The short-term goal of a tool like this is to sell products. The more ambitious long-term goal is to shift cultural norms, blurring the lines between advertising and reality until the question you're asking is no longer consciously asked. At least, not by average people, and not at the point of purchase.

I find it easy to envision a world, maybe 50 years from now, in which the very concept of "truth in advertising" is viewed as a lost, idyllic fantasy. Something people are nostalgic for, but feel powerless to regain.

As long as the Product Manger gets a bonus/promotion then it's a success.

I've noticed something similar in Facebook marketplace ads for used furniture. Most of the images are AI generated to look like a Pottery Barn catalog, then the last image will be the actual item, full of scratches and other damage, sitting in a messy garage.

Is it gonna be less distorted than just seeing the shirt on a model photographed by a professional in the perfect light?

Sounds exactly like something the marketing department would use to up the convertion rate

One joy of online shopping, especially for people doing it in an impulsive and/or addictive way (it's not really rare) is the satisfaction they get from the imagination of having it.

An acquaintance of mine was buying many and not wearing most, as she did not attend that many social occasions. Still, she kept buying.

Eventually, she had to face the actual problem in her life that bothered her. She ended up dealing with it, terribly.

If it doesn’t fit, then you must have gained weight while the item was in transit

The more honest ones are “how it looks on you” and don’t promise fit that depends on so many measurements that aren’t even visible in pics.

Sure, it’s idealized, but some people benefit from seeing color / neckline / etc on themselves as a visual reference.

Me, I’m a text-learner so I don’t get it at all. But I know people who get value.

There's definitely a predatory "everything will look good", but you can also leverage exactly that part for your own purposes - I've done pre-shopping a couple of times by asking for something like "a grid of 9 versions of my photo, wearing different types of X that look good". Definitely helped with choosing a good style.

I use nanobanana 2 to test changes in paint and flooring/tiling to great success. And the real pro move is taking those images to a designer to tweak the remaining 20% or so.

I bet if you had a way to easily train a LORA on you trying on various clothing types the models would do pretty well but I agree without that I can't think of a way to get it to work. Reminds me of the flattering mirrors scam https://finance.yahoo.com/news/company-swears-controversial-...

It’s clear to us here on HN but to the average person today the way these models actually work is beyond the realm of constraints and reasoning.

The cynic in me says this is just an advancement and logical continuation from the known problem of sycophantic behavior in text-to-text chatbot format LLM, to image generation models.

Good or bad, I’m pretty sure showing things in the best light has always been the point of “marketing”. There is a reason ads aren’t filled with ugly people with misshaped bodies, and it isn’t because the intention is to reflect reality, so what you allude to as problematic is what a lot of businesses call a feature.

This will push us even more to go outside and visit actual shops. Becouse thanks to AI we will have more time? Will we?

Yet it pushes the goal of the brand/shop forward: make the product more appealing and sell

i'd like it to notice things i would miss, like "this is ring-spun shirt, so it will sit like this on your torso" or "these pleats will require you to iron them" etc

A prompt went viral recently where people were sharing their pictures and asking chatgpt to visualise what their looksmatched partner would look like

The result was always someone extremely good looking

There’s going to be an entirely new class of mental disorders that will emerge from people being deluded by AI

But they dont have to do either of these things. Thats just what people prompt

Maybe this will lead to more business for tailors doing alterations, assuming the clothes people end up buying are expensive enough to justify it.

> But these models will always make the clothes fit your body and show you in flattering light and so on

This is something that can be fixed over time. And if this forces clothing manufacturers to stick more to their advertised "specs" (width/length), then it's a win for us.

How does this fry pan look with a fish in it? Ask Mr Bean.

User-targeted fashion advice is the polite goal. AI designed to generate images of people is actually racing to capture the entertainment markets. They want to be ready to replace models/actors in everything from fashion mags to porn studios. That is where the money is.

To be fair in many cases the actual clothes aren't much better. I've had two pair of the same pants, same brand, same size fit noticeably differently.

I've been struggling with this question myself. But isn't this a model training/use problem (a.k.a skill issue )? Isn't there a way to make these models be faithful to how people will actually look?

I have a similar use case at work for previewing construction material and such in our catalogue applied to user uploaded images.

Results are mixed, expensive, but it really feels you're few months off the next improvement to really nail it. It's already good enough.

Wonder what Qwen image will provide over nano banana.

[dead]