Photoshop/photopea. I end up asking for a white background and then cutting out manually

Re: Google Imagen 2

#127

Post by mkl »

kkkkkkk wrote: post #85
l33tman wrote: post #22

They never released Imagen 1 either, why do they even do these "releases"?

the post says its generally available and includes instructions on how to use it via their API

The documentation [1] says otherwise. Image generation is "Restricted General Availability (approved users)" and "To request access to use this Imagen feature, contact your Google account representative."

[1] https://cloud.google.com/vertex-ai/docs/generative-ai/image/...

Re: Google Imagen 2

#128

Post by jsnell »

celestialcheese wrote: post #46
knodi123 wrote: post #32

The prompt "A shot of a 32-year-old female, up and coming conservationist in a jungle; athletic with short, curly hair and a warm smile" produced an impressive image. But I ran the same prompt 3 times on my laptop in just a few minutes, and got 3 almost-equally impressive images. (using stable diffusion and a free model called devlishphotorealism_sdxl15) https://imgur.com/a/4otrN17

How are two completely different models from different groups, converging on what looks like the exact same person? Number 1 and 3 are eerily similar. I don't understand.

I think you might be misunderstanding. The GP did three runs using one model, each with the same prompt that was used for the Imagen demo image. The outputs are images 1, 3 and 4. Hence the similarity.

Re: Google Imagen 2

#130

Post by CobrastanJorji »

mrtksn wrote: post #107
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did the Twitter-style culling work out for Twitter?

AFAIK it worked out well. Works more-less the same as before, shipped quite a bit of stuff and drastically reduced costs.

Shipped stuff? Like what?

Threads? Its usage is down 90% since its launch six months ago, presumably because they kept the people who could launch stuff and got rid of the people who had some idea of what should be launched.

The "Blue Checkmark" system? Released with no thought at all, absolute disaster. Steven King had to publicly announce that, despite indications to the contrary, he was not a paid user, and he felt it was important to tell people because he didn't want the idea that he was a paid subscriber to harm his reputation. Same underlying problem: the people who could ship things were still shipping things, but the people who could figure out what to make were gone.

And yes, they did drastically reduce cost...and much more drastically reduce revenue.

Post reply on HN