In some ways that makes the images more interesting to me as they’re sort of impossible - but you could argue that it’s a pretty glaring flaw in how it’s calculating refraction. I suspect it’s due to limitations in processing - but I’m not 100% sure how it even goes about creating an image like that as it’s not 3D rendered… just lots of inferences I guess - maybe it didn’t ‘notice’ that the images in its reference library are upside down when refracted like this. Sort of fascinating really.
In your series of 4 the 4th is even better not flipped i agree, but the 3rd is sorta doing it on the top edge, and because of the hints of trees it really focusses on the content of the globe and it becomes distracting for me. In the 2nd the contents of the globe are out of scale to me, the first is perfectly fine as an image. No need for discussion though, i think i’m just learning what i find appealing in these images, and what i feel it works best for.
It’s also something that could possibly be worked out of the images if wanted too - I need to upgrade my Midjourney sub so can’t check right now but it might be as simple as including ‘flipped refraction’ or a similar description to bring it into line. I do enjoy some of the happy accidents though - but then there other times where it almost feels like a puzzle and you really struggle to push it in the direction you need it.
I was trying to get some trees made out of bones yesterday and it wasn’t quite getting it, even though it seems to me like a very straight-forward prompt. It has too much of a strong association with what a ‘tree’ is, so it’s hard to break out of that reference into the abstract.
Equally it would probably give you a tree made out of bones because of a misunderstanding so it’s not that it isn’t possible - it’s just stubborn like a real artist!
