GPT Image 1.5

Ludicrously unnecessary nitpick for "Remove all the brown pieces of candy from the glass bowl":

> Gemini 2.5 Flash - 18 attempts - No matter what we tried, Gemini 2.5 Flash always seemed to just generate an entirely new assortment of candies rather than just removing the brown ones.

The way I read the prompt, it demands that the candies should change arrangement. You didn't say "change the brown candies to a different color", you said "remove them". You can infer from the few brown ones that you can see that there are even more underneath - surely if you removed them all (even just by magically disappearing them) then the others would tumble down into a new location? The level of the candies is lower than before you started, which is what you'd expect if you remove some. Maybe it's just coincidence, but maybe this really was its reasoning. (It did unnecessarily remove the red candy from the hand though.)

I don't think any of the "passes" did as well as this, including Gemini 3.0 Pro Image. Qwen-Image-Edit did at least literally remove one of the three visible brown candies, but just recolored the other two.

Maybe everyone has a different dose of skepticism. Personally I'm not even looking at results for models that were released after the benchmark, for all this tells us, they might as well be one-trick ponies that only do well in the benchmark.

It might be too much work, but one possible "correct" approach for this kind of benchmark would to periodically release new benchmarks with new tests (that are broadly in the same categories) and only include models that predate each benchmark.

What a prompt and image.

Out of curiosity why does gemini get gold for the poker example but gpt-image 1.5 does not? I couldn't see a difference between the two.

I edited the original "Lord of War" poster with a reference image of Jensen and replaced bullets with GPU dies, silicon wafers and electronic components.

https://x.com/singhkays/status/2001080165435113791

Personal request: could you also advocate for "image previz rendering", which I feel is an extremely compelling use case for these companies to develop. Basically any 2d/3d compositor that allows you to visually block out a scene, then rely on the model to precisely position the set, set pieces, and character poses.

If we got this task onto benchmarks, the companies would absolutely start training their models to perform well at it.

Here are some examples:

gpt-image-1 absolutely excels at this, though you don't have much control over the style and aesthetic:

https://imgur.com/gallery/previz-to-image-gpt-image-1-x8t1ij...

Nano Banana (Pro) fails at this task:

https://imgur.com/a/previz-to-image-nano-banana-pro-Q2B8psd

Flux Kontext, Qwen, etc. have mixed results.

I'm going to re-run these under gpt-image-1.5 and report back.

Edit:

gpt-image-1.5 :

https://imgur.com/a/previz-to-image-gpt-image-1-5-3fq042U

And just as I finish this, Imgur deletes my original gpt-image-1 post.

Old link (broken): https://imgur.com/a/previz-to-image-gpt-image-1-Jq5M2Mh

Hopefully imgur doesn't break these. I'll have to start blogging and keep these somewhere I control.

10 years ago I would have considered that sentence satire. Now it allegedly means something.

Somehow it feels like we’re moving backwards.

https://mordenstar.com/blog/edits-with-nanobanana

In particular, NB Pro successfully assembled a jigsaw puzzle it had never seen before, generated semi-accurate 3D topographical extrapolations, and even swapped a window out for a mirror.

Also: SUPER ANNOYING. It seems every time you give it a modification prompt it erases the whole conversation leading up to the new pic? Like.. all the old edits vanish??

I added "shaky amateur badly composed crappy smartphone photo of ____" to the start of my prompts to make them look more natural.

Counterpoint from someone on the Musk site: https://x.com/flowersslop/status/2001007971292332520

One thing that gpt-image-1 does exceptionally well that Nano Banana (Pro) can't is previz-to-render. This is actually an incredibly useful capability.

The Nano Banana models take the low-fidelity previz elements/stand-ins and unfortunately keep the elements in place without attempting to "upscale" them. The model tries to preserve every mistake and detail verbatim.

Gpt-image-1, on the other hand, understands the layout and blocking of the scene, the pose of human characters, and will literally repair and upscale everything.

Here's a few examples:

- 3D + Posing + Blocking: https://youtu.be/QYVgNNJP6Vc

- Again, but with more set re-use: https://youtu.be/QMyueowqfhg

- Gaussian splats: https://youtu.be/iD999naQq9A

- Gaussians again: https://youtu.be/IxmjzRm1xHI

We need models that can do what gpt-image-1 does above, but that have higher quality, better stylistic control, faster speed, and that can take style references (eg. glossy Midjourney images).

Nano Banana team: please grow these capabilities.

Adobe is testing and building some really cool capabilities:

- Relighting scenes: https://youtu.be/YqAAFX1XXY8?si=DG6ODYZXInb0Ckvc&t=211

- Image -> 3D editing: https://youtu.be/BLxFn_BFB5c?si=GJg12gU5gFU9ZpVc&t=185 (payoff is at 3:54)

- Image -> Gaussian -> Gaussian editing: https://youtu.be/z3lHAahgpRk?si=XwSouqEJUFhC44TP&t=285

- 3D -> image with semantic tags: https://youtu.be/z275i_6jDPc?si=2HaatjXOEk3lHeW-&t=443

I'm trying to build the exact same things that they are, except as open source / source available local desktop tools that we can own. Gives me an outlet to write Rust, too.

