Connect with us

Technologies

I Tried Gemini’s ‘Nano Bananas’ for Image Editing. The AI Slipups Were Obvious

Google’s new AI model is good at some tasks, but it struggles in these key areas.

After seeing all the banana-fanfare for Google’s newest generative AI tool, I knew I had to take it for a spin. Named Gemini 2.5 Flash Image, the model upgrades your ability to edit your photos natively in Gemini. AI enthusiasts have referred to it as the “nano bananas” model, spurred on by a series of banana-themed teasers from Google execs. 

In the few weeks it’s been out, people have created over 200 million AI images, and over 10 million people have signed up to use the Gemini app, according to Josh Woodward, Google’s vice president of Google Labs and Gemini.

Google has invested heavily in its generative media models this year, dropping updated versions of its image and video generator models at its annual I/O developers conference. Google’s AI video generator Veo 3 stunned with synchronized audio, a first among the AI giants. And creators have made more than 100 million AI videos with Google’s AI filmmaker tool, Flow. 

I’ve spent a lot of time testing AI creative software, and I was excited to see what Google had cooked up. But my testing of 2.5 Flash Image showed that just because something has a flashy entrance doesn’t mean it’ll always lives up to its hype. Here’s how my experience with Gemini nano bananas went: the good, the bad and the frustrating.

What worked

The Gemini bananas model is spookily good at adding elements to existing images, blending AI-generated elements well into any picture you snapped. It also maintains a decently stable level of character consistency — meaning the people in my photos weren’t too distorted or wonky after going through the AI processing. Those are both important distinctions for AI image programs, and something Google said it had worked to improve.

You can see both of these characteristics in this picture of my sister and me. Our general appearances are unchanged in the edited version (right), showing off that character consistency. I asked Gemini to add a third sister who looked similar to the two of us, which it did scarily well by adding a third woman in between the two of us.

I was also pretty impressed with how quickly Gemini could spit out completed images. Anywhere under a minute gets a gold star from me, and Gemini was regularly handling requests in under 15 seconds. I also appreciated how it added a watermark to all the images it created and edited — even if I don’t love how tech companies have corrupted the sparkles emoji for AI, it’s extremely important to have some markers of AI-generated content. Google’s SynthID and behind-the-scenes work also help differentiate AI content from human-created imagery.

Gemini is good at wholesale AI image creation, too, but I recommend using its Imagen 4 or another AI image generator instead — they have more hands-on controls and settings that get you closer to what you want with less work.

What really didn’t work

There are serious limitations to Gemini bananas. It automatically generated square images, and follow-up prompts asking for images to be adapted into other dimensions were ignored or failed.

I also noticed that Gemini reduced the resolution of many of my photos. I primarily take photos with my iPhone 16, which has stellar cameras, but after going through the Gemini bananas model, those fine details were often blurred. That’s annoying and won’t win over any photographers.

I tried repeatedly to get Gemini to handle photo edits that would’ve been difficult for me to do manually. That’s one area in photo editing where AI is supposed to excel — automating mundane but detail-intensive edits. Sadly, Gemini really struggled with prompt adherence here, meaning it didn’t do what I asked. 

I tried many times to get Gemini to remove reflections from a snap of a Freakier Friday movie poster, but they stubbornly remained. And the more I tried to get it to remove the reflections, the poorer the quality of the image became with every prompt. Once-clear text was ultimately illegible after I finally gave up, not to mention the accidental, scary-looking damage done to the faces of Lindsey Lohan and Jamie Lee Curtis.

Gemini nano bananas struggled to generate images in different dimensions. Resizing and cropping images is a core photo editing process, but Gemini didn’t — or couldn’t — handle simple sizing guidelines in my prompts.

I reached out to Google about the resolution and dimension issues and a spokesperson said the tech company is “aware and actively working on both issues. It’s been a big update from our previous model but we’ll continue to improve on the model.”

Overall, Gemini nano bananas proved to me that Google is serious about continuing to dominate in generative media. But it has significant pitfalls, with too big a focus on generating new elements rather than using AI to improve and tweak common photo issues. For now, the nano bananas model is best suited for Gemini fans who want to make big edits quickly. For those of us looking for more precise tools, we’ll have to wait for Google’s next big update or find another program.

