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

AI real-time human full-body photo generator

generated.photos

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 421 posts

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#131

Post by mrguyorama »

dragonwriter wrote: post #85
gwern wrote: post #9

If you're wondering how it's so fast and cheap and they can generate variants so easily, it's because they're using GANs (see the footer). GANs are way faster than diffusion models because they generate the image in a single forward pass and their true latent space encoding makes editing a breeze. (And if you're wondering how it can look so good when 'everyone knows GANs don't work because they're too unstable', a wi…

> If you're wondering how it's so fast and cheap and they can generate variants so easily I assume its cheap because they are burning money to build a business, its not fast at all, and the quality... sucks. > And if you're wondering how it can look so good I’m not. I'm wondering why they’re trying to get people to use something worse than using a decent photorealistic SD1.5-based checkpoint with some basic prompt te…

Looking at the poses, it feels optimized for generating porn, but one example someone showed had a child's face (good god please don't let your "AI" system generate child anything if you want to sell it for porn purposes), and another user noted that their attempt error'd out because it "detected nudity", even though other users get given a nude model by default.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#132

Post by mrguyorama »

14 wrote: post #75
philote wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this was my first attempt: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e648819c8c0400088... Not quite right. I am, however, impressed that the fingers are generally "mostly" correct.

my first attempt created some kind of gym monster lol https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e64a2f412bec0009b...

This is actually an incredible example of "The longer you look the worse it gets".

She has a second set of boobs where her hips should be! That's not evolutionarily advantageous!

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#133

Post by garyfirestorm »

freeflight wrote: post #125
kortex wrote: post #62

Oh yeah, totally ready for prime time, hyper realistic, SFW filter works great, not at all hallucinations /massive_sarcasm Actually NSFW, not safe for sanity. That's...not how body parts work: https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e644f39c8c0400108... Prompt was "young woman with tattoos in miniskirt" really nothing crazy there. But perhaps the latent space with that particular pose is particularly raunchy.

There is a SFW filter? I just let it generate a random woman with no prompt, and it gave me a pretty good result, except there is a mask on the face and literally bloody nude boobs; https://generated.photos/human-generator/64d67874568faa0007a... edit; I just realized it put in a default prompt

and I got a 'We detected that generated image contains nude content. Try changing parameters.' despite not specifying any such thing

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#134

Post by dragonwriter »

klyrs wrote: post #69

Amusing. My first two "random human" samples had completely ordinary uncanny valley issues (eye was smushed and blurry, weirdly shark-like teeth in child's mouth). But the third looks pretty good! ...for a 90s era povray Barbie doll model. https://generated.photos/human-generator/64d552c85263da00077...

The text prompt for that image (one is generated for the “random” images) is “barbie doll”, so in this specific case its not so much an imagegen problem as other parts of the app design not matching the advertised behavior.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#136

Post by trebligdivad »

smeej wrote: post #24

Why is it impossible to generate a male model wearing anything other than rolled denim jean shorts? I've tried things like "long pants" or "ankle-length pants," but I cannot get it to stop putting them all in denim shorts!

Yeh; tbh I thought it did a reasonable job with them though https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e666d59563e6000e0... (The hairline is way off, and he's way too muscular) I at least don't spot anything too anatomically wrong.

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#137

Post by mrguyorama »

chefandy wrote: post #109

Incredible. In the time I'd spend creating one image that exactly fits my or my client's needs or buying a high quality stock photo, I can generate literally millions of photorealistic, unappealing, images that would require a skilled commercial artist to make useful for all but the most throwaway uses. What about for some high-volume throwaway use case? I generated like 5 images before I got a 3/4 shot instead of a…

But think of how much easier this makes believeable spam and scams!

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#138

Post by mrguyorama »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #99
sandgiant wrote: post #94

The only thing I changed from the default parameters was Age == Teenager. That resulted in this error: We detected that generated image contains nude content. Try changing parameters. Not sure what to make of this, but it feels wrong, somehow? Edit: This was the prompt it generated for me on page load: "Minerva McGonagall in Hogwarts, wearing Hogwarts robe and witch hat" - https://generated.photos/human-generator/64e…

"teen" is a ubiquitous porn category that, in practice, describes a body type, not age; similar to how "babe" almost never means "infant". I would be more surprised to get SFW results from that prompt, considering the result would be based on more heavily regulated (less common) photographs of minors.

No, teen in porn absolutely means 18 and 19, or at least "I'm '18-19' and definitely not a 26 year old"

Re: AI real-time human full-body photo generator

#139

Post by mrguyorama »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #12
aerodog wrote: post #8

Has the same problems as midjourney et al: you can feed it pictures of a friend or yourself or a celebrity, and the result is always off - not recognizable as them

Some will surely consider that a feature rather than a bug.

But then how am I supposed to be the kind of creepy person that jerks it to poorly modified "nudes" made from Facebook profile pics?
Post reply on HN