sigh

so many little details off when the instructions are clear and/or the details are there. Brad Pitt jeans? The result are not the same style and missing clear details which should be expected to just translate over.

Another one where the prompt ended with output in a 16:9 ratio. The image isn't in that ratio.

The results are visually something but then still need so much review. Can't trust the model. Can't trust people lazily using it. Someone mentioned something about 'net negative'.

▲

istjohn 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, almost all of the examples are off in one way or another. The viewpoints don't actually match the arrow directions, for example. And if you actually use the model, you will see that even these examples must be cherry-picked.

▲

bflesch 4 days ago | parent [-]

The way you formulated your message just made me realize that we got somehow duped into accepting the term "model" (as in "scientific model") as a valid word for this AI stuff. A scientific model has a theoretical foundation and specific configuration parameters.

The way current AI is set up, you can't even reliably adjust the position of the sun.

	▲	quesera 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I wouldn't consider the word "model" to be too precious. It does not have an expectation of fidelity in general. Also, of course: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong

▲

bflesch 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You need to wait until someone does the exact picture you want, annotates it in their android photo library, and google uses it to train their AI models. But then they will be able to provide you the perfect result for your query, totally done with AI! ;)