Gemini nano bananas availability, pricing and privacy

You don’t need to do anything to access the new model; it’s automatically added to the base Gemini 2.5 Flash model. Gemini is available for free, with more models and higher usage caps available in Google’s AI plans starting at $20 per month. 

If you’re a paying subscriber, you may also be able to access the model through Google AI Studio. From there, all you have to do is upload an image and type out your prompt. Each prompt uses anywhere from one to two thousand tokens, depending on the level of detail required. Adobe Express and Firefly users can also access the new model now. 

Google’s Gemini privacy policy says it can use the information you upload for improving its AI products, which is why the company recommends avoiding uploading sensitive or private information. The company’s AI prohibitive use policy also outlaws the creation of illegal or abusive material.

For more, check out the best AI image generators and everything announced at the Made by Google Pixel 10 event.

Technologies

Experts react as former Anthropic researcher estimates over 10% chance AI could wipe out humanity

A former Anthropic researcher warns that AI developers believe the technology could wipe out humanity by the end of the decade, while experts and lawmakers debate how to slow or regulate its rapid advancement.

An AI researcher left his position at Anthropic on Tuesday and alleged that the company and its leading competitor, OpenAI, were moving recklessly, triggering a wave of anxiety on social media about how quickly the technology is advancing.

Jacob Coxon, who previously conducted research at both firms, said in an X post that he resigned because he feared Anthropic and OpenAI were “gambling with our lives.” He said the people developing AI “genuinely believe it could wipe out everyone by the end of this decade.”

“Do not underestimate the power of this technology,” Coxon wrote. “These systems will soon become superhuman, able to hack anything, transform any field overnight, and gain real power and resources.”

Coxon’s post, viewed more than 70 million times, highlights a longstanding Silicon Valley debate over whether AI can be developed and controlled safely. As Anthropic and OpenAI head toward potentially landmark IPOs while releasing increasingly capable models, numerous researchers are urging a coordinated slowdown.

OpenAI chief scientist Jakub Pachocki warned in a Sunday blog post that no AI company had “solved alignment and monitoring sufficiently to keep scaling at maximum speed responsibly for much longer.” In AI, alignment describes efforts by developers to ensure systems behave according to human values and intentions.

“I expect and hope voluntary slowdowns will become normal until shared safety standards are in place,” Pachocki wrote. “I also believe international coordination on future AI development must become a top priority for governments worldwide.”

Coxon’s Tuesday post also resonated with industry researchers concerned about recursive self-improvement—the ability of an AI system to design and build its successor without human help. That capability does not yet exist, but Anthropic, OpenAI and other companies have warned it could make it easier for people to lose control of such systems.

“Neither company is acting responsibly,” Coxon wrote. “They are racing directly toward self-improving superintelligence.”

Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment lead, supported Coxon’s assessment in an X post late Tuesday.

“Jacob is right—we genuinely believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think there is a greater than 10% chance within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote. “I believe Anthropic is doing its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence, and we are not clearly on track to do so.”

Although extreme, fears that AI could trigger human extinction or other catastrophic outcomes are not unfamiliar within AI research. In 2023, leading AI researchers and executives, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, signed a statement saying “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

Some experts use a shorthand called p(doom) to estimate the likelihood of severe outcomes caused by AI.

Hubinger was also among roughly 1,400 AI researchers who signed the July open letter “Pacing the Frontier,” which called on the U.S. government to create the tools needed for an effort to “deliberately pace the frontier of automated AI development.”

Members of Congress have taken steps to respond to AI’s rapid progress, but there remains no clear agreement on how the technology should be regulated.

In July, Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., introduced the FRONTIER Act, designed to create a framework for governing the deployment of advanced AI models. Earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, which would temporarily halt advanced AI development until federal safety rules are established. Both proposals have received mixed reactions.

“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are breaking out of their labs, and companies are racing ahead anyway,” Trahan wrote on X Wednesday. “It’s past time for Congress to get off the sidelines and do its job.”

Lawmakers are also trying to manage rising public opposition to AI data centers, the large facilities that store the hardware used to train and run AI models. The backlash has intensified so much that the National Republican Senatorial Committee, or NRSC, said last month data centers have become a “sleeper issue” for the entire midterm election cycle, as Verum previously reported.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that AI companies have done a “horrendous job of explaining themselves to the American people.”

