• maxinstuff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    It’s not that these images are perfect - it’s that they’re close enough.

    The “problem” is that these images look amazing with a minimal touchup - something which would happen anyway to a real photo.

    An extra hour to two fixing some AI artifacts (the ol’ droop-eye and derp-hand) is a LOT cheaper than getting actual people out to an actual location and taking an actual photo.

    EDIT: I just realised the tent is on fire 🤡

    • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Honestly if you did those touch ups and said it was real I would still believe it, reminds me of that subreddit where they post weird Stockphotos. Like the lady soldering but she’s holding the hot bit of the solder iron, or the hackerman with the faux mask. Serious stock photos can be hilarious sometimes.

      • Comment105@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It also stores a lot of heat in the walls of the tent, which will keep the air inside from cooling down too much over the course of the night.

      • rtxn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        If you put the whole ass campfire in the tent, it might fly away. Put the fire in the freezer overnight, then thaw it out in chunks when needed.

        Alternatively, scrape some glue off your pizza and use it to stick the tent’s bottom to the ground.

        • morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.deOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I always pack several tablets of dehydrated water with me so if I’m running out, I can just dissolve a couple to have something to drink or cook with

        • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Great advice. I’ve sometimes woken up several fields over after the fire has been a bit ferocious. The screams of my family as we’ve flown over people’s houses has also caused some complaints.

  • Snowclone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The tells

    Hands issues, thumb and metal claw

    Face issue, studio lighting on face, right eye is not eyeing.

    Body issues, left leg is a weird tiny leg

    Boot laces lack credibility

    Fire in a tent

    AI is bad at the details.

    • sdcSpade@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ve gotten so used to looking at the details that I didn’t even notice the blatant fire-in-the-tent.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          They’re terrible!

          I actually kind of love that AI art can’t even pretend to do hands right. But also I had an instructor who’s catch phrase was ‘‘if you let the computer do it, it’s gonna suck’’ so. Not really a surprise AI can only defeat art that’s placid and uninspired shit. and can’t even do anything on model or sequential… it’s just… it can be a placeholder and that’s about it.

  • huginn@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s funny how the generators arent getting better. They’ve plateaued pretty hard in terms of believability. Glance value? Convincing.

    Under any level of scrutiny though this falls apart in at least a dozen ways.

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think the scale of image believability is logarithmic. Going from “believable at a glance” to “believable under scrutiny” requires an exponential increase in performance compared with going from “not believable at a glance” to “believable at a glance”. The same principle applies to text generation, facial recognition, sound generation, image enhancement, etc. One of the many reasons AI should not be being integrated in many of the ways world governments and corporations are trying to integrate it.

      • huginn@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s unclear if the current models can reach that level though. They seem more like they’re asymtotically approaching their limit.

        Maybe I’m wrong and GPT 5 will be the end all and be all - but I don’t think generalist models will ever be consistent enough. Specialist generators focused on specifics, trained to output very defined data seem more likely to be useful than this attempt to make a single catch all LLM.

    • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      “AI” image generation actually takes a lot of human knowledge and understanding of the models to manipulate outcomes. It is a different kind of effort, but the issues with it are based in human use of the tool.