[crazygringo]

Not even close. Traditional Photoshop filters can't do anything like this.

I know the filters you're talking about, and they can certainly turn photos into some faux-artistic effects, but the result is really bad, and everything in the image remains in the exact same place.

This is applying an actual artistic style, and also changing body position, background, hair, lighting, etc.

So I don't know why you'd want to be so dismissive of something like this.

[slackfan]

To an untrained eye, it all looks the same really. There is no artistic style here that you can clearly see in any decent museum of fine arts. It really does just look like photoshop filters.

Not sure the power costs of running a model like this over the caloric costs of a human + the power to power their photoshop machine, for instance, is worth it.

[crazygringo]

No, they look nothing alike. And I described why. Which you haven't even acknowledged. And it has nothing to do with an "trained eye".

Saying they look the same is like saying Nintendo 64 graphics look the same as PlayStation 5 graphics. It's just incorrect.

[slackfan]

They look alike to me. I'm sorry that I am not you, and cannot perceive reality the same way that you do. Really open-minded of you to think like this, really.