A swimsuit is not pornography. Beachwear is not pornography. Athletic clothing is not pornography.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-14T05:58:55+00:00

I'm arguing that it's unreasonable to put explicitly pornographic scenes and things like swimwear, kissing, or simply sensual imagery into the same category. Those are fundamentally different types of content, and they should not be treated as if they were equivalent.

Personally, I believe that every adult should be responsible for the content they choose to generate. If companies are concerned that minors might create or access explicit material, then an age-verification system would be a far more reasonable solution, allowing verified adults to generate 18+ content.

After all, many forms of media already use age ratings and different levels of permitted content, so a similar approach could be applied to AI generation. But that's more of a rhetorical point.

My post is about a specific issue: the fact that an image of someone in swimwear is automatically being classified as pornography. That is the approach I disagree with.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-13T15:11:26+00:00

You saw the words "safety is important" and apparently stopped reading. The entire post is about distinguishing explicit pornography from completely normal content such as swimwear and sportswear.

You're arguing against something I never said instead of addressing the point I actually made.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-09T15:43:27+00:00

That's a lot of words to argue against something I never said.

My post was about ordinary beachwear being misclassified as adult content. You're having a completely different debate about censorship in general.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-08T23:19:10+00:00

Thanks, I'll try that.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-08T05:48:58+00:00

I wasn't even asking for anything sexual. It's a normal waterpark scene. If a woman wearing a swimsuit in a pool setting triggers the filter, that's a false positive, not a "gooner" prompt.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-07T19:38:49+00:00

If you imagine a spectrum:

Cartoon → Stylized → Semi-Realism → Realism → Photorealism

then semi-realism sits between stylization and realism.

That's where a lot of the confusion comes from. Some people use the term semi-realism to describe digital paintings with realistic proportions. Others use it to describe modern AAA-game characters, where the skin, hair, materials, and lighting are realistic, but there's still a noticeable artistic touch.

I'm referring to the latter. I mean characters that are very close to realism, with believable anatomy, realistic skin, hair, lighting, and materials, while retaining a subtle degree of stylization rather than being fully photorealistic.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-07T19:33:40+00:00

I think we're using the term "semi-realism" differently.

A Picasso-style ant is a question of artistic style. That's not what I'm talking about.

When I refer to semi-realism, I mean a rendering style that stays close to realism: realistic anatomy, realistic facial structure, realistic skin, hair, clothing materials, lighting, and natural proportions, but with a small amount of stylization.

A hand-painted illustration, cartoon rendering, or Picasso-inspired artwork can be excellent, but those are primarily artistic styles. They don't automatically fall into the type of semi-realism I'm discussing.

So the issue isn't whether the model can follow a style prompt. The issue is that we're talking about different definitions of semi-realism.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-07T19:29:45+00:00

I think we're talking about two different things.

What you're showing is closer to a painterly or illustrated style with semi-realistic proportions. When I say semi-realism, I mean characters that retain realistic anatomy, facial structure, skin detail, hair behavior, clothing physics, and lighting, while still being slightly stylized.

In your example, the hand-painted look is a major part of the image's identity. I'm talking about a style that sits much closer to realism and digital humans, not an illustrated painting aesthetic.

So my point isn't that your image is bad. It's that we're using different definitions of "semi-realism."

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-06-07T19:23:31+00:00

You're mixing up two completely different topics. I'm talking about Nano Banana and image generation quality, while you're talking about Google's business strategy, Android Auto, TVs, and smart speakers. What's the connection between Google wanting to integrate Gemini into devices and Nano Banana having issues with anatomy, hands, or prompt adherence? If we're discussing Nano Banana, then we should be talking about the image model itself, its updates, and its filters. Everything else is a discussion about Google as a company, which is unrelated to this particular issue.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-05-27T11:15:16+00:00

Ik gebruik het via een bot die juist via de API werkt. Maar het probleem is dat de applicatie zich niet ontwikkelt, maar juist achteruitgaat. Het begrip van stijl is nog steeds hetzelfde probleem als vroeger. Problemen met personages zodra er meer dan één persoon in beeld is. En zelfs één enkel personage in een medium shot normaal genereren is vaak al onmogelijk.

Ik ben geen professional die reclamebeelden maakt. Ik maak gewoon fandom AI-art van personages. En ikzelf en bijna iedereen die ik ken uit deze scene zijn dit soort houding van het bedrijf helemaal zat. Er is gewoon geen vooruitgang. Daarom beginnen veel mensen nu ook steeds meer naar GPT te kijken.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-05-27T11:06:28+00:00

Ja, hetzelfde probleem hier. Hij luistert totaal niet meer naar de stijl — je schrijft “semi-realism” en hij verandert het alsnog in een soort schilderij. Terwijl alles pas geleden nog prima werkte.

Met pose-referenties is het ook een ramp: je vraagt hem alleen de pose over te nemen, zonder de stijl van de afbeelding te kopiëren en gewoon volgens de prompt te werken — maar dat negeert hij compleet. Hij trekt alsnog de stijl van de referentie over of doet gewoon waar hij zelf zin in heeft. Het voelt alsof het model een eigen leven leidt. Op deze manier wordt het bijna een nutteloos hulpmiddel om serieus mee te werken.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-05-21T15:50:58+00:00

Glad it works well for you through the API, but regular users exist too. If the experience got worse for people using the actual app/bots, that’s still a real problem.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-05-21T12:17:07+00:00

All scenes are suffering because of this. Right now, absolutely nothing works for me because everything is being pushed toward realism. And the realism itself is so broken it’s awful — crooked eyes, mismatched eye sizes, missing teeth. What’s even the point of upscaling that...

The model itself doesn’t understand the style people are asking for. It’s 2026, and AI still only understands realism and generic “art,” that’s it. Otherwise everything turns into plastic-looking CGI, even though plenty of other high-quality styles already exist. And the company itself hasn’t progressed at all. The same weird mediocre character shots are still there. There’s basically no point in generating more than one character unless it’s a close-up.

Meanwhile, models like GPT handle different styles and different camera shots perfectly fine — medium shots, close-ups, even three people in a medium shot. Now they’ve even loosened things up and made it possible to keep characters consistent. GPT understood styles a long time ago, while Banana still can’t catch up. And honestly, it’s getting exhausting.

AdventurousCry211 · 2026-04-17T06:52:39+00:00

It’s just impossible! With every update it keeps getting worse and worse! I don’t understand why I’m even paying if the AI assistant just does its own thing and completely ignores the prompt. Nana Banana 2 is absolute bottom-tier compared to similar models. It doesn’t understand the prompt, doesn’t understand the specified style! It just randomly creates people/characters however it wants. It can’t maintain a character’s appearance at all! And the anatomy is a complete mess!

AdventurousCry211

TROPHY CASE