[HN Gopher] Nano Banana can be prompt engineered for nuanced AI ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Nano Banana can be prompt engineered for nuanced AI image
       generation
        
       Author : minimaxir
       Score  : 840 points
       Date   : 2025-11-13 17:39 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (minimaxir.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (minimaxir.com)
        
       | doctorpangloss wrote:
       | lots of words
       | 
       | okay, look at imagen 4 ultra:
       | 
       | https://aistudio.google.com/app/prompts?state=%7B%22ids%22:%...
       | 
       | In this link, Imagen is instructed to render the verbatim prompt
       | "the result of 4+5", which shows that text, and not instructed,
       | which renders "4+5=9"
       | 
       | Is Imagen thinking?
       | 
       | Let's compare to gemini 2.5 flash image (nano banana):
       | 
       | look carefully at the system prompt here:
       | https://aistudio.google.com/app/prompts?state=%7B%22ids%22:%...
       | 
       | Gemini is instructed to reply in images first, and if it thinks,
       | to think using the image thinking tags. It cannot seemingly be
       | prompted to show verbatim the result 4+5 without showing the
       | answer 4+5=9. Of course it can show whatever exact text that you
       | want, the question is, does it prompt rewrite (no) or do
       | something else (yes)?
       | 
       | compare to ideogram, with prompt rewriting:
       | https://ideogram.ai/g/GRuZRTY7TmilGUHnks-Mjg/0
       | 
       | without prompt rewriting:
       | https://ideogram.ai/g/yKV3EwULRKOu6LDCsSvZUg/2
       | 
       | We can do the same exercises with Flux Kontext for editing versus
       | Flash-2.5, if you think that editing is somehow unique in this
       | regard.
       | 
       | Is prompt rewriting "thinking"? My point is, this article can't
       | answer that question without dElViNg into the nuances of what
       | multi-modal models really are.
        
         | gryfft wrote:
         | Can you provide screenshots or links that don't require login
        
         | PunchTornado wrote:
         | sorry, but I don't understand you post. those links don't work.
        
       | dostick wrote:
       | Use Google AI Studio to submit requests, and to remove watermark,
       | open browser development tools and right click on request to
       | "watermark_4" image and select to block it. And from next
       | generation there will be no watermark!
        
         | billynomates wrote:
         | That sounds dangerous honestly. Watermarks should be mandatory
         | for AI generated images.
        
           | dymk wrote:
           | How would you enforce that when it's actually important? Any
           | "bad actor" could just open photoshop and remove it. Or run a
           | delobotimized model which doesn't watermark.
        
           | dieortin wrote:
           | This only applies to the visible watermark on the corner,
           | which you could crop anyways. If I'm not mistaken, all images
           | generated by Google models have an invisible watermark:
           | https://deepmind.google/models/synthid/
        
         | dreis_sw wrote:
         | So the watermark is being added to the image on the client-
         | side? That's pretty bad
        
         | wormpilled wrote:
         | Can't believe that worked, thanks!
        
       | squigz wrote:
       | I'm getting annoyed by using "prompt engineered" as a verb. Does
       | this mean I'm finally old and bitter?
       | 
       | (Do we say we software engineered something?)
        
         | vpShane wrote:
         | You're definitely old and bitter, welcome to it.
         | 
         | You CREATED something, and I like to think that creating things
         | that I love and enjoy and that others can love and enjoy makes
         | creating things worth it.
        
           | squigz wrote:
           | Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against using AI as an
           | expression of creativity :)
        
             | malcolmxxx wrote:
             | Create? So I have created all that code I'm running on my
             | site, yes is bad I know, but thank you very much! Such
             | creative guy I was!
        
         | officeplant wrote:
         | Not really since "prompt engineering" can be tossed in the same
         | pile as "vibe coding." Just people coping with not developing
         | the actual skills to produce the desired products.
        
           | bongodongobob wrote:
           | Couldn't care less. I don't need to know how to do literally
           | everything. AI fills in my gaps and I'm a ton more
           | productive.
        
             | squigz wrote:
             | I wouldn't bother trying to convince people who are upset
             | that others have figured out a way to use LLMs. It's not
             | logical.
        
           | koakuma-chan wrote:
           | Try getting a small model to do what you want quickly with
           | high accuracy, high quality, etc, and using few tokens per
           | request. You'll find out that prompt engineering is real and
           | matters.
        
         | pavlov wrote:
         | I think it's meant to be engineering in the same sense as
         | "social engineering".
        
         | antegamisou wrote:
         | No it means you can still discern what is BS.
        
       | miladyincontrol wrote:
       | Theres lots these models can do but I despise when people suggest
       | they can do edits with "with only the necessary aspects changed".
       | 
       | No, that simply is not true. If you actually compare the before
       | and after you can see it still regenerates all the details on the
       | "unchanged" aspects. Texture, lighting, sharpness, even scale its
       | all different even if varyingly similar to the original.
       | 
       | Sure they're cute for casual edits but it really pains me people
       | suggesting these things are suitable replacements for actual
       | photo editing. Especially when it comes to people, or details
       | outside their training data theres a lot of nuance that can be
       | lost as it regenerates them no matter how you prompt things.
       | 
       | Even if you
        
         | StevenWaterman wrote:
         | That is true for gpt-image-1 but not nano-banana. They can do
         | masked image changes
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | Nano Banana is different and much better at edits without
         | changing texture/lighting/sharpness/color balance, and I am
         | someone that is extremely picky about it. That's why I add the
         | note that Gemini 2.5 Flash is aware of segmentation masks, and
         | that's my hunch why that's the case.
        
         | BoredPositron wrote:
         | Nano banana has a really low spatial scaling and doesn't affect
         | details like other models.
        
         | miohtama wrote:
         | Could you just mask out the area you wish to change in more
         | advanced tools, or is there something in the model itself which
         | would prevent this?
        
           | lunarboy wrote:
           | That's probably where things are headed and there are already
           | products trying this (even photoshop already). Just like how
           | code gen AI tools don't replace the entire file on every
           | prompt iteration.
        
       | mkagenius wrote:
       | > Nano Banana is still bad at rendering text perfectly/without
       | typos as most image generation models.
       | 
       | I figured that if you write the text in Google docs and share the
       | screenshot with banana it will not make any spelling mistake.
       | 
       | So, use something like "can you write my name on this Wimbledon
       | trophy, both images are attached. Use them" will work.
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | Google's example documentation for Nano Banana does demo that
         | pipeline: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/image-
         | generation#pytho...
         | 
         | That's on my list of blog-post-worthy things to test, namely
         | text rendering to image in Python directly and passing both
         | input images to the model for compositing.
        
           | mkagenius wrote:
           | Yeah, close.
           | 
           | But it is still generating it with a prompt
           | 
           | > Logo: "A simple, modern logo with the letters 'G' and 'A'
           | in a white circle.
           | 
           | My idea was do to it manually so that there is no
           | probabilities involved.
           | 
           | Though your idea of using python is same.
        
       | ml-anon wrote:
       | "prompt engineered"...i.e. by typing in what you want to see.
        
         | harpiaharpyja wrote:
         | Not all models can actually do that if your prompt is
         | particular
        
           | pksebben wrote:
           | Most designers can't, either. Defining a spec is a skill.
           | 
           | It's actually fairly difficult to put to words any specific
           | enough vision such that it becomes understandable outside of
           | your own head. This goes for pretty much anything, too.
        
             | Razengan wrote:
             | Yep, knowing how and what to _ask_ is a skill.
             | 
             | For anything, even back in the "classical" search days.
        
               | pksebben wrote:
               | at least then, we had hard overrides that were actually
               | hard.
               | 
               | "This got searched verbatim, every time"
               | 
               | W*ldcards were handy
               | 
               | and so on...
               | 
               | Now, you get a 'system prompt' which is a vague promise
               | that no really this bit of text is special you can
               | totally trust us (which inevitably dies, crushed under
               | the weight of an extended context window).
               | 
               | Unfortunately(?), I think this bug/feature has gotta be
               | there. It's the price for the enormous flexibility.
               | Frankly, I'd not be mad if we had _less_ control - my
               | guess is that in not too many years we 're going to look
               | back on RLHF and grimace at our draconian methods. Yeah,
               | if you're only trying to build a "get the thing I intend
               | done" machine I guess it's useful, but I think the real
               | power in these models is in their propensity to expose
               | you to new ideas and provide a tireless foil for all the
               | half-baked concepts that would otherwise not get room to
               | grow.
        
             | andai wrote:
             | https://habitatchronicles.com/2004/04/you-cant-tell-
             | people-a...
        
