At least for the real life pictures, there’s no depth of field. Everything is crystal clear like it’s composited.

> like its composited

Like focus stacking, specifically.

I’m always surprised when people bother to point out more-subtle flaws in AI images as “tells”, when the “depth-of-field problem” is so easily spotted, and has been there in every AI image ever since the earliest models.

▲

Mashimo 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I had no problems getting images with blurry background with the appropriate prompts. Something like "shallow depth of fields, bokeh, DSLR" can lead to good results. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1180506623475720222/1... [0]

But I found that that results in more professional looking images, and not more realistic photos.

Adding something like "selfy, Instagram, low resolution, flash" can lead to a .. worse image that looks more realistic.

[0] I think I did this one with z image turbo on my 4060 ti

	▲	afro88 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The blur isn't correct though. Like the amount of blur is wrong for the distance, zoom amount etc. So the depth of field is really wrong even if it conforms to "subject crisp, background blurred"

▲

vunderba 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Which is pretty amusing - because it's the exact opposite problem that BFL had with the original Flux model - every single image looked like it was taken with a 200mm f/4.

▲

albumen 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Every photoreal image on the demo page has depth of field, it’s just subtle.