Hmm, I think the hype is mainly for image editing, not generating. Although note I haven't used it! How are you testing it?

▲

kemyd 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

I tested it with two prompts:

// In this one, Gemini doesn't understand what "cinematic" is

"A cinematic underwater shot of a turtle gracefully swimming in crystal-clear water [...]"

// In this one, the reflection in the water in the background has different buildings

"A modern city where raindrops fall upward into the clouds instead of down, pedestrians calmly walking [...]"

Midjourney created both perfectly.

▲

echelon 7 days ago | parent [-]

As others have said, this is an image editing model.

Editing models do not excel at aesthetic, but they can take your Midjourney image, adjust the composition, and make it perfect.

These types of models are the Adobe killer.

▲

kemyd 7 days ago | parent [-]

Noted that! The editing capabilities are impressive. I was excited for image gen because of the API (Midjourney doesn't have it yet).

	▲	echelon 7 days ago \| parent [-]
		David Holz mentioned on Twitter that he was considering a Midjourney API. They're obviously providing it to Meta now, so it might become more broadly available after Midjourney becomes the default image gen for Meta products. Midjourney wins on aesthetic for sure. Nothing else comes close. Midjourney images are just beautiful to behold. David's ambition is to beat Google to building a world model you can play games in. He views the image and video business as a temporary intermediate to that end game.

▲

qingcharles 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It actually has impressive image generating ability, IMO. I think the two things go hand-in-hand. Its prompt adherence can be weaker than other models, though.