             | deathanatos wrote:
             | ... sure ... but also no. For example, say I have an image.
             | 3 people in it; there is a speech bubble above the person
             | on the right that reads "I'A'T AY RO HERT YOU THE SAP!"1
             | 
             | I give it,                 Reposition the text bubble to be
             | coming from the middle character.            DO NOT modify
             | the poses or features of the actual characters.
             | 
             | Now sure, specs are hard. Gemini removed the text bubble
             | entirely. Whatever, let's just try again:
             | Place a speech bubble on the image. The "tail" of the
             | bubble should make it appear that the middle (red-headed)
             | girl is talking. The speech bubble should read "Hide the
             | vodka." Use a Comic Sans like font. DO NOT place the bubble
             | on the right.            DO NOT modify the characters in
             | the image.
             | 
             | There's only one red-head in the image; she's the middle
             | character. We get a speech bubble, correctly positioned,
             | but with a sans-serif, Arial-ish font, not Comic Sans. It
             | reads "Hide the vokda" _(sic)_. The facial expression of
             | the middle character has changed.
             | 
             | Yes, specs are hard. Defining a spec is hard. But Gemini
             | struggles to follow the specification given. _Whole
             | sessions_ are like this, and absolute struggle to get basic
             | directions followed.
             | 
             | You can even see here that I & the author have started to
             | learn the SHOUT AT IT rule. I suppose I should try more
             | bulleted lists. Someone might learn, through
             | experimentation "okay, the AI has these hidden
             | idiosyncrasies that I can abuse to get what I want" but ...
             | that's not a good thing, that's just an undocumented API
             | with a terrible UX.
             | 
             | (1because that is what the AI on a previous step generated.
             | No, that's not what was asked for. I am astounded TFA
             | generated an NYT logo for this reason.)
        
               | minimaxir wrote:
               | The NYT logo being rendered well makes sense because it's
               | a _logo_ , not a textual concept.
        
               | pksebben wrote:
               | You're right, of course. These models have deficiencies
               | in their understanding related to the sophistication of
               | the text encoder and it's relationship to the underlying
               | tokenizer.
               | 
               | Which is exactly why the current discourse is about 'who
               | does it best' (IMO, the flux series is top dog here. No
               | one else currently strikes the proper balance between
               | following style / composition / text rendering quite as
               | well). That said, even flux is pretty tricky to prompt -
               | it's really, really easy to step on your own toes here -
               | for example, by giving conflicting(ish) prompts "The
               | scene is shot from a high angle. We see the bottom of a
               | passenger jet".
               | 
               | Talking to designers has the same problem. "I want a
               | nice, clean logo of a distressed dog head. It should be
               | sharp with a gritty feel". For the person defining the
               | spec, they actually do have a vision that fits each
               | criteria _in some way_ , but it's unclear which parts
               | apply to what.
        
         | darepublic wrote:
         | "amenable to highly specific and granular instruction"
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | ... and then iterating on that prompt many times, based on your
         | accumulated knowledge of how best to prompt that particular
         | model.
        
           | minimaxir wrote:
           | Case in point, the final image in this post (the IP bonanza)
           | took 28 iterations of the prompt text to get something
           | maximally interesting, and why that one is very particular
           | about the constraints it invokes, such as specifying
           | "distinct" characters and specifying they are present from
           | "left to right" because the model kept exploiting that
           | ambiguity.
        
             | chankstein38 wrote:
             | Hey! The author, thank you for this post! QQ, any idea
             | roughly how much this experimentation cost you? I'm having
             | trouble processing their image generation pricing I may
             | just not be finding the right table. I'm just trying to
             | understand if I do like 50 iterations at the quality in the
             | post, how much is that going to cost me?
        
               | minimaxir wrote:
               | All generations in the post are $0.04/image (Nano Banana
               | doesn't have a way to increase the resolution, yet), so
               | you can do the math and assume that you can generated
               | about 24 images per dollar: unlike other models, Nano
               | Banana does charge for input tokens but it's neligible.
               | 
               | Discounting the testing around the character JSON which
               | became _extremely_ expensive due to extreme iteration /my
               | own stupidity, I'd wager it took about $5 total including
               | iteration.
        
         | mensetmanusman wrote:
         | We understand now that we interface with LLMs using natural and
         | unnatural language as the user interface.
         | 
         | This is a very different fuzzy interface compared to
         | programming languages.
         | 
         | There will be techniques better or worse at interfacing.
         | 
         | This is what the term prompt engineering is alluding to since
         | we don't have the full suite of language to describe this yet.
        
         | w_for_wumbo wrote:
         | Yes, that is a serious skill. How many of the woes that we see
         | is because people don't know what they want or are unable to
         | describe it in such a way that others understand it. I believe
         | prompt engineer to properly convey how complex communication
         | can be, when interacting with a multitude of perspectives,
         | world views, assumptions, presumptions etc. I believe it works
         | well to counter the over-confidence that people have, from not
         | paying attention to what gaps exist between what is said and
         | what is meant.
        
           | CobrastanJorji wrote:
           | Yes, obviously a role involving complex communication while
           | interacting with a multitude of perspectives, world views,
           | assumptions, presumptions, etc needs to be called "engineer."
           | 
           | That is why I always call technical writers "documentation
           | engineers," why I call diplomats "international engineers,"
           | why I call managers "team engineers," and why I call
           | historians "hindsight engineers."
        
             | w_for_wumbo wrote:
             | I believe you're joking here, but I do think it'd be useful
             | to have some engineering background in each of these
             | domains. The number of miscommunications that happen in any
             | domain, due to oversight, presumptions and assumptions is
             | vast. At the very least the terminology will shape how we
             | engage with it, so having an aspirational title like prompt
             | engineer, may influence the level of rigor we apply to it.
        
               | croon wrote:
               | I think what you're describing is more commonly included
               | under epistemology under philosophy, and I agree that it
               | would be a useful background in each of those domains,
               | but for some reason in the last few decades we have
               | downgraded the humanities as less useful.
               | 
               | So Prompt Philosopher/Communicator?
        
               | drw85 wrote:
               | I don't think that's the right direction to go in.
               | 
               | Despite needing much knowledge of how a planes inner
               | workings function, a pilot is still a pilot and not an
               | aircraft engineer.
               | 
               | Just because you know how human psychology works when it
               | comes to making purchase decision and you are good at
               | applying that to sell things, you're not a sales
               | engineer.
               | 
               | Giving something a fake name, to make it seem more
               | complicated or aspirational than it actually is makes you
               | a bullshit engineer in my opinion.
        
               | ml-anon wrote:
               | it's really unclear whether this is satire.
        
           | thisOtterBeGood wrote:
           | It IS a skill. And most often it is disregarded by those who
           | did not yet conquer it ...
        
         | jazzyjackson wrote:
         | Used to be called Google Fu
        
         | yieldcrv wrote:
         | right? 15 months ago in image models you used to have to
         | designate rendering specifications, and know the art of
         | negative prompting
         | 
         | now you can really use natural language and people want to
         | debate you about how poor they are at articulating a shared
         | concepts, amazing
         | 
         | it's like the people are regressing and the AI is improving
        
       | pfortuny wrote:
       | Well, I just asked it for a 13-sided irregular polygon (is it
       | that hard?)...
       | 
       | https://imgur.com/a/llN7V0W
        
       | BoredPositron wrote:
       | The kicker for nano banana is not prompt adherence which is a
       | really nice to have but the fact that it's either working on
       | pixel space or with a really low spatial scaling. It's the only
       | model that doesn't kill your details because of vae
       | encode/decode.
        
       | sebzim4500 wrote:
       | It's really cool how good of a job it did rendering a page given
       | its HTML code. I was not expecting it to do nearly as well.
        
         | kridsdale1 wrote:
         | Same. This must have training from sites that show html next to
         | screenshots of the pages.
        
       | leviathant wrote:
       | I was kind of surprised by this line:
       | 
       | >Nano Banana is terrible at style transfer even with prompt
       | engineering shenanigans
       | 
       | My context: I'm kind of fixated on visualizing my neighborhood as
       | it would have appeared in the 18th century. I've been doing it in
       | Sketchup, and then in Twinmotion, but neither of those produce
       | "photorealistic" images... Twinmotion can get pretty close with a
       | lot of work, but that's easier with modern architecture than it
       | is with the more hand-made, brick-by-brick structures I'm
       | modeling out.
       | 
       | As different AI image generators have emerged, I've tried them
       | all in an effort to add the proverbial rough edges to snapshots
       | of the models I've created, and it was not until Nano Banana that
       | I ever saw anything even remotely workable.
       | 
       | Nano Banana manages to maintain the geometry of the scene, while
       | applying new styles to it. Sometimes I do this with my Twinmotion
       | renders, but what's really been cool to see is how well it takes
       | a drawing, or engraving, or watercolor - and with as simple a
       | prompt as "make this into a photo" it generates phenomenal
       | results.
       | 
       | Similarly to the Paladin/Starbucks/Pirate example in the link
       | though, I find that sometimes I need to misdirect a little bit,
       | because if I'm peppering the prompt with details about the 18th
       | century, I sometimes get a painterly image back. Instead, I'll
       | tell it I want it to look like a photograph of a well preserved
       | historic neighborhood, or a scene from a period film set in the
       | 18th century.
       | 
       | As fantastic as the results can be, I'm not abandoning my manual
       | modeling of these buildings and scenes. However, Nano Banana's
       | interpretation of contemporary illustrations has helped me
       | reshape how I think about some of the assumptions I made in my
       | own models.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | You can't take a highly artistic image and supply it as a style
         | reference. Nano Banana can't generalize to anything not in its
         | training.
        
