Show HN: I used OpenAI's new image API for a personalized coloring book service
263 points - yesterday at 10:05 AM
I've had an idea for a long time to generate a cute coloring book based on family photos, send it to a printing service, and then deliver it to people.
Last month, when OpenAI's Sora was released for public use I (foolishly) thought I'd manually drag-and-drop each order’s photos into Sora's UI and copy the resulting images back into my system. This took way too much time (about an hour for each of the few books I made and tested with family and friends). It clearly wasn't possible to release this version because I’d be losing a huge amount of time on every order. So instead, I decided I'd finish off the project as best I could, put it "on ice," and wait for the API release.
The API is now released (quicker than I thought it'd be, too!) and I integrated it last night. I'd love your feedback on any and all aspects.
The market is mostly family-based, but from my testing of the physical book I've found that both adults and kids enjoy coloring them in (it's surprisingly cathartic and creative). If you would like to order one you can get 10% off by tapping the total price line item five times.
simianparrot
today at 11:14 AM
Every example is the Studio Ghibli style. Tasteless and no respect for the studio and its legacy.
I don’t understand how you can do this and not feel horrible about it. But I guess not everyone cares as long as it might earn you a few dollars…
slantaclaus
today at 2:36 PM
Upvoting a bunch of lower comments in an effort to bury this one. What a dick
true_religion
today at 12:00 PM
I suggest that they use the Disney style. It’s similarly popular and well known but no one will stand up to protect it since it’s a multi billion dollar company that we already know has no respect for artists or artistic legacy.
Style has been copied since time immemorial and was never copyrightable. I think it's better to be the studio everyone copies in their AI slop than the studio nobody copies in terms of publicity, sales and cultural impact. And the mass copying by a handful of models in a reasonably consistent way together with everyone talking about it is probably better for the studio than flesh and blood artists here and there copying it not so consistently / competently without the buzz attributing the style to the studio
reneretord
today at 1:58 PM
[dead]
mdeeks
yesterday at 10:42 PM
This is a cute and simple idea!
I'd like to see what a real physical book looks like before I buy it though. Do you have real pictures of a printed one?
I think our kids would appreciate seeing the original (even if a small thumbnail) along side it. You can't always tell from these AI drawings that it was originally you and your family.
Also, it's REALLY expensive. $30 for a book that my kids will draw on in one or two nights and then never touch again is probably too much.
Thanks! I've added a section at the bottom of the site showing some real photos of an actual coloring book I got in the mail. There are thumbnails of all photos uploaded on the back.
$24 + postage is the lowest I could reasonably charge for this. Printing costs are a bit more than half of that, OpenAI charge a surprising amount for image generation, but there is also a good amount of human effort (and creative choices) in generating the book. It's not a fully automated process and I hope that's evident from the quality of the end product.
subpixel
yesterday at 11:40 PM
It’s not cheap, but my kids treasure coloring books for a long time and probably one like this until it falls apart.
zakki
yesterday at 11:44 PM
To the author, I have this idea, for each page, put a sheet of transparent plastic or something like that. So the owner will color the plastic which can be erased.
But it may increase the cost anc the color may not stick to the plastic.
sharkjacobs
yesterday at 10:40 PM
from clevercoloringbook.com:
> Please only upload photos that are in line with OpenAI's Usage Policy.
> We are not able to include any photos that do not follow their policy in the final printed book.
from openai.com/policies
> Editing uploaded images or videos that contain real people under the age of 18 is not permitted.
The first two sample pictures on the page contain of adolescent children. Are you concerned about this apparent contradiction?
Great point. As per our TOS - users of the site must be over 18 and have the consent of everyone in the image (i.e. their own kids, relations etc).
I put that line about OpenAI's usage policy there for practical reasons. If someone orders something that OpenAI refuses to generate (like a photo of Bart Simpson say), then I can't include it in the printed book. With this project, if someone uploads content that's in any way inappropriate, we'll see it and refuse to fulfill the order (and take other appropriate actions, if needed)
mdeeks
yesterday at 10:47 PM
I'm not the OP, but during the recent Studio Ghiblification craze there were a huge number of photos of families and kids passing along in facebook, twitter, and other social media. It was literally everywhere you looked. OpenAI obviously saw all of that. I don't think they actually care unless it's something bordering on illegal.
ronsor
yesterday at 10:54 PM
I agree. In practice OpenAI is unlikely to care about families uploading their own photos. I think the policy is mostly to stop random people from engaging in creepy activities with the photos of children.
