3 ms·
Even with Google, and having used Midjourney since v3, I still don't have enough context to understand what the advance is here. Midjourney could do hands befo
by starkparker 4y ago
Even with Google, and having used Midjourney since v3, I still don't have enough context to understand what the advance is here.
Midjourney could do hands before, just not consistently. That doesn't seem to have changed. So is it that MJ can now do more realistic hands inconsistently? Or did consistency get better without achieving reliability?
I can't make this not sound sarcastic, but I'm trying very hard to ask this earnestly: I never had trouble getting too many hands into a picture with v3 or v4. Is v5 getting the correct number of hands more frequently now? Is that it?
- 1attice 4y agoYes, that's it precisely. The odds of having a good hand have gone up dramatically, near as I can tell. Even the hands that aren't quite right seem better somehow. I expect either MJ 7 or 8 to do hands flawlessly, every time.
- nwienert 4y agoThis is HN so if you’re claiming “dramatically” let’s get some proof.
- 1attice 4y agosure. See image on the tweet that started this thread. Now, take a look at these hands from MJ3: https://www.reddit.com/r/midjourney/comments/wlujgw/midjourney_fail_why_dont_ai_art_generators/ https://www.reddit.com/r/midjourney/comments/wlujgw/midjourn... It's important to note that MJ3 reliably did not produce human looking hands. It's equally important to note that MJ5 usually does, at least from a quick count/survey of the hands shown in the provided image. Is that sufficient? If not, what proofs would be sufficient?