[bluejellybean]

While neat, and no doubt impressive, it still utterly fails on prompts that should be completely reasonable to any sane human being/artist.

Take something like "A cat dancing atop a cow, with utters that are made out of ar-15s that shoot lazer-beam confetti". A vivid description should be aroused in your head, and no doubt, I could imagine an artist have a lot of fun creating such a description... Alas, what the model spits out is pure unusable garbage.

[TulliusCicero]

More complex/weirder prompts aren't going to work yet, no.

What will probably happen with these models is that for more advanced stuff, you may using the "inpainting" that Dall-E already has going, where you can sort of mix and match and combine images. That way you could have the cat, for example, rendered separately, thereby simplifying each individual prompt.

[topynate]

The referent of "utters" (sic) is ambiguous, so I can imagine a model having more difficulty with it than usual. Regardless, the current SOTA does need more specific and sometimes repetitive prompting than a human artist would, but it's surprising how much better results you can get from SOTA models with a bit of experience at prompt engineering.

[bluejellybean]

This is, in part, what I'm trying to point out, it's an obvious typo given the context, and something that you or I would be able to pick up on, yet it completely breaks (it spit out a bunch of weird confetti cats for me). Perhaps I'm being a little harsh, but if it requires word-perfect tuning and prompt engineering, it speaks to something about the 'stupidity' of these models. It's a neat trick, but to call it anything in the realm of artificial intelligence is a bit of a joke.

[h2odragon]

ITYM "udders"

also try "teats"