> "that contain real people"
It seems the loophole on this site, is the examples (by my best guess) are AI.
mmastrac
yesterday at 10:29 PM
The comics look pretty Miyazaki-inspired, like all of the comics I've seen lately. I've kinda started to dislike this look because it's _everywhere_ that low-effort comics are these days.
Maybe worth trying to train a better style for this. This is probably something where you could put a little effort in up-front (ie: using a model that's for segmentation to get outlines, using some classic image-processing for boundary detection) and then have AI touch it up a little more lightly and a less of the "default" style.
Also, do you have AI images for the "real world" samples on the left? They have a certain "I don't exactly know what, but it's creeping me out" vibe.
ronsor
yesterday at 10:40 PM
It doesn't look particularly Miyazaki style to me; it's just a generic cartoon style.
I think the Ghiblipocalypse has gotten people on edge.
OP confirmed that their prompt includes a directive for Ghiblification. Given that Miyazaki is known to hate GenAI I really can't condone... I mean there's nothing anyone can do about it but it's just kind of sad.
Springtime
today at 6:54 AM
> Given that Miyazaki is known to hate GenAI I really can't condone
Not that I wouldn't similarly expect it from Miyazaki in terms of general generative art but the actual source of all the articles/memes about his quote point to a 2016 video where he's being demo'd a disturbing 3D simulation of an oily looking human figure crawling on the ground by its head while the dev explains to Miyazaki and others that 'it feels no pain so it learned to move by its head' and it could be used for horror games.
It's then that Miyazaki expresses the 'insult to life itself' quote and explains the devs have no idea what human pain is. Makes one wonder how the devs thought the reaction would be any different tbh.
Edit: reading that he clarified in an interview[1] a couple years later that his distaste was due to believing the dev was aiming at humorizing such body contortions of realistic humans which he took issue with.
[1] https://realsound.jp/tech/2018/10/post-270755.html
Yeah can we stop spreading this misinformation. His quote was in reference to grotesque nature of something he saw.
> Miyazaki was shown an AI-generated character. The character was a scary monster that used its head as a leg because it couldn’t feel pain. The person presenting it said its movements could be used in making a zombie video game.
To which he stated:
> Every morning, not in recent days, I see my friend who has a disability. It’s so hard for him just to do a high five; his arm with stiff muscle can’t reach out to my hand. Now, thinking of him, I can’t watch this stuff and find it interesting. Whoever creates this stuff has no idea what pain is. I’m utterly disgusted. If you really want to make creepy stuff, you can go ahead and do it. I would never wish to incorporate this technology into my work at all. I strongly feel that this is an insult to life itself.
there's 4 sample pages, and the one with the cat is the only one that is not Ghibli-style.
Here's some generic cartoon styles to look at:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/04/ef/5f04ef77ce3beb272a61...
throwup238
today at 5:20 AM
That's probably the only info-graphic I've ever seen that's worth a damn.
This is so interesting - I could add some of these as options.
It absolutely resembles the current Miyazaka-esque OpenAI image trend that’s been going on.
rafram
yesterday at 10:45 PM
This has zero resemblance to Miyazaki’s style. (And I say that as someone who isn’t a fan of this idea at all.)
mmastrac
yesterday at 10:48 PM
Hard disagree. Sample #2 is totally the Miyazaki-vibe that is everywhere in OpenAI-generated comics. https://clevercoloringbook.com/samples/2_cartoon.png
The cartoon owl at the top has a different vibe and would probably work for the comics as well.
After seeing this example, I think this is the elevator pitch: ”We take your personal highlights and make them as generic and impersonal as possible.”
xdfgh1112
today at 2:22 AM
It's nothing like Ghibli, you are overthinking this.
I'm gonna agree with the above comment - #2 looks like a Japanese-style cartoon (for better or worse).
OP confirmed their prompt explicitly asks for a studio ghibli style
barbazoo
yesterday at 11:05 PM
For anyone looking for a prompt to do this manually, it seems to be as simple as this:
> Generate a version of this photo that can be used as a coloring sheet
Close enough! The prompt I use is:
> Make this a page in a colouring book. The drawing is in a simple Studio Ghibli portrait style. Bleed all the way to the edges. Background colour is #ffffff and lines are bold and #000000. There is no shading or crossthatching.
natdempk
today at 10:27 AM
I think one thing that slightly drags this down is the Ghibli style produces images that don’t really look that much like the original people. If you can find a prompt that is still stylized while preserving more of the characteristics of faces would go a long way on the personalization front. Maybe easier said than done.