           | leviathant wrote:
           | Fair enough! I suppose I've avoided that kind of "style
           | transfer" for a variety of reasons, it hadn't even occurred
           | to me that people were still interested in that. And I don't
           | say that to open up debate on the topic, just explaining away
           | my own ignorance/misinterpretation. Thanks
        
       | simonw wrote:
       | I like the Python library that accompanies this:
       | https://github.com/minimaxir/gemimg
       | 
       | I added a CLI to it (using Gemini CLI) and submitted a PR, you
       | can run that like so:                 GEMINI_API_KEY="..." \
       | uv run --with https://github.com/minimaxir/gemimg/archive/d6b9d5b
       | befa1e2ffc3b09086bc0a3ad70ca4ef22.zip \         python -m gemimg
       | "a racoon holding a hand written sign that says I love trash"
       | 
       | Result in this comment:
       | https://github.com/minimaxir/gemimg/pull/7#issuecomment-3529...
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | The author went to great lengths about open source early on. I
         | wonder if they'll cover the QwenEdit ecosystem.
         | 
         | I'm exceptionally excited about Chinese editing models. They're
         | getting closer and closer to NanoBanana in terms of robustness,
         | and they're open source. This means you can supply masks and
         | kernels and do advanced image operations, integrate them into
         | visual UIs, etc.
         | 
         | You can even fine tune them and create LoRAs that will do the
         | style transferring tasks that Nano Banana falls flat on.
         | 
         | I don't like how closed the frontier US models are, and I hope
         | the Chinese kick our asses.
         | 
         | That said, I love how easy it'll be to distill Nano Banana into
         | a new model. You can pluck training data right out of it: ((any
         | image, any instruction) -> completion) tuples.
        
           | minimaxir wrote:
           | I've been keeping an eye on Qwen-Edit/Wan 2.2 shenanigans and
           | they are interesting: however actually running those types of
           | models is too cumbersome and in the end unclear if it's
           | actually worth it over the $0.04/image for Nano Banana.
        
             | CamperBob2 wrote:
             | I was skeptical about the notion of running similar models
             | locally as well, but the person who did this (https://old.r
             | eddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1osi1q0/wa... ) swears
             | that they generated it locally, just letting a single 5090
             | crunch away for a week.
             | 
             | If that's true, it seems worth getting past the
             | 'cumbersome' aspects. This tech may not put Hollywood out
             | of business, but it's clear that the process of filmmaking
             | won't be recognizable in 10 years if amateurs can really do
             | this in their basements today.
        
               | rcarr wrote:
               | Neural Viz has been putting out some extremely high
               | quality content recently, these seem to be the closest
               | I've seen to approaching Hollywood level:
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bYA2Rv2CQ8
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfTnW8pl3DE
        
             | braebo wrote:
             | Takes a couple mouse clicks in ComfyUI
        
               | echelon wrote:
               | On that subject - ComfyUI is not the future of image gen.
               | It's an experimental rope bridge.
               | 
               | Adobe's conference last week points to the future of
               | image gen. Visual tools where you mold images like clay.
               | Hands on.
               | 
               | Comfy appeals to the 0.01% that like toolkits like
               | TouchDesigner, Nannou, and ShaderToy.
        
               | mh- wrote:
               | Got a link handy to a video of what you're referring to
               | from Adobe's conference? Gave it a quick google but
               | there's a lot of content. Thanks!
        
               | echelon wrote:
               | They demoed a ton of new features in various stages of
               | completion. Some of them are already production-grade and
               | are being launched soon.
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqAAFX1XXY8 - dynamic 3D
               | scene relighting is insane, check out the 3:45 mark.
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLxFn_BFB5c - molding
               | photos like clay in 3D is absolutely wild at the 3:58
               | mark.
               | 
               | I don't have links to everything. They presented a deluge
               | of really smart editing tools and gave their vision for
               | the future of media creation.
               | 
               | Tangible, moldable, visual, fast, and easy.
        
               | mh- wrote:
               | Thank you! Will take a look. That's really exciting.
        
           | msp26 wrote:
           | > I don't like how closed the frontier US models are, and I
           | hope the Chinese kick our asses.
           | 
           | For imagegen, agreed. But for textgen, Kimi K2 thinking is by
           | far the best chat model at the moment from my experience so
           | far. Not even "one of the best", the best.
           | 
           | It has frontier level capability and the model was made very
           | tastefully: it's significantly less sycophantic and more
           | willing to disagree in a productive, reasonable way rather
           | than immediately shutting you out. It's also way more funny
           | at shitposting.
           | 
           | I'll keep using Claude a lot for multimodality and artifacts
           | but much of my usage has shifted to K2. Claude's sycophancy
           | is particular is tiresome. I don't use ChatGPT/Gemini because
           | they hide the raw thinking tokens, which is really cringe.
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | Claude Sonnet 4.5 doesn't even feel sycophantic (in the 4o)
             | way, it feels like it has BPD. It switches from desperately
             | agreeing with you to moralizing lectures and then has a
             | breakdown if you point out it's wrong about anything.
             | 
             | Also, yesterday I asked it a question and after the answer
             | it complained about its poorly written system prompt to me.
             | 
             | They're really torturing their poor models over there.
        
               | dontlikeyoueith wrote:
               | It rubs the data on its skin or else it gets the prompt
               | again!
        
           | vunderba wrote:
           | The Qwen-Edit images from my GenAI Image Editing Showdown
           | site were all generated from a ComfyUI workflow on my machine
           | - it's shockingly good for an open-weight model. It was also
           | the only model that scored a passing grade on the Van Halen
           | M&M test (even compared against Nanobanana)
           | 
           | https://genai-showdown.specr.net/image-editing
        
             | irthomasthomas wrote:
             | Ha I created a Van Halen M&M test for text prompts. I would
             | include an instruction demanding that the response contain
             | <yellow_m&m> and <red_m&m> but never <brown_m&m>. Then I
             | would fail any llm that did not include any m&ms, or if
             | they wrote anything about the <brown_m&m> in the final
             | output.
        
         | ctippett wrote:
         | Any reason for not also adding a project.scripts entry for
         | pyproject.toml? That way the CLI (great idea btw) could be
         | installed as a tool by uv.
        
           | simonw wrote:
           | I decided to avoid that purely to keep changes made to the
           | package as minima as possible - adding a project.scripts
           | means installing it adds a new command alias. My approach
           | changes nothing other than making "python -m gemimg" do
           | something useful.
           | 
           | I agree that a project.scripts would be good but that's a
           | decision for the maintainer to take on separately!
        
         | sorcercode wrote:
         | @simonw: slight tangent but super curious how you managed to
         | generate the preview of that gemini-cli terminal session gist -
         | https://gistpreview.github.io/?17290c1024b0ef7df06e9faa4cb37...
         | 
         | is this just a manual copy/paste into a gist with some html css
         | styling; or do you have a custom tool a la amp-code that does
         | this more easily?
        
           | simonw wrote:
           | I used this tool: https://tools.simonwillison.net/terminal-
           | to-html
           | 
           | I made a video about building that here:
           | https://simonwillison.net/2025/Oct/23/claude-code-for-web-
           | vi...
           | 
           | It works much better with Claude Code and Codex CLI because
           | they don't mess around with scrolling in the same way as
           | Gemini CLI does.
        
             | sorcercode wrote:
             | very cool. frequently, i want to share my prompt + session
             | output; this will make that super easy! thanks again for
             | sharing!
        
           | ilyakaminsky wrote:
           | I use Gemini CLI on a daily basis. It used to crash often and
           | I'd lose the chat history. I found this tool called ai-cli-
           | log [1] and it does something similar out of the box. I don't
           | run Gemini CLI without it.
           | 
           | [1] https://github.com/alingse/ai-cli-log
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | I just merged the PR and pushed 0.3.1 to PyPI. I also added
         | README documentation and allowed for a `gemimg` entrypoint to
         | the CLI via project.scripts as noted elsewhere in the thread.
        
