A Million Little Pieces Of My Mind

Here's my original photo. I intentionally chose one that had no people in it, as I know faces are often processed independently of the photo as a whole. In case you're wondering, this was taken at Maui's Papalaua Beach in 2020.

So let's take the pre-trained models in alphabetic order (and, remember, Fotor can add or remove models at their discretion, so my list may not match exactly what you see when you log in to Fotor). Here's the first, 3D Cartoon 1. I find it interesting which picture elements get altered: For example, the center-left tree root looks like some kind of table.

Presumably, 3D Cartoon 2 is the same as 1, but with more training? Or perhaps training on newer 3D cartoons?

This style does, at first glance, look very authentically comic book style. But one reason I choose the original image was the ocean and the horizon, since I know a lot of AIs have a problem rendering a consistent horizon line. If I were serious about putting this image in a comic book, I would definitely have some editing work to do, first!

This works, mostly, as an anime scene. Again, some fixable horizon problems. (Also, remember it's customary to generate as many as six images at a time to select the best; I just did one as a sample.)

The second iteration of this model does produce a more complex image. Horizon is still wonky, though.

This filter, along with Be Old and Be Young, seem to only generate different images when a face is part of it, because that's what the model mostly works on.

I assume this model was trained on scenes from the movie.

Without a human in it, the Be Old style created a nice painting. However, the horizon…

This is the first model we've come to in which the horizon is consistent!

Well, the horizon isn't too bad. It doesn't look all that cartoony; probably this is another model that focuses on modifying the face.

I love that this model threw Mt Fuji in! Yes, it is only slightly similar to my original, but I do like it as an image. (There's a truism that goes, A computer can generate a thousand images in a second, but it can never tell you which one it likes best.) Obviously, this would be a specialty model. But if you happen to be working on some promotional brochures for Japan…!

There are actually six Christmas-themed models in Fotor! As with Cherry Blossoms, only the most general aspects of my original composition are retained. I didn't bother trying all six models.

Again, if you are just trying to make some original photos for a cyberpunk project, this would be the model to use. It's probably not very useful otherwise.

My daughter is also an author, of children's books; this would be the sort of model she could use for her illustrations.

I'm not even sure what a fashion cartoon is…all I could think of was Betty Boop and this is definitely not that! But I kind of like the mixture of abstract and commonplace. And the horizon is consistent, so there's that!

I'm guessing this is an older model. The varicolored trees are an interesting modification.

I was hoping this one would give a more faithful rendition of the original, and instead it added the most feature hallucinations of any of them!

Since there's a Barbie model, of course there's a Ken! Personally, I loved the movie but these models are, in my opinion, a waste of time, unless you have a very specific need.

Likewise with this model. In photos with people in them, this model isn't too bad. But this is…just weird.

Of course, in the real world, a sketch is something you throw together to guide you in creating the final piece. This is the opposite, since it was rendered from a finished piece. Still, if I were art director of a movie and a character needed a sketch of a finished work seen later in the film, this would be a very efficient way to create the prop.

There's a game called Sunnyshore, and this was rendered using a model trained on its images. I suspect the reason they use so many game-based models is the artwork is easy to generate, isn't copyrighted (because it was generated on the fly, not created by a person), and lots of users will recognize the game and know the style.

This model provides a very interesting take on the original image. I could see myself printing this one to canvas.

I expected this model to do nothing since it seemed like a face-modifier. But, no, it zombified the environment! Cute but of limited use to me.

My customize prompt for this was, simply, In the style of Van Gogh. And I set it to 90% similarity. It is, in fact, very similar to my original.

At 50%, the image looks much more painterly. I can't say it screams, Van Gogh! but, printed on canvas, it might sell.

However, at 20% (which was Fotor's recommendation, anyway), the Van Gogh style starts to come through. However, I'm less convinced he would have chosen this as a subject.

So then, sticking to the 20%, I plugged in names of artists I could think of off-hand.

I guess it kind of looks like Leonardo's painting style. But I'm tickled at the notes in his handwriting at random across the canvas!

I'm not sure this is really Matthew Parrish's style. Actually, I'm not certain there was ever an artist by that name. Maybe I'm confusing a real artist with Matthew Perry. Whatever.

I doubt Picasso would have contented himself with one weird thing in the environment. Also, what the heck is that thing?!

Current artist Banksy pretty much only does street art with a message. I'm not sure what the message here would be.

Then I thought, what if I asked it to render the image in the name of someone who doesn't, in reality, exist? So I asked it to create the image in the style of Clark Kent. It's lovely, too, except we're back to the inconsistent horizon.

My final experiment was to ask it to create an image as if a 6-year-old made it with crayons.