Anyone else feeling this weird vibe in the age of AI? You get a cool new idea, but then you think about how easy it is for someone else to replicate it, and you end up not doing it.
an0malous
today at 3:37 AM
The OP looks like it runs images through a Ghibli filter first
Yeah I've been doing this with image-gen AIs pretty much since they started and it's a lot of fun. Even early Dall-E etc was awesome at doing stuff like "Create a colouring in sheet with some dinosaurs having a party" or generic prompts like that, and more recently giving photos to convert has been loads of fun for the kids.
thehappypm
today at 2:27 AM
I’ve done this a bunch with my son. It’s not quite that simple because often times it’ll create images that have too much detail, sometimes it’ll actually include colors. But yeah, it’s not really all that complicated
This is fucking amazing!
Everyone and their mother are trying to hop on the band wagon of AI and make a half assed service just because it may sell just due to the "ai" tag attached to it - this is different!
Chapeau bas!
It's simple but brilliant. It's a great example of what a good idea is - with minimal effort he made an epic product focusing not an AI, but what AI can bring to the table and executing it flawlessly. Hats off!
laborcontract
today at 4:10 AM
i've been doing this with my child and picture books. i take pictures of pages, convert it to a coloring book, print it, and then we color her favorite books together.
Thanks so much! Really glad you like it.
waynesonfire
today at 7:43 AM
You're uploading your family pictures.. nevermind. Go enjoy your coloring book.
rafram
yesterday at 10:56 PM
For what it’s worth (and it’s probably not much), it doesn’t cost that much to commission comic book-style art from an actual artist online. When you do that, the proceeds go to an artist, not to an AI company that stole from them and a software developer who wrote a wrapper around their API.
In fairness no artists are advertising a personal coloring book. The time, effort and cost would put this out of reach for 99.99 of people.
No artists are losing income because of this and no industry is being upended. This is a new product that's available because of a technology advanced.
Why the focus the artist? Everytime you order in food online you take away a tip from a host, server, bartender and take away a job from a person who answers a phone. Why focus on artists when so many have been affected by technology.
Something1234
today at 12:56 AM
And yet there’s plenty of adult coloring books made by a human out there if you’re willing to go to a brick and mortar shop. Got a super cool one from dick blicks, with a lot of underwater scenes. Also paper quality is important. I can’t imagine getting as far as I did in mine if it was newspaper
That’s because those are not personalized. The economy of scale allows for artists to make generic coloring book with high quality art, but it’s expensive for artists to create (and customers to buy) custom made coloring books personalized for the customers photos.
My partner makes one! Go grab a copy if you're in Australia, the wonderful POP local -- started as POP Canberra -- sells them.
https://www.poplocal.com.au/product/bum-man-colouring-book/
He's 'Bum Man'. A man (actually it's asexual) who is a bum. I mean c'mon.
Looks cool, but they should show more of the pages online. All I see is the (already coloured) front cover.
seeEllArr
today at 1:31 AM
The food you order online was not stolen from the server/bartender without their permission or compensation. Even if the analogy holds, this is whataboutism, and in the U.S. at least tipping is a fucked system too.
If you stop going into the restaurant they stop scheduling servers. You or the restaurant didn't get permission from the server who isn't working there anymore.
It's about applying your outrage evenly. Why put artists over a servers? Why do you drive when not using horses means many blacksmiths positions disappear. Technology that is accepted by society changes society. Artists will continue to evolve and create messages about those changes. No need to worry about their plight. Worry about translators or other industries that can't easily provide the same value. Artists are the one group who will survive and thrive.
If it's not plant based it is.
Usually when you commission something you're asking the artist to do art and create something unique with their own artistic flair... not just line-trace an existing photo.
The intention and cost of something like that is not at all comparable to what is being offered here.
patch_collector
today at 3:41 AM
I tried to do exactly that once. I was offering between $20-$40 per image to make a few coloring pages as a mother's day gift for my wife. Not complex images either -- just basic coloring pages from photos of my wife and child, without backgrounds, for my kids to color in.
