>Totally disagree. A whole of AI business space seems totally focused on pushing the boundaries of what is possible, completely ignoring delivering something consistently useful.
Interestingly, Midjourney is taking an approach you might be interested in, where they're fine-tuning their model to prioritize consistent, visually-appealing outputs with even the most vague prompts (e.g. "a man").
And... it's really making me appreciate its competitors more. This always-good-enough consistency is very much a double-edged sword, IMO, because it also results in a very same-y feel for most Midjourney images (and kind of makes me appreciate instantly-recognizable MJ images a little less, in a way not unlike how I used to be impressed by starry-sky spraypaint pieces and then realized they're basically SP101). You almost always get something good out (at a rate I'd feel comfortable wrapping a production-quality app around) but it has become harder and harder to produce new visuals/aesthetics as Midjourney has progressed closer to their desired consistency levels.
Back when I started on it, I'd get good/interesting images every 5-10 generations that I'd then tweak and get even more interesting images. Now I'm lucky to see something new/interesting every 5-10 generations, although everything in between is _fine_.
My background here, FWIW: according to the site, I've been using Midjourney for 4 months straight and generated almost 10,000 images. I also have ~700GB of generations on disks from other models in the meantime and run a few sites that basically do wrap these kind of generation models, like novelgens.com, that try to find a good ratio between consistency and divergence.
In the grand scheme of things, I think the AI generation space needs both ends of the spectrum: consistent results like Midjourney lower the barrier of entry for new people to explore the space, but prompt-dependent powerhouses like Stable Diffusion enable artists to push the tooling further and have significantly better control over the art they're trying to create.
Interestingly, Midjourney is taking an approach you might be interested in, where they're fine-tuning their model to prioritize consistent, visually-appealing outputs with even the most vague prompts (e.g. "a man").
And... it's really making me appreciate its competitors more. This always-good-enough consistency is very much a double-edged sword, IMO, because it also results in a very same-y feel for most Midjourney images (and kind of makes me appreciate instantly-recognizable MJ images a little less, in a way not unlike how I used to be impressed by starry-sky spraypaint pieces and then realized they're basically SP101). You almost always get something good out (at a rate I'd feel comfortable wrapping a production-quality app around) but it has become harder and harder to produce new visuals/aesthetics as Midjourney has progressed closer to their desired consistency levels.
Back when I started on it, I'd get good/interesting images every 5-10 generations that I'd then tweak and get even more interesting images. Now I'm lucky to see something new/interesting every 5-10 generations, although everything in between is _fine_.
My background here, FWIW: according to the site, I've been using Midjourney for 4 months straight and generated almost 10,000 images. I also have ~700GB of generations on disks from other models in the meantime and run a few sites that basically do wrap these kind of generation models, like novelgens.com, that try to find a good ratio between consistency and divergence.
In the grand scheme of things, I think the AI generation space needs both ends of the spectrum: consistent results like Midjourney lower the barrier of entry for new people to explore the space, but prompt-dependent powerhouses like Stable Diffusion enable artists to push the tooling further and have significantly better control over the art they're trying to create.