I guess what I learned from this is google image search doesn’t use the same technology as google photos search. Photos is absolutely capable of “dog on a beach at night” and many terrifying things like finding people standing in front of small photographs of helicopters when I search for “helicopters”.
ETA: and the result from google photo search for “boy playing with toy helicopter” are perfect while that search on this new tool produces essentially random images: a lizard, a fishing pole, etc. I’m not sure the art of machine image segmentation and classification has been advanced here.
Thanks for the reply! The search results are a function of the images we have - we've only indexed 2M images so far. Also, the model prefers certain semantic patterns that we haven't automated yet. For example "a boy playing with a toy helicopter" gives more meaningful results. :)
Interesting. There are definitely two things going on here: understanding the photos, and understanding the question. Especially if I search for “ein junge mit einem spielzeughubschrauber” instead :-)
Honestly going up against the huge companies in ML seems like a big challenge.
12 comments
[ 0.21 ms ] story [ 36.8 ms ] threadETA: and the result from google photo search for “boy playing with toy helicopter” are perfect while that search on this new tool produces essentially random images: a lizard, a fishing pole, etc. I’m not sure the art of machine image segmentation and classification has been advanced here.
Honestly going up against the huge companies in ML seems like a big challenge.
At least it's more or less consistent ;) great pics
But it's fast and clean.