The models can generate hyper realistic renders of pelicans riding bikes in png format. They also have perfect knowledge of the SVG spec, and comprehensive knowledge of most human creative artistic endeavours. They should be able to produce astonishing results for the request.
I don’t want to see a chunky icon-styled vector graphic. I want to see one of these models meticulously paint what is unambiguously a pelican riding what is unambiguously a bicycle, to a quality on-par with Michelangelo, using the SVG standard as a medium. And I don’t just want it to define individual pixels. I want brush strokes building up a layered and textured birds wing.
If you train for your first marathon, is your goal to run it under 2h?
We are all looking forward to perfect results, but our standards are reasonable. We know what the results were last month, and judge the improvement velocity.
Nobody thinks that's a good SVG of a pelican riding a bike - on it's own. But it's a lot better compared to all the other LLM-generated SVGs of a pelican riding a bike.
We judge relative results - you judge absolute results. Confusion ensues.
To use your marathon metaphor, they have the body of Kipchoge in his absolute prime, and are failing to qualify for a local fun-run.
How well do you reckon you could draw a pelican on a bicycle by typing out an SVG file blind?
https://www.behance.net/gallery/29122113/Pelican-on-bikes-wi...
There are other such images. Not an image model? How do we know that they don't convert all images to svg and train an LLM on it? How do we know that they do not cheat on this benchmark and route the query to an image model first?
But since everything is closed source with any number of potential special case hacks, we won't know.
Looks like complete crap to me.