       | peetle wrote:
       | In my own experience, nano banana still has the tendency to:
       | 
       | - make massive, seemingly random edits to images - adjust image
       | scale - make very fine grained but pervasive detail changes
       | obvious in an image diff
       | 
       | For instance, I have found that nano-banana will sporadically add
       | a (convincing) fireplace to a room or new garage behind a house.
       | This happens even with explicit "ALL CAPS" instructions not to do
       | so. This happens sporadically, even when the temperature is set
       | to zero, and makes it impossible to build a reliable app.
       | 
       | Has anyone had a better experience?
        
         | andblac wrote:
         | The "ALL CAPS" part of your comment got me thinking. I imagine
         | most llms understand subtle meanings of upper case text use
         | depending on context. But, as I understand it, ALL CAPS text
         | will tokenize differently than lower case text. Is that right?
         | In that case, won't the upper case be harder to understand and
         | follow for most models since it's less common in datasets?
        
           | minimaxir wrote:
           | There's more than enough ALL CAPS text in the corpus of the
           | entire internet, and enough semantic context associated with
           | it for it to be intended to be in the imperative voice.
        
             | miohtama wrote:
             | Shouldn't all caps normalised to tokens like low caps?
             | There are no separate tokens for all caps and low caps in
             | Llama, or at least not in the past.
        
               | minimaxir wrote:
               | Looking at the tokenizer for the older Llama 2 model, the
               | tokenizer has capital letters in it:
               | https://huggingface.co/meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf
        
         | symisc_devel wrote:
         | I work on the PixLab prompt based photo editor
         | (https://editor.pixlab.io), and it follows exactly what you
         | type with explicit CAPS.
        
       | ainiriand wrote:
       | The blueberry and strawberry are not actually where they
       | prompted.
        
       | mFixman wrote:
       | The author overlooked an interesting error in the second skull
       | pancake image: the strawberry is on the right eye socket (to the
       | left of the image), and the blackberry is on the left eye socket
       | (to the right of the image)!
       | 
       | This looks like it's caused by 99% of the relative directions in
       | image descriptions describing them from the looker's point of
       | view, and that 99% of the ones that aren't it they refer to a
       | human and not to a skull-shaped pancake.
        
         | martin-adams wrote:
         | I picked up on that also. I feel that a lot of humans would
         | also get confused about whether you mean the eye on the left,
         | or the subject's left eye.
        
           | Closi wrote:
           | To be honest this is the sort of thing Nano Bannana is weak
           | at in my experience. It's absolutely amazing - but doesn't
           | understand left/right/up/down/shrink this/move this/rotate
           | this etc.
           | 
           | See below to demonstrate this weakness with the same prompts
           | as the article see the link below, which demonstrates that it
           | is a model weakness and not just a language ambiguity:
           | 
           | https://gemini.google.com/share/a024d11786fc
        
             | ffsm8 wrote:
             | Mmh, ime you need to discard the session/rewrite the
             | failing prompt instead of continuing and correcting on
             | failures. Once errors occur you've basically introduced a
             | poison pill which will continuously make things to haywire.
             | Spelling out what it did wrong is the most destructive
             | thing you can do - at least in my experience
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | Almost no image/video models can do "upside-down" either.
        
             | basch wrote:
             | to the point where you can say, raise the left arm and then
             | raise the right arm and get the same image with the same
             | arm raised.
        
         | jonas21 wrote:
         | I am a human, and I would have done the same thing as Nano
         | Banana. If the user had wanted a strawberry in the skull's left
         | eye, they should've said, "Put a strawberry in _its_ left eye
         | socket. "
        
           | kjeksfjes wrote:
           | Exactly what I was thinking too. I'm a designer, and I'm used
           | to receiving feedback and instructions. "The left eye socket"
           | would to me refer to what I currently see in front of me,
           | while "its left eye socket" instantly shift the perspective
           | from me to the subject.
        
             | bear141 wrote:
             | I find this interesting. I've always described things from
             | the users point of view. Like the left side of a car,
             | regardless of who is looking at it from what direction, is
             | the driver side. To me, this would include a body.
        
               | Jolter wrote:
               | Spend some time at sea, learn why a ship has no right or
               | left side.
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | I admit I missed this, which is particularly embarrassing
         | because I point out this exact problem with the character JSON
         | later in the post.
         | 
         | For some offline character JSON prompts I ended up adding an
         | additional "any mentions of left and right are from the
         | character's perspective, NOT the camera's perspective" to the
         | prompt, which did seem to improve success.
        
           | frumiousirc wrote:
           | The lack of proper indentation (which you noted) in the
           | Python fib() examples was even more apparent. The fact that
           | both AIs you tested failed in the same way is interesting.
           | I've not played with image generation, is this type of
           | failure endemic?
        
             | minimaxir wrote:
             | My hunch in that case is that the composition of the image
             | implied left-justified text which overwrote the indentation
             | rule.
        
         | sib wrote:
         | Came to make exactly the same comment. It was funny that the
         | author specifically said that Nano Banana got all five edit
         | prompts correct, rather than noting this discrepancy, which
         | could be argued either way (although I think the "right eye" of
         | a skull should be interpreted with respect to the skull's POV.)
        
         | zulban wrote:
         | Extroverts tend to expect directions from the perspective of
         | the skull. Introverts tend to expect their own perspective for
         | directions. It's a psychology thing, not an error.
        
       | layer8 wrote:
       | > It's one of the best results I've seen for this particular
       | test, and it's one that doesn't have obvious signs of "AI slop"
       | aside from the ridiculous premise.
       | 
       | It's pretty good, but one conspicuous thing is that most of the
       | blueberries are pointing upwards.
        
       | satvikpendem wrote:
       | For images of people generated from scratch, Nano Banana always
       | adds a background blur, it can't seem to create more realistic or
       | candid images such as those taken via a point and shoot or
       | smartphone, has anyone solved this sort of issue? It seems to
       | work alright if you give it an existing image to edit however. I
       | saw some other threads online about it but I didn't see anyone
       | come up with solutions.
        
         | kridsdale1 wrote:
         | Maybe try including "f/16" or "f/22" as those are likely to be
         | in the training set for long depth of field photos.
        
           | satvikpendem wrote:
           | I tried that but they don't seem to make much difference for
           | whatever reason, you still can't get a crisp shot such as
           | this [0] where the foreground and background details are all
           | preserved (linked shot was taken with an iPhone which doesn't
           | seem to do shallow depth of field unless you use their
           | portrait mode).
           | 
           | [0] https://www.lux.camera/content/images/size/w1600/2024/09/
           | IMG...
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Those are rarely in the captions for the image. They'd have
           | to extract the EXIF for photos and include it in
           | recaptioning. Which they should be doing, but I doubt they
           | thought about it.
        
             | efskap wrote:
             | Photo sites like Flickr do extract EXIF data and show it
             | next to the image, but who knows if the scraping picked
             | them up.
             | 
             | Looks like specific f-stops don't actually make a
             | difference for stable diffusion at least: https://old.reddi
             | t.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1adgcf3/co...
        
       | jdc0589 wrote:
       | I don't feel like I should search for "nano banana" on my work
       | laptop
        
       | insane_dreamer wrote:
       | I haven't paid much attention to image generation models (not my
       | area of interest), but these examples are shockingly good.
        
       | comex wrote:
       | I tried asking for a shot from a live-action remake of My
       | Neighbor Totoro. This is a task I've been curious about for a
       | while. Like Sonic, Totoro is the kind of stylized cartoon
       | character that can't be rendered photorealistically without a
       | great deal of subjective interpretation, which (like in Sonic's
       | case) is famously easy to get wrong even for humans. Unlike
       | Sonic, Totoro hasn't had an actual live-action remake, so the
       | model would have to come up with a design itself. I was wondering
       | what it might produce - something good? something horrifying?
       | Unfortunately, neither; it just produced a digital-art style
       | image, despite being asked for a photorealistic one, and kept
       | doing so even when I copied some of the keyword-stuffing from the
       | post. At least it tried. I can't test this with ChatGPT because
       | it trips the copyright filter.
        
       | roywiggins wrote:
       | Another thing it can't do is remove reflections in windows, it's
       | nearly a no-op.
        
       | sejje wrote:
       | >> "The image style is definitely closer to Vanity Fair (the
       | photographer is reflected in his breastplate!)"
       | 
       | I didn't expect that. I would have definitely counted that as a
       | "probably real" tally mark if grading an image.
        