Air gap. If you don’t want content to be used without your permission, it never leaves your computer. This is the only protection that works.

If you want others to see your content, however, you have to accept some degree of trade off with it being misappropriated. Blatant cases can be addressed the same as they always were, but a model overfitting to your original work poses an interesting question for which I’m not aware of any legal precedents having been set yet.

There seems to be no other way (apart from air-gapping everything, as others say).

Question: Now that the steamboats have been invented, how do I keep my clipper business afloat ?

Answer: Good riddance to the broken idea of IP, Schumpeter's Gale is around the corner, time for a new business model.

Back in reality, you can get in line to sue. Since they have more money than you, you can't really win though.

So it goes.

I can tell you with 100% certainty they are not. For example, Crash doesn't have a backside for his torso. You could definitely make a model that uses these as textures, but you'd really have to force it and a lot of it would be stretched or look weird. If you want to go this approach, it would make a lot more sense to make a model, unwrap it, and use the wireframe UV map as input.

Here's the original Crash model: https://models.spriters-resource.com/pc_computer/crashbandic... , its actual texture is nothing like the generated one, because the real one was designed for efficiency.

also in the tweet

> GPT Image 1.5 is **ing crazy

and

> holy shit lol

what's impressive if you don't know if it's right or not (as the other comment pointed out, it is not right)

My own main use cases are entirely textual: Programming, Wiki, and Mathematics.

I almost never use image generation for anything. However its objectively extremely popular.

This has strong parallels for me to when snapchat filters became super popular. I know lots of people loved editing and filtering pictures but I always left everything as auto mode, in fact I'd turn off a lot of the default beauty filters. It just never appealed to me.

In late stage capitalism you pay for fake photos with someone. You have chat gpt write about how you dated for a summer, and have it end with them leaving for grad school to explain why you aren't together.

Eventually we'll all just pay to live in the matrix. When your credit card is declined you'll be logged out, to awaken in a shared studio apartment. To eat your rations.

At the least, it's not present in these new images.

They forgot to calibrate the cameras, so everything had a green tint.

Meanwhile all the other teams had a billion macbeth charts lying around just in case.

And I say "subtle" - but because that model would always "regenerate" an image when editing, it would introduce more and more of this yellow tint with each tweak or edit. Which has a way of making a "subtle" bias anything but.

That is, it's nice to make a pretty stand-alone image, but without tools to maintain consistency and place them in context you can't make a project that is more than just one image, or one video, or a scattered and disconnected sequence of pieces.

  POST "https://api.openai.com/v1/responses": 500 Internal Server Error {
    "message": "An error occurred while processing your request. You can retry your request, or contact us through our help center at help.openai.com if the error persists. Please include the request ID req_******************* in your message.",
    "type": "server_error",
    "param": null,
    "code": "server_error"
  }

  POST "https://api.openai.com/v1/responses": 400 Bad Request {
    "message": "Invalid value: 'blah'. Supported values are: 'gpt-image-1' and 'gpt-image-1-mini'.",
    "type": "invalid_request_error",
    "param": "tools[0].model",
    "code": "invalid_value"
  }

Now it means whoever has access to uncensored/non-watermarking models can pass off their faked images as real and claim, "Look! There's no watermark, of course, it's not fake!"

Whereas, if none of the image models did watermarking, then people (should) inherently know nothing can be trusted by default.

It doesn't mention the new model, but it's likely the same or similar.

$ exiftool chatgpt_image.png

...

Actions Software Agent Name : GPT-4o

Actions Digital Source Type : http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgori...

Name : jumbf manifest

Alg : sha256

Hash : (Binary data 32 bytes, use -b option to extract)

Pad : (Binary data 8 bytes, use -b option to extract)

Claim Generator Info Name : ChatGPT

...

I'd especially say like 100% of amateur political infographics/memes are wrong. ("climate change is caused by 100 companies" for instance)

This tool is keeping my look the same.

My own profile picture? Can’t edit some public figures. A famous Norman Rockwell painting from 80 years ago? Can’t edit some public figures.

Safety’d into oblivion.

hopefully this leads to greater importance of seeing things with your own wetware.

I'm not saying this as a critique against image generation as you can manually make these fake images but yeah

Ultimately I think it's good, makes people be real

A professional artist wouldn't know what you want.

You didn't even specify an art style. 1970s sci-fi novel cover isn't a style. You'll find vastly different art styles from the 70s. If you're disappointed, it's because you're doing a shitty job describing what's in your head. If your prompt isn't at least a paragraph, you're going to just get random generic results.

we have the capability, we just stopped making power more abundant.

https://x.com/coldhealing/status/1747270233306644560

I'm honestly surprised they're still on this post-Sora 2: let the consumer of the API determine their risk appetite. If a copyright holder comes knocking, "the API did it" isn't going to be a defense either way.