I reached out to multiple artists, and got one image back (from a good friend). I gave up on commissioning actual artists, and traced the images myself on a tablet. I imagine someone with the right knowledge of where to find artists and the willingness to wait on their schedule could have done it faster, but I'd have used this service if it had been around.
I can't imagine how much it would cost to commission an artist to do a whole coloring book and then organize them and send them to print but it's a good point. AI is never going to be as good as a real commissioned artist, but this idea makes having something similar far more accessible to a lot of people.
richardw
yesterday at 11:38 PM
My opinion isn’t fully formed but I currently think either all content producers have a claim (potentially workable as eg a discount), or only those who contribute should get access to AI’s.
And by all I mean the AI companies owe a huge debt to all humans who wrote or designed or drew anything. The vast majority of the benefit of this technology relies on volume: the billions of pages and lines of code we wrote for other humans, but have now been repurposed. This technology relies on bulk, which was mainly unprofessional or freely given content, by those who intended it for other humans. It was not 100% built only on the output of the few who charge for their exquisite words or designs, even if their output is higher quality.
Alternatively, let the AI companies go for it but everyone who uses any kind of AI should understand that they’re standing on the shoulders of the millions of developers and nonprofessional writers whose work has now been repurposed. Not the few artists and journalists. So those artists and journalists should both refuse to contribute to, and use, AI.
* I’ve written very little of this useful content, but would be happy to pay my share to those that have built what we have. I also turn off training on my content, but I pay a lot for models. Feel free to help me think through this with comments of your own.
jstummbillig
today at 12:13 AM
If it does not cost that much, that is obviously because the artist is too cheap. If you find that to be a preferable equilibrium, that's a choice I guess, but I find it fairly ironic in light of the purported motivation.
thehappypm
today at 2:28 AM
I can get ChatGPT to do this for literally free. Even in the free tier, I can get a couple images per day.
paulcole
yesterday at 11:33 PM
If this person’s service was to pay human artists $24 for a 23 page custom coloring book you’d be crying on here about them not paying human artists enough.
Almost nobody is paying $100 or more for a custom 5-page coloring book.
This service isn’t taking work from human artists.
yieldcrv
today at 12:51 AM
Those transactions never would have happened, and never will happen.
This is a cool technological feat but what is the cost to humanity and its artists?
Some of these replies seem rather dismissive to the artists’ plight.
Cost is nothing because this service isn't offered currently. No income lost and might spark an interest in coloring books which grows the artist's income.
Artists have been around and existed in more repressive societies throughout time. The best art is usually produced from the greatest struggle. Artists will engage and create art in this new world. The cost of not providing a new surface for artists to explore is what kills art.
How does buying an AI generated coloring book lead to more sales for the artist that doesn’t offer AI generated coloring books?
qotgalaxy
today at 2:59 AM
[dead]
They're dismissive because we've had the same moral panics before with the introduction of photography, then sound recordings, and then digital art tools, and then vector art, and then 3D, and also the Internet to an extent, and...
You can see where this is going, right? In the end, humanity and even artists will be fine overall, even if the world changes.
This feels different to me. This isn’t the camera going from film to digital. This is the camera taking over the photo creation process, and developing them, and selling them. What’s the point of the human?
how will artists be fine when Google can steal all their work, then use that to compete with them and ultimately replace them
for the cost of showing ads?
warkdarrior
yesterday at 11:07 PM
Maybe, but then I have to negotiate with the artist, handle their refusal to draw art of my choosing, and wait for their (possibly unpredictable) schedule. AIs mostly avoid these problems.
13_9_7_7_5_18
yesterday at 11:38 PM
[dead]
op00to
yesterday at 11:30 PM
Didn’t the artist “steal” from artists that came before them by looking at and taking inspiration from their photos? Especially ones that would do such artistic genres as commercial coloring book art?
jmathai
yesterday at 11:35 PM
Yes. But they are people, perhaps with families to feed. Not computers.
Cool idea. I can see keeping colored pages of these by my kids up on the fridge a lot longer than what’s on there now!
nextworddev
today at 2:20 PM
Everything is a copy of a copy of a copy of…
Congrats!
I would like to know the cost of the tokens you are paying for an image. How many pages coloring book will be created against $24 book?
Thank you!
OpenAI costs are surprisingly expensive. It's about $7 to generate a whole book (24 pages). There are 8-24 images allowed in a book, with a cover too. So there'll be 48 max pages in a book (incl blank pages).