       | Genego wrote:
       | I have been generating a few dozen images per day for
       | storyboarding purposes. The more I try to perfect it, the easier
       | it becomes to control these outputs and even keep the entire
       | visual story as well as their characters consistent over a few
       | dozen different scenes; while even controlling the time of day
       | throughout the story. I am currently working with 7 layers
       | prompts to control for environment, camera, subject, composition,
       | light, colors and overall quality (it might be overkill, but it's
       | also experimenting).
       | 
       | I also created a small editing suite for myself where I can draw
       | bounding boxes on images when they aren't perfect, and have them
       | fixed. Either just with a prompt or feeding them to Claude as
       | image and then having it write the prompt to fix the issue for me
       | (as a workflow on the api). It's been quite a lot of fun to
       | figure out what works. I am incredibly impressed by where this is
       | all going.
       | 
       | Once you do have good storyboards. You can easily do start-to-end
       | GenAI video generation (hopping from scene to scene) and bring
       | them to life and build your own small visual animated universes.
        
         | taylorhughes wrote:
         | We use nano banana extensively to build video storyboards,
         | which we then turn into full motion video with a combination of
         | img2vid models. It sounds like we're doing similar things,
         | trying to keep images/characters/setting/style consistent
         | across ~dozens of images (~minutes of video). You might like
         | the product depending on what you're doing with the outputs!
         | https://hypernatural.ai
        
           | Genego wrote:
           | Yes we are definitely doing the same! For now I'm just
           | familiarizing myself in this space technically and
           | conceptually. https://edwin.genego.io/blog
        
           | roywiggins wrote:
           | Your "Dracula" character is possibly the least vampiric
           | Dracula I've ever seen tbh
        
             | observationist wrote:
             | I agree. Bruhcula? Something like that. He's a vampire, but
             | also models and does stunts for Baywatch - too much color
             | and vitality. Joan of Arc is way more pale.
             | 
             | Maybe a little mode collapse away from pale ugliness, not
             | quite getting to the hints of unnatural and corpse-like
             | features of a vampire - interesting what the limitations
             | are. You'd probably have to spend quite a lot of time
             | zeroing in, but Google's image models are supposed to have
             | allowed smooth traversal of those feature spaces generally.
        
               | ineedasername wrote:
               | Flux Kontext does pretty well also, for modifications.
               | Though I've otherwise found the Flux models somewhat
               | stubbornly locked into certain compositions at times that
               | requires a control net to break where other models have
               | been more pliable, though with other trade offs.
        
             | Conscat wrote:
             | That looks exactly like the photos on a Spirit Halloween
             | costume.
        
               | HaZeust wrote:
               | People pay consulting firms good money to be told their
               | ideal customer so plainly!
        
               | flir wrote:
               | The Sherlock Holmes is heavily influenced by Cucumber
               | Patch.
        
               | Teelo wrote:
               | I'm in tears. Clicked to check out Dracula and sure
               | enough it's a spot on spirit halloween dollar tree
               | Dracula.
        
             | beepbooptheory wrote:
             | Having a Statue of Liberty character available is for some
             | reason so funny to me.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | Makes a lot of sense for some short kid's skit teaching
               | them about the branches of government or whatever. One
               | could also get more creative with the Statue of Liberty
               | and Joan of Arc.
        
               | happymellon wrote:
               | > Create me a video of Joan of Arc fighting the Statue of
               | Liberty in the style of Shadow of the Colossus.
               | 
               | I see where you are coming from...
        
             | qmmmur wrote:
             | If anything, the ubiquity of AI has just revealed how many
             | people have 0 taste. It also highlights the important role
             | that these human-centred jobs were doing to keep these
             | people from contributing to the surface of any artistic
             | endeavour in "culture".
        
               | prox wrote:
               | There is a reason people (used to) study art and train
               | for years. Easy art is often no art because you need that
               | effort and investment, and learning artistic context, to
               | understand and appreciate.
               | 
               | Which is not to say don't be creative, I applaud all
               | creativity, but also to be very critical of what you are
               | doing.
        
               | bestthrowaway wrote:
               | I've been playing around with T2I/I2V generation to make
               | some NSFW stuff of video-game characters using ComfyUI.
               | 
               | It's pretty easy to get something decent. It's really
               | hard to get something good. I share my creations with
               | some close friends and some are like "that's hot!" but
               | are too fixated on breasts to realize that the lighting
               | or shadow is off. Other friends do call out the bad
               | lighting.
               | 
               | You may be like "it's just porn, why care about
               | consistent lighting?" and the answer for me is that I'm
               | doing all this to learn how everything works. How to fine
               | tune weights, prompts, using IP Adapter, etc. Once I have
               | a firm understanding of this stuff, then I will probably
               | be able to make stuff that's actually useful to society.
               | Unlike that coke commercial.
        
               | sam345 wrote:
               | You can do better than porn which isn't very useful to
               | society.
        
               | CamperBob2 wrote:
               | As opposed to what you're doing at the moment, living
               | your best life here on social media.
        
               | abustamam wrote:
               | I think it's a fair comment though. Porn isn't really
               | useful to society (one could argue that it's actually
               | detrimental to society but that's a separate topic).
               | 
               | But what I understood from parent comment is that they
               | just do it for fun, not necessarily to be a boon to
               | society. And then if it comes with new skills that
               | actually can benefit society, then that's a win.
               | 
               | Granted, the commenter COULD play around with SFW stuff
               | but if they're just doing it for fun then that's still
               | not benefiting society either, so either way it's a wash.
               | We all have fun in our own ways.
        
               | abustamam wrote:
               | Reminds me of that AI coke commercial. I personally
               | didn't notice how shitty it was until I read about it
               | online. (I actually didn't even see the commercial until
               | I read about it online).
               | 
               | But it's impressive that this billion dollar company
               | didn't have one single person say "hey it's shitty, make
               | it better."
        
               | scotty79 wrote:
               | Everything's shitty in its own way. Modern (or even
               | golden age era) movies, with top production values are
               | equivalent of Egyptian wall paintings. They have specific
               | style, specific way to show things. Over the years movie
               | artists just figured out in what specific way the movies
               | should be shitty and the audiences were taught that as a
               | canon.
               | 
               | AI is shitty in its own new unique ways. And people don't
               | like new. They want they old, polished shittiness they
               | are used to.
        
               | abustamam wrote:
               | While I agree that all art is kinda shitty in its own way
               | (IMDB has sections dedicated to breaks in continuity and
               | stuff like that), experienced filmmakers would be good at
               | hiding the shittiness (maybe with a really clever action
               | sequence or something).
               | 
               | It's only a matter of time before we get experienced AI
               | filmmakers. I think we already have them, actually. It's
               | clear that Coke does not employ them though.
        
               | scotty79 wrote:
               | So in the end it turns out that the art was never so much
               | about creativity as about gatekeeping. And "everyone can
               | make art" was just a fake facade, because not really.
        
               | vasco wrote:
               | Everyone can, don't worry, art people are snobs even with
               | their own. Now they can just complain about the plebes
               | doing it wrong ALSO.
        
               | Cthulhu_ wrote:
               | Everyone can make art, but whether it's considered good
               | is another matter.
        
               | DrewADesign wrote:
               | Of course everyone can make art. Toddlers make art. The
               | hard truth is that getting good technical art skills, be
               | they visual, musical, literary, or anything else is like
               | getting stronger-- many people that want to do it are too
               | lazy or undisciplined to do the daily work required to do
               | it. You might be starting too late (Maybe post-middle-
               | age) or don't have the time to become an _exceptional_
               | artist, but most art that people like wasn't made by
               | exceptional artists; there are a lot more strong people
               | than professional athletes or Olympians. You don't even
               | need a gym membership or weights, and there's limitless
               | free information about how to do it online. Nobody is
               | stopping anyone from doing it. Just like many, if not
               | most gym memberships are paid for but unused after the
               | first, like, month, many people try drawing for a little
               | while, get frustrated that it's so difficult to learn,
               | and then give up. The gatekeeping argument is an asinine
               | excuse people make to blame other people for their own
               | lack of discipline.
        
               | scotty79 wrote:
               | > Of course everyone can make art. Toddlers make art.
               | 
               | That's my entire point. Artists were fine with everybody
               | making "art" as long as everybody except them (with their
               | hard fought skill and dedication) achieved toddler level
               | of output quality. As soon as everybody could truly get
               | even close to the level of actual art, not toddler art,
               | suddenly there's a horrible problem with all the amateur
               | artists using the tools that are available to them to
               | make their "toddler" art.
        
               | cvwright wrote:
               | Well but then they spent 100 years telling us that the
               | toddler stuff was the good stuff. Just as long as it was
               | created by a "real artist".
        
