Live data from Hacker News

Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

blog.google

31–40 of 593 posts

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#31

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

It is faster as well

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#32

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

Drafting, iteration, mockups. Quite useful during ideation.

All things traditionally done by artists or artist adjacent roles. I can understand at an individual level, say for a solo gamedev who wasn’t going to pay an artist anyway. That’s not at scale though.

Larian Studios most recently was under fire for this [1]. Like I can see a director going “what would X look like?” and then speeding over to the concept artists for a proper rendition if they liked it. I don’t think this is at scale though. Any large business is just going to get rid of the concept artists.

[1]: https://www.pcgamer.com/games/rpg/baldurs-gate-3-developer-l...

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#33

These image gen models are getting so advanced and life like that increasingly the general public are being duped into believing AI images are actually real (ex Facebook food images or fake OF models). Don't get me wrong I will enjoy the benefits of using this model for expressing myself better than ever before, but can't help feeling there's something also very insidious about these models too.

Oh we’ve seen nothing yet of the chaos that generative ai will unleash on the world, looking at Meta platforms it’s already a multi million dollar industry of selling something or someone that doesn’t exist. And that’s just the benign stuff.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#34
post #23

Google updated it early in AI Studio so I've been experimenting: - Base pricing for a 1024x1024 image is almost 1.6x what normal Nano Banana is ($0.067 vs. $0.039), however you can now get a 512x512 image for cheaper, or a 4k image for cheaper than four 1k images: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing#gemini-3.1-fla... - Thinking is now configurable between `Minimal` and `High` (was not the case with Nano Ban…

For your knowledge cutoff test, did it failing mean that it generated a generic "Kpop demon hunter" or it rejected the prompt?

Generic "Kpop demon hunter". Nano Banana 2 atleast has fun with it, though.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#35

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

Won't somebody think of the window replacers?

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#37

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

One major thing is photoreal use cases, which artists can't really do. A lot of that is deep fakes / scams but there are some real use cases

Isn’t that what photographers are for?

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#38

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

Advertising? "We don't want to pay an artist" goes a long way for a small business with a limited budget.

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#39

These image gen models are getting so advanced and life like that increasingly the general public are being duped into believing AI images are actually real (ex Facebook food images or fake OF models). Don't get me wrong I will enjoy the benefits of using this model for expressing myself better than ever before, but can't help feeling there's something also very insidious about these models too.

It's more likely than not that every single person who uses the internet has viewed an AI image and taken it as real by now. The obvious ones stand out, but there are so many that are indiscernible without spending lots of time digging through it. Even then there are ones that you can at best guess it's maybe AI gen.

At the point now where basically any photo that isn't shared by someone I trust or a reputable news organisation is essentially unverifiable as being real or not

The positive aspect of this advance is that I've basically stopped using social media because of the creeping sense that everything is slop

Re: Nano Banana 2: Google's latest AI image generation model

#40

I think this tech is cool, from an engineering perspective. I’m trying to figure out if there’s any justification for using it in a business world outside of: “We don’t want to pay an artist.” You can argue things like code generation are an extension of the engineer wielding it. Image generation just seems like a net negative overall if it’s used at scale. Edit: By scale, I mean large corporations putting content in…

When a company uses a photocopier, they don’t want to pay a scribe.

When a company sends an email or docu-sign, they don’t want to pay a courier.

Technology supplements or replaces jobs, often reducing costs. This is no different.

Post reply on HN