BoredPositron
5 months ago
It's truly fascinating to see how photography, CGI, and Photoshop are being "replaced" in these videos. I understand the appeal of this technology, and Nano Banana is undoubtedly a step forward, but we're talking about 1024x1024 images and 80% reproduced likeness here. While that might suffice for YouTube videos or profile pictures, in the real world of high-end production, we work with images up to 400MP daily. I am very adamant taking resolution as a single quality factor because usually I get ESRGAN upscaled images as a counterpoint, look the resolution is here, what people are missing is the fidelity of say a phase one or Hasselblad.
You can achieve these higher resolutions, fidelity and close to 100% reproduction of objects with considerable effort in generative AI right now, it's even a very enjoyable experience to do so, but not with a closed model like Nano Banana. When Google or other major image model providers give us proper fine tuning and custom inference, particularly for applications like upscaling, then we can have a serious conversation.
At present, while I understand the fascination, everyone should take a step back and consider what we're actually trying to replace. We are stuck at these low inference resolutions since SDXL. For genuine high-end commercial applications, we're not there yet, and we won't be without another significant leap in GPU technology.
1oooqooq
5 months ago
my guess is that nobody cares. netflix cut production costs in ways everybody in the industry thought it was a joke. didn't matter, they cut anyway and produced crap and survived. this will be the same. they will probably add "ai upscale" on the camera list and yolo.
also, recently i saw a dubbed commercial, so it's already rock bottom.
image is not like coding. you don't get hacked with a shitty commercial or something. you can live with 80%