Anyone know how to use this with Google Slides? I don't see it anywhere in app.
Nano Banana Pro
641–650 of 718 posts
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#642Generated images still contain JPEG artifacts all over them. We are not doomed yet - can pretty much reliably spot RAW image vs AI-generated image by just zooming in
It's only a matter of time this will be fixed, also there probably already are custom LoRAs that can remove jpeg artifacts. So it's not a matter of if, only when.
I dont think so. You cant train away a compression artifact that comes from the model's core architecture, LoRAs can smooth or hide artifacts, but some detail will be inevitably lost. You can try to hide artifacts but not remove them without retraining the whole model on RAW sensor data.
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#643The interesting tidbit here is SynthID. While a good first step, it doesn't solve the problem of AI generated content NOT having any kind of watermark. So we can prove that something WITH the ID is AI generated but we can't prove that something without one ISN'T AI generated. Like it would be nice if all photo and video generated by the big players would have some kind of standardized identifier on them - but now you…
This is what the SynthID signature looks like on Nano Banana images https://www.reddit.com/r/nanobanana/comments/1o1tvbm/ And if it can be seen like that, it should be removeable too. There are more examples in that thread.
> more examples in that thread
Some supposition: A Fourier amplitude image should show that pattern as peaks at a certain angle/radius location. The exact location may be part of the identification scheme. Running peak finding on the Fourier image and then zeroing out the frequencies in the peak should remove the pattern. Modeling the shape of the peak would allow mimicking the application of a legit SynthID signature.
If anyone tries/tried this already, I'd love to see the results.
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#644The funny part is that Google puts watermark on the generated graphics, because they are oh so not evil and socially responsible.
Unless you pay Google more, what is mentioned at the very bottom of this infomercial.
"Recognizing the need for a clean visual canvas for professional work, we will remove the visible watermark from images generated by Google AI Ultra subscribers and within the Google AI Studio developer tool."
BTW: anyone with the skills found in 1 min on the Internet can remove all of those ids, etc. (yes, as you might guess, the website is called remove synth id dot com...)
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#645Something I find weird about AI image generation models is that even though they no longer produce weird "artifacts" that give away that the fact that it was AI generated, you can still recognize that it's AI due to stylistic choices. Not all examples they gave were like this. The example they gave of the word "Typography" would have fooled me as human-made. The infographics stood out though. I would have immediately…
We can also pick up hints on discordant production value. This is quite noticeable on websites such as Amazon/Alibaba/Etsy/Ebay/etc where there's a lot of scam listings that use AI images for cheap or basic items.
So even though the image shown doesn't present obvious flaws, the fact that the image is high quality is the tell-tale sign of being AI generated.
This also isn't something that can be easily fixed - even if we produce convincing low production value imagery using AI, then the scam listing doesn't achieve its goal because it looks like junky crap.
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#646Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe the team should push hard before releasing the product instead of after to make it work.
That’s a pretty uncharitable take. Given the scale of their recent launches and amount of compute to make them work, it seems incredibly smooth. Edge cases always arise, and all the company/teams can really do is be responsive - which is exactly why I see happening.
A company with a literal embedded payment processor, including subscription services for half of all mobile users can't manage to take payments for their own public facing services seems like a huge fucking failure to me.
Especially for software developer and tech influencer focused markets.
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#647Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect there'd be no problem rotating a different object. But this tower is EXTREMELY represented in the training data. It's almost an immutable law of physics that Towers in Pisa are Leaning.
It's also a tower that has famously been deliberately un-straightend just enough to remain a tourist attraction while remaining stable.
What?!? The tower was slightly straightened for safety reasons. It was never intentionally made to lean more.
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#648Alright results are in! I've re-run all my editing based adherence related prompts through Nano Banana Pro. NB Pro managed to successfully pass SHRDLU, the M&M Van Halen test (as verified independently by Simon), and the Scorpio street test - all of which the original NB failed. Model results 1. Nano Banana Pro: 10 / 12 2. Seedream4: 9 / 12 3. Nano Banana: 7 / 12 4. Qwen Image Edit: 6 / 12 https://genai-showdown.spec…
I think Nano banana pro’s answer to the giraffe edit is far superior to the Seedream response, but you passed Seedream and failed NB pro. Maybe that one is just not a good test?
I thought so too at first, but zoom in to where the neck joins the head. What looks like the head’s shadow from a distance is actually a hard seam between thick neck and thin neck, with much of the apparent shadow actually a cutout showing the background.
Looks like the Seedream result here has been changed to fail, which I’d agree with, too. Pose change complaints aside, I think that neck is actually the same length were it held straight.
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#649Alright results are in! I've re-run all my editing based adherence related prompts through Nano Banana Pro. NB Pro managed to successfully pass SHRDLU, the M&M Van Halen test (as verified independently by Simon), and the Scorpio street test - all of which the original NB failed. Model results 1. Nano Banana Pro: 10 / 12 2. Seedream4: 9 / 12 3. Nano Banana: 7 / 12 4. Qwen Image Edit: 6 / 12 https://genai-showdown.spec…
Please consider changing pass/fail to an integer score out of maybe 5. This test is becoming more and more misleading as your apparent desire to give due credit conflicts with quality improvements over already ok-ish models. For example, on the great wave Gemini 3’s excellent rendition gets no additional credit over Qwen technically not failing if one is generous, and on cards, there’s actually no score distinction between results that one could or could not use.
Re: Nano Banana Pro
#650Google has been stomping around like Godzilla this week, and this is the first time I decided to link my card to their AI studio. I had seen people saying that they gave up and went to another platform because it was "impossible to pay". I thought this was strange, but after trying to get a working API key for the past half hour, I see what they mean. Everything is set up, I see a message that says "You're using Paid…
First off, apologies for the bad first impression, the team is pushing super hard to make sure it is easy to access these models. - On permission issue, not sure I follow the flow that got you there, pls email me more details if you are able too and happy to debug: Lkilpatrick@google.com - On overall friction for billing: we are working on a new billing experience built right into AI Studio that will make it super ea…
Just make it a VSCode plugin, I don't want to install a new IDE (which is just VSCode anyway) to use your product. It might be better than claude and chatgpt5.1 but not better enough to justify me re-doing all my IDE configs.