               | DrewADesign wrote:
               | Most artists don't give a flying fuck about what you do
               | on your own. Seriously! They really don't. What they care
               | about is having their work ripped off so for-profit
               | companies can kill the market for their hard-won skills
               | with munged-up derivatives.
               | 
               | Folks in tech generally have very limited exposure to the
               | art world -- fan art communities online, Reddit subs,
               | YouTubers, etc. It's more representative of internet
               | culture than the art world-- no more representative of
               | artists than X politics is representative of voters.
               | People have real grievances here and you are not a victim
               | of the world's artists. Most artists also don't care
               | about online art communities or what you think about
               | them. Not even a little bit.
        
               | scotty79 wrote:
               | > you are not a victim of the world's artists
               | 
               | I will be if they manage to slow down development of AI
               | even by a smidgen.
               | 
               | > Most artists also don't care about online art
               | communities or what you think about them. Not even a
               | little bit.
               | 
               | Fully agree. They care about whether there's going to be
               | anyone willing to buy their stuff from them. And not-
               | toddler art is a real competition for them. So they are
               | super against everybody making it.
        
               | DrewADesign wrote:
               | Well drat, you've exposed all of us as petty,
               | transactional rakes. Fortunately, _everyone_ is an artist
               | now, so you can make your own output to feed to models
               | and leave our work out of it entirely! It clearly has no
               | value so nobody should be mad about going without it.
               | Problem solved!
        
               | KineticLensman wrote:
               | Classic gatekeeping quote: "Everyone has a book in them,
               | but in most cases that's where it should stay"
        
               | CamperBob2 wrote:
               | I prefer Stephen King's version: something like
               | "Everybody has four crappy books in them. Get them done
               | and out of the way as soon as possible."
        
               | friendzis wrote:
               | The ubiquity of AI has just revealed that there are tons
               | of grifters willing to release the sloppiest thing ever
               | if they thought it could make some money. They would
               | refrain from that if they had at least a glimmer of
               | taste.
        
               | Libidinalecon wrote:
               | It is really no different than music. Millions of people
               | play guitar but most are not worth listening to or
               | deserving of an audience.
               | 
               | Imagine if you gave everyone a free guitar and people
               | just started posting their electric guitar noodlings on
               | social media after playing for 5 minutes.
               | 
               | It is not a judgement on the guitar. If anything it is a
               | judgement on social media and the stupidity of the social
               | media user who get worked up about someone creating
               | "slop" after playing guitar for 5 minutes.
               | 
               | What did you expect them to sound like, Steve Vai?
        
             | tincholio wrote:
             | He looks like Dracula on LinkedIn
        
           | nolroz wrote:
           | The website lets you type in an entire prompt, then tells you
           | to login, then dumps your prompt and leaves you with nothing.
           | Lame.
        
             | scotty79 wrote:
             | I noticed ChatGPT and others do exactly the same once you
             | run out of anonymous usage. Insanely annoying.
        
               | jdhjn6hhh wrote:
               | Hn does that too. You've typed out a long response, oh
               | sorry you're posting too fast. Please slow down.
               | 
               | It's intentionally hostile and inconsiderate.
        
               | setr wrote:
               | You don't lose the message though, so it's infinitely
               | less annoying
        
               | ta12653421 wrote:
               | Rule #1 when typing longer texts into webforms/textboxes:
               | ALWAYS do a CTRL+C before you click submit.
        
               | idiotsecant wrote:
               | That's because you're in the bad user doghouse.
        
               | insane_dreamer wrote:
               | At least on HN you can Go Back in your browser and
               | restore the page before submission with your post in the
               | box.
               | 
               | But it would be _much_ better if when you hit reply, it
               | gave you a message that you're "posting too fast" before
               | you spend the time to write it up.
        
         | nashadelic wrote:
         | > The more I try to perfect it, the easier it becomes I have
         | the opposite experience, once it goes off track, its nearly
         | impossible to bring it back on message
        
           | Genego wrote:
           | How much have you experimented with it? For some stories I
           | may generate 5 image variations of 10-20 different scenes and
           | then spend time writing down what worked and what did not;
           | and running the generation again (this part is mostly for
           | research). It's certainly advancing my understanding over
           | time and being able to control the output better. But I'm
           | learning that it takes a huge amount of trial and error. So
           | versioning prompts is definitely recommended, especially if
           | you find some nuances that work for you.
        
         | brulard wrote:
         | That sounds intriguing. 7 layers - do you mean its one prompt
         | composed of 7 parts, like different paragraphs for each aspect?
         | How do you send bounding box info to banana? Does it understand
         | something like that? What does claude add to that process?
         | Makes your prompt more refined? Thanks
        
           | Genego wrote:
           | Yes, the prompt is composed of 7 different layers, where I
           | group together coherent visual and temporal responsibilities.
           | Depending on the scene, I usually only change 3-5 layers, but
           | the base layers still stay the same; so the scenes all appear
           | within the same story universe and same style. If something
           | feels off, or feels like it needs to be improved, I just
           | adjust one layer after the other to experiment with the
           | results on the entire story, but also on individual scene
           | level. Over time, I have created quite some 7-Layer style
           | profiles, that work well, and I can cast onto different story
           | universes. Keep in mind this is heavy experimentation, it may
           | just be that there is a much easier way to do this, but I am
           | seeing success with this. https://edwin.genego.io/blog/lpa-
           | studio - at any point I may throw this all out and start
           | over; depending on how well my understanding of this all
           | develops.
           | 
           | Bounding boxes: I actually send an image with a red box
           | around where the requested change is needed. And 8 out of 10
           | times it works well. But if it doesn't work, I use Claude to
           | make the prompt more refined. The Claude API call that I
           | make, can see the image + the prompt, as well understanding
           | the layering system. This is one of the 3 ways I edit, there
           | is another one where I just sent the prompt to Claude without
           | it looking at the image. Right now this all feels like dial-
           | up. With a minimum of 0.035$ per image generation (0.0001$ if
           | I just use a LoRa though) and a minimum of 12-14 seconds wait
           | on each edit/generation.
        
             | yard2010 wrote:
             | This is beautiful and inspiring, This is exactly what we
             | need right now - tools to empower artists and builders
             | leveraging the novel technologies. Claude Code is a great
             | example IMHO and it's the tip of the iceberg - the future
             | consists of a whole new world, new mental model and set of
             | constraints and capabilities, so different that I can't
             | really imagine it.
             | 
             | Who has thought that we reach this uncharted territory with
             | so many opportunities for pioneering and innovation? Back
             | in 2019 it felt like nothing was new under the sun, today
             | it feels like there is a whole new world under the sun, for
             | us to explore!
        
         | weq wrote:
         | I dont get how these tools are considered good when they cant
         | even do a simple thing decribing this scene.
         | 
         | > i was to bring awareness to the dangers of dressing up like a
         | seal while surfboarding (ie. wearing black wetsuites, arms
         | hanging over the board). Create a scene from the perspective of
         | a shark looking up from the bottom of the ocean into a clear
         | blue sky with silhouettes of a seal and a surfer and fishing
         | boat with line dangling in the water and show how the shark
         | contemplates attacking all these objects because they look so
         | similiar.
         | 
         | I havnt found a model yet that can process that description, or
         | any varition, into a scene that usable and makes sense visually
         | to anyone older the a 1st grader. They will never place the
         | seal, surfer, shark or boat in the correct location to make
         | sense visually. Typically everyone is under water, sizing of
         | everything is wrong. You tell them to the image is wrong, to
         | place the person ontop of the water, and they cant. Please can
         | someone link to a model that is capable or tell me what i am
         | doing wrong? How can you claim to process words into images in
         | a repeatable way when these systems cant deal with multiple
         | contraints at once?
        
         | vunderba wrote:
         | _> I also created a small editing suite for myself where I can
         | draw bounding boxes on images when they aren't perfect, and
         | have them fixed. Either just with a prompt or feeding them to
         | Claude as image and then having it write the prompt to fix the
         | issue for me (as a workflow on the api)_
         | 
         | Are you talking about Automatic1111 / ComfyUI inpainting masks?
         | Because Nano doesn't accept bounding boxes as part of its API
         | unless you just stuffed the literal X/Y coordinates into the
         | raw prompt.
         | 
         | You could do something where you draw a bounding box and when
         | you get the response back from Nano, you could mask that
         | section back back over the original image - using a decent
         | upscaler as necessary in the event that Nano had to reduce the
         | size of the original image down to ~1MP.
        
           | rcarr wrote:
           | You can literally just open the image up in Preview or
           | whatever and add a red box, circle etc and then say "in the
           | area with the red square make change foo" and it will
           | normally get rid of the red box on the generated image.
           | Whether or not it actually makes the change you want to see
           | is another matter though. It's been very hit or miss for me.
        
