4 ms·
My experience is that anyone that says predictably generating art is easy using AI is either lying, never done it, or exclusively copying prompts others have po
by O__________O 4y ago
My experience is that anyone that says predictably generating art is easy using AI is either lying, never done it, or exclusively copying prompts others have posted.
Beyond that, lots of people are unable to even explain how prompts are parsed or per token explain how it impacts what is generated. For example, do commas matter?
“Prompt engineering” is real, still unclear to me though what the future for it looks like, since easy to see via comparable things like Google search operators that the general public has little interest in learning command parameters.
- danielvf 4y agoOne fun tip for anyone who wants to understand more how their prompts work - lock down to a single seed, no variations, then change one word at a time in your prompt. Then you can see what effects each word has. Or you can answer your question about the effects of commas. You can try moving a word or phrase forwards or backwards and see what effect it has. By working with a single snapshot of randomness, you can see the word effects more clearly.
- O__________O 4y agoAgree; to the expand on your points, even trying ultra simple prompt like [black circle on a white background] and then running the output through CLIP to get its text outputs. Then try to narrow the iterations between the two to be predictable and controlled by you. Obviously understanding the code and data the model is based on is likely best path to better understanding what is going on; for example, last time I checked, Stable Diffusion was limited to 77 tokens. Ultimately though, possible paths to understanding are like unlimited and just as creative as any other aspect of the topic.