Tuning-Free Personalized Image Generation
ai.meta.com
ai.meta.com
Just imagine the possibilities for advertisers: Instead of telling someone how happy they would be if only they bought your expensive car, let's just spam them with AI pictures of themselves sitting in said expensive car, ideally next to some very attractive other people that match their dating preferences.
Facebook has all the data they need to create very pleasant dream scenarios for you. And they have the connections to monetize those dreams. Didn't the Expanse have a scene with someone addicted to living in a fantasy world? I thought it was meant as a warning, but this wouldn't be the first time that an elaborate warning would be misunderstood as an instruction manual.
Just add it to my Instagram timeline and I can skip the trip and the cost. Everyone else (including me in 30 years) thinks I went.
Recently a travel agency used our platform to generate images of people in the destinations they were advertising.
But content creation and ads are Meta's killer app. By having a model that doesn't require finetuning, they just changed the whole game.
How do ad blockers work exactly?
Not directly. But most genai needs text models. And Meta definitely doesn't want OpenAI or Google or someone else controlling the state of the art. Zuck is essentially preventing anyone from getting too big by preventing the only options for "quite good" being behind someone's metered API.
I've done a lot of photorealistic drawings, and the trick to make something look real, is to get the tones exactly right. Misjudge a tone a bit, and the result looks like a mediocre drawing or a painting. In other words, the gradient of skin tones is off, which is ironic, I guess.
I assume that there is a systemic error in (linearly?) interpolating colors (in the wrong color space?) somewhere, which potentially could be easy to fix and lead to improved photorealism. On the other hand, it might be a horrible problem to fix, because it would require accurate radiosity and raytracing to get right.
It may not be enough to use a perceptual color space only. The gradients in skin tones, or any other complex texture, are non-linear due to lighting and curvature.
Is there someone in the room who does know how things work, and whether this hypothesis is wrong or not?
Meta just released and productionized a new technique that doesn't require finetuning at all.
This enables a whole host of new possibilities... People can now be inserted into scenes or outfits at will without any sort of time consuming model training.
I mean, not really, you could just train a LoRA for example (it doesn't require training with Dreambooth).
Might want to update the HN title to reflect the paper title. It's really just applying multiple techniques that have existed. Paper's title is "Imagine yourself: Tuning-Free Personalized Image." Nice paper though!
I think applying the same idea to video games makes more sense, especially given the autonomy you have in a video game, but even then, the appeal wears off pretty quickly.
Games have had features that allow you to put your likeness in the game before, and that feature probably isn't what people we're buying the game for. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 for Dreamcast allowed you to map a photograph of your face to the in game player. Odd example, but I actually just dusted off my old Dreamcast and remembered this feature the other day as the 20 year old game save had my 20 years younger face on the main character. What I recall about that experience was that for about 2 minutes it felt special, and then never thought about it again until feeling confused about why I was in the game before remembering.
The idea that we'd someday have no more shared experience around media is harrowing and thankfully the public isn't actually calling for it.