             | vunderba wrote:
             | Yeah I could see that being useful if there were a lot of
             | similar elements in the same image.
             | 
             | I also had similar _mixed_ results wrt Nano-banana
             | especially around asking it to "fix /restore" things (a
             | character's hand was an anatomical mess for example)
        
           | Genego wrote:
           | No I am using my own workflows and software for this. I made
           | nano-banana accept my bounding boxes. Everything is possible
           | with some good prompting: https://edwin.genego.io/blog/lpa-
           | studio < there are some videos of an earlier version there
           | while I am editing a story. Either send the coords and
           | describe the location well, or draw a box around the bb and
           | tell it to return the image without the drawn bb, and only
           | the requested changes.
           | 
           | It also works well if you draw a bb on the original image,
           | then ask Claude for a meta-prompt to deconstruct the changes
           | into a much more detailed prompt, and then send the original
           | image without the bbs for changes. It really depends on the
           | changes you need, and how long you're willing to wait.
           | 
           | - normal image editing response: 12-14s
           | 
           | - image editing response with Claude meta-prompting: 20-25s
           | 
           | - image editing response with Claude meta-prompting as well
           | as image deconstructing and re-constructing the prompt:
           | 40-60s
           | 
           | (I use Replicate though, so the actual API may be much
           | faster).
           | 
           | This way you can also go into new views of a scene by zooming
           | in and out the image on the same aspect-ratio canvas, and
           | asking it to generatively fill the white borders around. So
           | you can go from an tight inside shot, to viewing the same
           | scene from outside of an house window. Or from inside the
           | car, to outside the car.
        
             | vunderba wrote:
             | Thanks, that makes sense. I'll have to give the "red
             | bounding box overlay" a shot when there are a great deal of
             | similar objects in the existing image.
             | 
             | I also have a custom pipeline/software that takes in a
             | given prompt, rewrites it using an LLM into multiple
             | variations, sends it to multiple GenAI models, and then
             | uses a VLM to evaluate them for accuracy. It runs in an
             | automated REPL style, so I can be relatively hands-off,
             | though I do have a _" max loop limiter"_ since I'd rather
             | not spend the equivalent of a small country's GDP.
        
         | gassi wrote:
         | > Once you do have good storyboards. You can easily do start-
         | to-end GenAI video generation (hopping from scene to scene) and
         | bring them to life and build your own small visual animated
         | universes.
         | 
         | I keep hearing advocates of AI video generation talking at
         | length about how easy the tools are to use and how great the
         | results are, but I've yet to see anyone produce something
         | meaningful that's coherent, consistent, and doesn't look like
         | total slop.
        
           | scotty79 wrote:
           | You'll have to wait for actual talented artists to start
           | using these tools.
        
             | timc3 wrote:
             | I don't think that is the problem (as someone that has been
             | described in that bracket), it's the tooling and control
             | that is missing. I believe that will be solved over time.
        
             | gassi wrote:
             | Almost every talented artist with a public presence that
             | has spoken on AI art, has spoken against it's generation,
             | the use of AI tools, and the harm it's causing to their
             | communities. The few established artists who are proponents
             | of AI art (Lioba Brueckner comes to mind) have a
             | financially incentive to do so, since they sell tools or
             | courses teaching others with less/no talent to do the same.
        
               | CamperBob2 wrote:
               | Art, like science, advances one funeral at a time.
        
               | Larrikin wrote:
               | The tools aren't going anywhere. Fans were outraged at
               | the look and artists raged against the transition from
               | cel animation to digital. Almost nothing serious is
               | produced via cel now and the art adjusted by making
               | extremely complex and beautiful art that couldn't have
               | been done on cels.
               | 
               | There's a real legal fight that needs to go on right now
               | about these companies stealing style, voices, likeness,
               | etc. But it's really beginning to feel like there's a
               | generation of artists that are hampering their career by
               | saying they are above it instead of using the tools to
               | enhance their art to create things they otherwise
               | couldn't.
               | 
               | I see kids in high school using the tools like how I used
               | Photoshop when I was younger. I see unemployed/under
               | employed designers lamenting what the tools have done.
        
               | scotty79 wrote:
               | Why didn't you mention financial incentives of many
               | outspoken critics of AI? They feel like their entire
               | livelyhood depends on AI failing. I'd say that's a pretty
               | strong financial incentive.
        
               | Genego wrote:
               | The issue for them is that once the tools exists,
               | adoption only moves in one direction. And it will enable
               | a whole wave of new artists. I sympathize with them, but
               | if I enjoy GenAI art creation and see it as my genuine
               | creative outlet, why would I stop? What about thousands
               | of others exploring this?
               | 
               | If at some point I also get very good at it; and the
               | tech, models and tools mature, this will turn into a real
               | avenue; who are they to tell us not to pursue it?
        
           | DrSiemer wrote:
           | Bots in the Hall. Neural Viz. The Meat Dept video for
           | Igorrr's ADHD. More will come.
           | 
           | You need talented people to make good stuff, but at this time
           | most of them still fear the new tools.
        
             | gassi wrote:
             | I watched the most popular and most recent videos of each
             | channel to compare, and they were all awful:
             | 
             | > Bots in the Hall
             | 
             | * voices don't match the mouth movements * mouth movements
             | are poorly animated * hand/body movements are "fuzzy" with
             | weird artifacts * characters stare in the wrong direction
             | when talking * characters never move * no scenes over 3
             | seconds in length between cuts
             | 
             | > Neural Viz
             | 
             | * animations and backgrounds are dull * mouth movements are
             | uncanny * "dead eyes" when showing any emotions * text and
             | icons are poorly rendered
             | 
             | > The Meat Dept video for Igorrr's ADHD
             | 
             | This one I can excuse a bit since it's a music video, and
             | for the sake of "artistic interpretation", but:
             | 
             | * continuation issues between shots * inconsistent visual
             | style across shots * no shots longer then 4 seconds between
             | cuts * rendered text is illegible/nonsensical * movement
             | artifacts
        
       | BeetleB wrote:
       | Nano Banana can be frustrating at times. Yesterday I tried to get
       | it to do several edits to an image, and it would return back
       | pretty much the same photo.
       | 
       | Things like: Convert the people to clay figures similar to what
       | one would see in a claymation.
       | 
       | And it would think it did it, but I could not perceive any
       | change.
       | 
       | After several attempts, I added "Make the person 10 years
       | younger". Suddenly it made a clay figure of the person.
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | The first request is a style transfer, which is why I included
         | the Ghibli failure example.
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | I've gotten it to make Ghibli transfers by responding to the
           | initial attempt with "I can barely tell the difference. Make
           | the effect STRONGER."
        
             | mh- wrote:
             | In my experience, once it starts interpreting your request
             | incorrectly, you're better off starting with fresh context.
        
       | Der_Einzige wrote:
       | I really wish that real expert stuff, like how to do controlnet,
       | use regional prompting, or most other advanced ComfyUI stuff got
       | upvoted to the top instead.
        
       | tomalbrc wrote:
       | Cute. What's the use case?
        
         | qayxc wrote:
         | NSFW, mostly
        
       | AuthError wrote:
       | use it for technical design doc, where i sketch out something on
       | paper and ask nano banana to make flow chat, its incredibly good
       | at this kind of editing (also if want to borrow image from
       | someone and change some bridges usually its hard its embedded
       | image, but nano banana solves that)
        
       | 4b11b4 wrote:
       | I found this well written. I read it start to finish. The author
       | does a good job of taking you through their process
        
       | smerrill25 wrote:
       | Created a tool you can try out!! sorry to self-plug but I launch
       | on Product Hunt next week that lets you do this:)
       | 
       | www.brandimagegen.com
       | 
       | if you want a premium account to try out, you can find my email
       | in my bio!!
        
       | icemelt8 wrote:
       | how did you do NSFW?
        
       | vunderba wrote:
       | Good read minimaxir! From the article:
       | 
       |  _> Nano Banana supports a context window of 32,768 tokens:
       | orders of magnitude above T5's 512 tokens and CLIP's 77 tokens._
       | 
       | In my pipeline for generating highly complicated images
       | (particularly comics [1]), I take advantage of this by sticking a
       | Mistral 7b LLM in-between that takes a given prompt as an input
       | and creates 4 variations of it before sending them all out.
       | 
       |  _> Surprisingly, Nano Banana is terrible at style transfer even
       | with prompt engineering shenanigans, which is not the case with
       | any other modern image editing model._
       | 
       | This is true - though I find it works better by providing a
       | minimum of two images. The first image is intended to be
       | transformed, and the second image is used as "stylistic aesthetic
       | reference". This doesn't always work since you're still bound by
       | the original training data, but it is sometimes more effective
       | than attempting to type out a long flavor text description of the
       | style.
       | 
       | [1] - https://mordenstar.com/portfolio/zeno-paradox
        
         | junon wrote:
         | It might also be an explicit guard against Studio Ghibli
         | specifically after the "make me Ghibli" trend a while back,
         | which upset Studio Ghibli (understandably so).
        