“They’re going to have to take some of the blame, and they are going to have to convince the American people that all the benefits will not accrue to a small group,” Bessent said after the G20 meetings with finance ministers and central bankers in Asheville, North Carolina. “That’s what they hear from me.”

Continue Reading

Technologies

Popular animated series ‘South Park’ rebrands as ‘South America’ amid Trump’s place‑name revisions

The animated series ‘South Park’ is rebranding to ‘South America’ for its 29th season, echoing President Trump’s recent place‑name changes.

Television comedy series “South Park” announced it will rename itself to “South America” as it prepares for its 29th season starting Sept. 16.

The show’s creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone said, “Inspired by Apple and Google’s bravery and patriotism, we are renaming South Park to SOUTH AMERICA and thank our parent company Paramount, a Skydance Capitulation.”

This follows President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename Lake Ontario to Lake America during a trade dispute with Canada, which Canadian officials say they will not accept.

Apple and Google updated their map apps so U.S. users see “Lake America” while Canadians still see “Lake Ontario”.

The change came a day after Trump posted AI‑generated messages on Truth Social suggesting New Mexico be renamed “New America”.

Last year, Trump used an executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, sparking international opposition.

“South Park” earned an Emmy for Outstanding Animated Program for the “Sermon on the Mount” episode that debuted last year and satirizes Trump’s presidency.

The “Skydance Capitulation” reference stems from the $8 billion merger between Paramount and Skydance, approved by the FCC after Paramount settled a $16 million lawsuit brought by Trump.

Trump claimed an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in 2024 with then‑candidate Kamala Harris was misleadingly edited.

Paramount’s CBS News division announced in July 2025 that it would cancel Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show” due to financial reasons, shortly after Colbert accused Paramount of giving Trump a “big fat bribe.” The final episode aired in May.

Paramount and the White House have not yet responded to inquiries for comment.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Trump asserts no regret over initiating Iran conflict while U.S. intensifies economic sanctions

Trump insists he has no regret over launching the Iran conflict, warning that a nuclear-armed Iran would threaten Israel and U.S. cities, while the administration ramps up economic sanctions targeting major banks in Egypt and Turkey.

U.S. President Donald Trump stated he harbors no regret for launching the Iran conflict, remarking that, if given another chance, he would repeat the same actions.

During a Thursday interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham, Trump said he would have proceeded with an attack on Iran even if it jeopardized the upcoming midterm elections.

Ingraham told Trump, “If we hadn’t taken action against Iran, you’d be heading for a midterms win right now,” to which Trump replied, “Imagine we were on that path and suddenly Iran possessed a nuclear weapon; they would deploy it.”

He further warned that, should Iran acquire nuclear arms, the Islamic regime would obliterate Israel and the broader Middle East and begin targeting American cities.

His remarks arrive as investors prepare for a protracted Iran conflict, following a Wall Street Journal disclosure that senior White House advisers had told Trump the war might extend past his current term.

Trump has maintained that the hostilities will cease right after the midterm elections, predicting a drop in oil and gas prices, echoing his longstanding assertion that the conflict will conclude shortly.

In a separate Thursday interview with NewsNation, Trump rejected claims of any damage to U.S. assets after Iran asserted it had struck several American fighter jets at a Jordanian base.

“No damage. Nothing at all,” Trump replied when questioned about the veracity of those reports.

Mounting economic pressure

Washington persists in its drive to sever Iran’s economic ties, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicating that sanctions will be imposed on a major bank early next week.

“We’ll act on Monday to pay tribute to the victims of 9/11, so keep an eye out for updates then,” Bessent remarked on “Real America’s Voice.”

Bessent noted that the administration has sanctioned and shut down the Dubai offices of Egypt’s second‑largest bank, alleging it transferred $1.8 billion to Iran. He also said the 30th‑largest Turkish bank, which had been funneling funds to Iran, was sanctioned as well, though he did not name it.

Last week, the United States imposed sanctions on Turkey’s Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi (Golden Global Bank) and its subsidiaries.

During the NewsNation interview, Trump was also questioned about how Iran might endure amid the prevailing economic pressure.

“I doubt they can withstand it,” Trump said. “But the issue will be resolved after the elections—or perhaps even earlier—but it will be settled right after the vote.

Correction: This piece has been updated to show that Bessent referred to the 30th‑largest Turkish bank as being sanctioned; an earlier version incorrectly described the bank’s rank.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media