4 ms·
Hi, founder here. You're right about the pre-generated images! 2.6M to be precise, all of them are here: https://generated.photos/faces https://generated.photo
by Icons8 6y ago
Hi, founder here.
You're right about the pre-generated images! 2.6M to be precise, all of them are here: https://generated.photos/faces https://generated.photos/faces
It definitely has some fitting issues; Brad Pitt is a good example as he dyes his hair. I've googled his hair situation so you don't have to. He most probably has gray hair, dyed dark, then highlighted.
That's a challenge huh! As a result, you can feel some of these guys manipulated hair color: https://i.imgur.com/bC6AxXO.jpg https://i.imgur.com/bC6AxXO.jpg
Anyway, I had better luck with Angelina Jolie. Hairwise, her hair looks also toned, but our dataset has way more colored women:
https://i.imgur.com/WmTzRAZ.jpg https://i.imgur.com/WmTzRAZ.jpg
- impostervt 6y agoYa the bottom left is pretty good! I've actually bought from the site before so please don't think I was knocking it too hard. It's very useful when you need a unique image of a face.
- Icons8 6y agoThank you for buying and thank you for your encouragement! My personal fault was positioning. We can’t make everyone looking similar. As you said, we have a bunch of files on a disk, heavy indexed ones. We spend a year working on diversity, including running as photo studio, but it has limits yet. So, we needed to invent a use for it. Anonymizing seemed like the opposite of resemblance, yet people wait for the latter. More resemblance (and prettier the face) more they like it. I wonder if the current tech is marketable without false expectations.