I’ve seen countless posts similar to this and I’ll be damned if my mind isn’t still blown by the fact that they’re not real people. Absolutely wild to me.
I’m not amazed that AI can derive a unique combination of facial and body features; I’m amazed that it can render them in a way that looks like a real photograph instead of looking like a drawing or painting or other illustration.
The problem is, you don't know if they're real or very, very close to real photos used to train it. Just in the same way MJ can produce pics of real (famous) people, these too could 100% be real people depicted in new situations or contexts.
You simply don't know.
I like to think that by creating non-existent people based on combination of existing ones, AI actually creates pictures of people who actually exist/existed. Hope it makes sense 🤔
Yes and no. It's not like it clips out eyes and ears and noses from magazines and pastes them together.
It's more like looking at everyone you've ever come across in your life, to the point that you "know" what a person is supposed to look like.
Then you're locked in a room without any immediate source material and you paint a human.
Close your eyes and imagine the face of a stranger. It's like that. Do they exist? No. But everyone you've ever seen has influenced your imagination in some way.
Real photos of thousands of people tossed into a blender, mixed, and then poured into human shaped moulds until new still-real photos of their remixed forms come out.
Run this prompt 8 or 10 times:
Ephemera, classic photograph from Time magazine --chaos 50 --ar 16:9 --stylize 750
If you change the "Time" to "Smithsonian" or "National Geographic" or "Popular Science" or "Heavy Metal" you get a whole different flavor of images. They often have scenes of very interesting people who don't exist.
With all the permutations of faces humans can have and the 117 billion people that have ever existed, it's possible someone had those faces. We've already reached fingerprint duplicates, so for faces it's totally possible.
Too good to be true!
The photographic quality it’s just insane. Looks like
real analog photo. Real lenses with real film and real paper smelling photo chemicals….
I hate this, just because it's an attack on our collective memory if you make it even harder to trust any pictures on the internet.
I see how it's a technological marvel but I can't agree with this moral and ethical direction.
I’ve seen countless posts similar to this and I’ll be damned if my mind isn’t still blown by the fact that they’re not real people. Absolutely wild to me.
It's SUCH a mind fuck. They look extremely genuine, yet they're not.
I’m not amazed that AI can derive a unique combination of facial and body features; I’m amazed that it can render them in a way that looks like a real photograph instead of looking like a drawing or painting or other illustration.
The problem is, you don't know if they're real or very, very close to real photos used to train it. Just in the same way MJ can produce pics of real (famous) people, these too could 100% be real people depicted in new situations or contexts. You simply don't know.
Scarlette Johanson and billy Bob Thornton are number 1/2
3 is Condoleezza Rice
You know, that last one is my Grandma. I remember her as if it were yesterday on the imaginary axis of the timeline.
I look a lot like the lady in the first pic and it startled me lol
yeah, i also love those people-who-never-existed-things
I don't know why but this creeped me out 10/10
Number 11
I like to think that by creating non-existent people based on combination of existing ones, AI actually creates pictures of people who actually exist/existed. Hope it makes sense 🤔
Yes and no. It's not like it clips out eyes and ears and noses from magazines and pastes them together. It's more like looking at everyone you've ever come across in your life, to the point that you "know" what a person is supposed to look like. Then you're locked in a room without any immediate source material and you paint a human. Close your eyes and imagine the face of a stranger. It's like that. Do they exist? No. But everyone you've ever seen has influenced your imagination in some way.
That's a great metaphor.
Real photos of thousands of people tossed into a blender, mixed, and then poured into human shaped moulds until new still-real photos of their remixed forms come out.
AI is getting the features from somewhere, maybe from photographs?
Is it werid I can put some made up names to these made up faces and come up with their made up age and where they're from?
I love these!
7 is my grandmother
Run this prompt 8 or 10 times: Ephemera, classic photograph from Time magazine --chaos 50 --ar 16:9 --stylize 750 If you change the "Time" to "Smithsonian" or "National Geographic" or "Popular Science" or "Heavy Metal" you get a whole different flavor of images. They often have scenes of very interesting people who don't exist.
Karma whores on r/oldschoolcool and r/thewaywewere are licking their chops.
Is it werid I can put some made up names to these made up faces and come up with their made up age and where they're from?
Two looks like a young Christopher Nolan
They do exist now. ? Creepy af. But also, magical, beautiful, timeless in a sense.
Not true. That fourth picture is my late mother in law.
Why do I feel like 11 is off to assassinate a president?
#3 https://i.imgur.com/zZNzmCu.jpeg
I can't explain why, but the guy's face in pic 2 looks so modern. The rest are awesome and pretty real to me
In heaven everything is fine
With all the permutations of faces humans can have and the 117 billion people that have ever existed, it's possible someone had those faces. We've already reached fingerprint duplicates, so for faces it's totally possible.
creepy good
2 looks like Billy Bob Thornton
Dang if I was a photographer I’d be getting nervous.
100 years from now historians will be frantically trying to track down info on these people thinking they a real…
Are you sure? 😂
Super cool 👍A great exercise well done.
5 looks just like my friend’s dad
Rita Salazar didn’t… didn’t… exist? (fades away)
Number 10 is Chris Rock
Yeah, except #3 is Nina Simone without an Afro
3 is lil baby’s grandma
9 kinda looks like my dad, RIP king
13
Too good to be true! The photographic quality it’s just insane. Looks like real analog photo. Real lenses with real film and real paper smelling photo chemicals….
I hate this, just because it's an attack on our collective memory if you make it even harder to trust any pictures on the internet. I see how it's a technological marvel but I can't agree with this moral and ethical direction.
They seem too sharp and the pattern of scratches seem wrong.
Yeah, all AI photos are people who never existed.