3 ms·

Good AI image generators handle those details well already. Even if you don't get it 100%, you can inpaint fix very quickly. The current problem for them reall

Good AI image generators handle those details well already. Even if you don't get it 100%, you can inpaint fix very quickly. The current problem for them really isn't the details in isolation but rather cohesive details throughout the entire picture in one attempt. It's very lacking and requires a lot of manual input, filtering, reliance on multiple tools, etc.

kergonath 2y ago
> Good AI image generators handle those details well already. Even if you don't get it 100%, you can inpaint fix very quickly. But that should not be the case. A human body is not more complicated than a horse’s or a cat’s, and those are usually much better. There really is a problem in our relation with our own bodies.
- snapcaster 2y ago
  I do think we have much more sensitivity to deviations in human appearance. We probably wouldn't notice a lot of "weird looking" cats that other cats would
  - kergonath 2y ago
    Looking at these mangled bodies, it’s not small deviations. We would definitely notice a cat with 6 limbs or 3 ears.
    - snapcaster 2y ago
      Yes in this case for sure, just meant in general
- elpocko 2y ago
  >> Good AI image generators handle those details well already. Even if you don't get it 100%, you can inpaint fix very quickly. >But that should not be the case. What is your point here? Good AI should not make mistakes? Or good AI should not handle those details? Go ahead and ask some human artist how difficult it is to draw hands.
  - kergonath 2y ago
    > What is your point here? Good AI should not make mistakes? Or good AI should not handle those details? Yeah, I should have been clearer. If you release a generator model for the general public, it needs to work. You cannot say that the user need to fix it themselves or learn what inpainting is. From a user’s point of view, it either works or is broken. That’s ok for specialist tools or technical audiences that love playing with the bleeding edge, but that’s about it.

kergonath 2y ago

> Good AI image generators handle those details well already. Even if you don't get it 100%, you can inpaint fix very quickly. But that should not be the case. A human body is not more complicated than a horse’s or a cat’s, and those are usually much better. There really is a problem in our relation with our own bodies.

snapcaster 2y ago
I do think we have much more sensitivity to deviations in human appearance. We probably wouldn't notice a lot of "weird looking" cats that other cats would
- kergonath 2y ago
  Looking at these mangled bodies, it’s not small deviations. We would definitely notice a cat with 6 limbs or 3 ears.
  - snapcaster 2y ago
    Yes in this case for sure, just meant in general
elpocko 2y ago
>> Good AI image generators handle those details well already. Even if you don't get it 100%, you can inpaint fix very quickly. >But that should not be the case. What is your point here? Good AI should not make mistakes? Or good AI should not handle those details? Go ahead and ask some human artist how difficult it is to draw hands.
- kergonath 2y ago
  > What is your point here? Good AI should not make mistakes? Or good AI should not handle those details? Yeah, I should have been clearer. If you release a generator model for the general public, it needs to work. You cannot say that the user need to fix it themselves or learn what inpainting is. From a user’s point of view, it either works or is broken. That’s ok for specialist tools or technical audiences that love playing with the bleeding edge, but that’s about it.