           | minimaxir wrote:
           | It happens with other styles. The demo documentation example
           | which attempts to transfer an image into the very-public-
           | domain Starry Night by Van Gogh doesn't do a true style
           | transfer: https://x.com/minimaxir/status/1963429027382694264
        
             | junon wrote:
             | Ah interesting! Thanks for the clarification. Great article
             | :)
        
       | empressplay wrote:
       | This article was a good read, but the writer doesn't seem to
       | understand how model-based image generation actually works, using
       | language that suggests the image is somehow progressively
       | constructed the way a human would do it. Which is absurd.
       | 
       | I've noticed a lot of this misinformation floating around lately,
       | and I can't help but wonder if it's intentional?
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | I'm not sure what you're implying is incorrect/misleading. As
         | noted in the post, autoregressive models like Nano Banana and
         | gpt-image-1 generate by token (and each generated token attends
         | to all previous tokens, both text and image) which are then
         | decoded, while diffusion models generate the entire image
         | simultaneously, refined over _n_ iteration steps.
        
       | achatham wrote:
       | My personal project is illustrating arbitrary stories with
       | consistent characters and settings. I've rewritten it at least 5
       | times, and Nano Banana has been a game-changer. My kids are
       | willing to listen to much more sophisticated stories as long as
       | it has pictures, so I've used it to illustrate text like Ender's
       | Game. Unfortunately, it's getting harder to legally acquire books
       | in a format you can feed to an LLM.
       | 
       | I first extract all the entities from the text, generate
       | characters from an art style, and then start stitching them
       | together into individual illustrations. It works _much_ better
       | with NB than anything else I tried before.
        
         | squigz wrote:
         | > so I've used it to illustrate text like Ender's Game
         | 
         | That sounds interesting. Could you share?
        
       | sigspec wrote:
       | regarding buzzword usage
       | 
       | "YOU WILL BE PENALIZED FOR USING THEM"
       | 
       | That is disconcerting.
        
       | sixhobbits wrote:
       | It's really nice to see long-form, obviously human-written blogs
       | from people deep into the LLM space - maybe us writers will be
       | around for a while still in spite of all the people saying we've
       | been replaced.
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | I've started increasing the number of jokes in my blog posts to
         | make it sound more obviously human-written: to be honest I was
         | expecting some "why is this so unserious" complaints.
        
           | sixhobbits wrote:
           | Can't make everyone happy!
        
           | baxtr wrote:
           | In other words: you show your "personality".
           | 
           | AI can't do that (yet?).
        
         | debesyla wrote:
         | Kinda like paper newspapers. In some ways it's "not optimal",
         | but in many ways it's irreplaceable.
        
       | Bromeo wrote:
       | This works with the openrouter API as well, which skips having to
       | make a google account etc. Here's a Claude-coded openrouter
       | compatible adaptation which seems to work fine:
       | https://github.com/RomeoV/gemimg
       | 
       | A 1024x1024 image seems to cost about 3ct to generate.
        
       | Psype wrote:
       | That article says that most image generators had been over-
       | shadowed by gpt.
       | 
       | Yet when I ask some simple tasks to it, like doing a 16:9 picture
       | sized image instead of a square one, it ends up doing a 16:9 on a
       | white background that matches a square.
       | 
       | When I ask it to make it with text, then on the second request to
       | redo while changing just a certain visual element, it ends up
       | breaking the previously asked text.
       | 
       | It's getting more good at flattering people and telling them how
       | clever and right they are than actually doing the task.
        
         | Miraltar wrote:
         | It doesn't say that gpt is better, just that it is more popular
        
         | Ylpertnodi wrote:
         | > It's getting more good at flattering people and telling them
         | how clever and right they are than actually doing the task.
         | 
         | Not (knowingly) used an llm for a long time. Is the above true?
        
           | jamesthurley wrote:
           | Nope
        
       | James_K wrote:
       | Perhaps I'm childish, but nano banana = tiny penis.
        
       | kuu wrote:
       | It was very interesting, I liked your style of explaining both at
       | user level but also at more technical level.
       | 
       | Very cool post, thanks for sharing!
        
       | sd9 wrote:
       | > Nano Banana supports a context window of 32,768 tokens: orders
       | of magnitude above T5's 512 tokens and CLIP's 77 tokens.
       | 
       | I had no idea that the context window was so large. I'd been
       | instinctively keeping my prompts small because of experience with
       | other models. I'm going to try much more detailed prompts now!
        
       | skeptrune wrote:
       | I need to give this a shot for turning written stories into
       | comics. Seems like the technology is finally there.
        
       | d4rkp4ttern wrote:
       | Photo-realism is great but the real step-jump in image-gen I'm
       | looking for is the ability to draw high quality technical
       | diagrams with a mix of text and images, so I can stop having LLMs
       | generate crappy diagrams with mermaid, SVG, HTML/CSS, draw.io
        
       | Twelveday wrote:
       | Great post with some nice insights I could've used a few days
       | ago!
       | 
       | I was trying to create a simple "mascot logo" for my pet project.
       | I first created an account on Kittl [0] and even paid for one
       | month but it was quite cumbersome to generate images until I
       | figured out I could just use the nano banana api myself.
       | 
       | Took me 4 prompts to ai-slop a small python script I could run
       | with uv that would generate me a specified amount of images with
       | a given prompt (where I discovered some of the insight the author
       | shows in their post). The resulting logo [1] was pretty much what
       | I imagined. I manually added some text and played around with
       | hue/saturation in Kittl (since I already paid for it :)) et
       | voila.
       | 
       | Feeding back the logo to iterate over it worked pretty nicely and
       | it even spit out an "abstract version" [2] of the logo for
       | favicons and stuff without a lot of effort.
       | 
       | All in all this took me 2 hours and around 2$ (excluding the 1
       | month Kittl subscription) and I would've never been able to draw
       | something like that in Illustrator or similar.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.kittl.com/ [1]
       | https://github.com/sidneywidmer/yass/blob/master/client/publ...
       | [2]
       | https://github.com/sidneywidmer/yass/blob/master/client/publ...
        
       | slightknack wrote:
       | The minimaxir/gemimg repo is pretty cool, fwiw.
       | 
       | Going further, one thing you can do is give Gemini 2.5 a system
       | prompt like the following:
       | 
       | https://goto.isaac.sh/image-prompt
       | 
       | And then pass Gemini 2.5's output directly to Nano-Banana. Doing
       | this yields very high-quality images. This is also good for style
       | transfer and image combination. For example, if you then give
       | Gemini 2.5 a user prompt that looks something like this:
       | I would like to perform style transfer. I will provide the image
       | generation model a photograph alongside your generated prompt.
       | Please write a prompt to transfer the following style: {{ brief
       | style description here }}.
       | 
       | You can get aesthetic consistently-styled images, like these:
       | 
       | https://goto.isaac.sh/image-style-transfer
        
       | skocznymroczny wrote:
       | I like to use these AI models for generating mockup screenshots
       | of game. I can drop a "create a mockup screenshot of a steampunk
       | 2D platformer in which you play as a robot" and it will give me
       | some interesting screenshot. Then I can ask it to iterate on the
       | style. Of course it's going to be broken in some ways and it's
       | not even real pixel art, but it gives a good reference to quickly
       | brainstorm some ideas.
       | 
       | Unfortunately I have to use ChatGPT for this, for some reason
       | local models don't do well with such tasks. I don't know if it's
       | just the extra prompting sauce that ChatGPT does or just
       | diffusion models aren't well designed for these kind of tasks.
        
       | AgentMatt wrote:
       | Great article!
       | 
       | Regarding the generated cat image:
       | 
       | > Each and every rule specified is followed.
       | 
       | Not quite; the eye color and heterochromia is followed only so-
       | so.
       | 
       | The black-and-silver cat seems to have no heterochromia; eye
       | color could be interpreted as silver though.
       | 
       | The white-and-gold cat _does_ have heterochromia. The colors can
       | be interpreted as "white" and "gold", though I'd describe them as
       | whitish-blue and orange. What's interesting about this is an
       | adjustment of the instructions toward biologically more plausible
       | eye colors in the cat which also has more natural fur colors.
       | 
       | The last cat's fur colors are so "implausible" that the model
       | doesn't seem to have problems taking exactly those colors for the
       | (heterochromatic) eyes too!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-14 23:01 UTC)