Thanks for your prompt and kind response. Yeah, it is expensive because it is new at the moment. They already mentioned the high token cost.
DrakeDeaton
today at 5:50 AM
Not sure if you're aware, but if you're interested in SEO/AEO marketing, there's very healthy monthly traffic for long-tail searches in this area. Some searches getting towards 100K per month.
Love the idea! Good luck.
I don't know much about it, feel free to send an email to dara@clevercoloringbook.com
jdthedisciple
today at 10:36 AM
Where do you get that from?
Maybe I am thinking a bit meta here. But who is supposed to colorize these pages? Kids that are in the progress of learning to instead use AI for everything? It can surely deliver better results quicker, after all.
Same question would be relevant if you wouldn't have used AI to generate these outlines, of course.
I just want to point out there is a certain irony of the "cut the branch you are sitting on"-kind here.
Edit: typo
This is an awesome. I had a similar one: Convert the dense non-fiction books into something more readable. eg. SAPIENS vs UNSTOPPABLE US.
But this makes me wonder: What is the barrier to entry for these apps now? Anyone can do it. There is going to be a barrage of apps/websites like this?
faeyanpiraat
today at 11:14 AM
Why would you do that to Sapiens, it's an enjoyable read
Oh, sorry - I'm going to be that person....
Your step 2 is wrong :-)
> Step 2: We convert them into a high-quality physical coloring book with OpenAI’s brand-new Sora model, then send it out for printing.
You don't convert it into a physical book /before/ sending it for printing.
darajava
today at 11:09 AM
Oh, lol. Nice catch - I'll fix that.
sathishmanohar
today at 9:44 AM
I'm from India. I was looking for a service like this but without sending me a physical book part.
I'd use this at @ $10 price point if I'm able get downloadable a4 coloring pages from a picture. It would be great. Also this way your customer base becomes international.
$10 for 20 pictures is a good price point for me. Pretty expensive but I'd still go for it.
I'll implement this today.
Edit: I've implemented this! It's a lot of code changes so I hope I didn't break anything.
I've been using (mostly) the OpenAI image generator for quite some time generating coloring pages, it's pretty decent at it and can generate just about anything my kids want as long as you word it a bit neutral to avoid it generating (something it recognizes as) copyrighted content.
Great idea to turn your own photos into a coloring book generator!
Edit: I wonder how you prevent it from generating copyrighted content when people upload e.g. 'photos' of Disney content? Or has that not been a problem yet?
Thanks! Hasn't been a problem yet, but if that happens I'd just email the customer directly and ask for a replacement photo/if it's okay to leave that one out.
Love it! Finally a product that properly leverages AI :)
darajava
today at 11:27 AM
Thanks!
Love it!
Idea: option to print "mini books".
I have some kids that still color, and it would be great to keep something in my pocket to give them quick with a crayon or pen.
I was thinking of doing different sizes alright! They might not be too much cheaper, that's the only problem I can think of there.
I'd pay for the convenience. Not sure about others!
Suggestions:
* one full PDF (including cover) of an example book.
* don't use AI images as examples - it's not obvious if the outline version will look as good on real images.
Thank you, I agree and I'll update the example photos.
I didn't add a PDF but I added some photos of the real end product to the bottom of the landing page now.
vunderba
yesterday at 10:47 PM
You'll want to really drive home the niche (through your feature set) that it's for family photos, because the generic photo to AI vectorized coloring book service has been done to death.
Can you show me an example? I think before 2-3 days ago this wasn't really possible without the output images looking really bad.
zengineer
today at 7:04 AM
Well done - I like the style of the page and simplicity!
We recently created one too, where you get a printable version: dibulo.com/editor - the next step will be to bring the templates to life again.
avree
yesterday at 11:25 PM
Cool idea and really nice looking site.
Pricing is quite high - 24 pages maximum for $23.99. There are 100-page coloring books on Amazon for $5.00, and the age group that really would be using this is not going to remember what was on the page a week from the day they did it.
Maybe it can work in the nice of "adult coloring books" - I've seen some social media content where people really go crazy on coloring books, and being able to get nice physical copy to work off could appeal there.
subpixel
yesterday at 11:44 PM
Presumably you aren’t the parent of a 5-7 year-old child. I might try this manually and save some money but my kids will absolutely cherish coloring themselves, their friends, and their parents. We’re on vacation now and this is gonna be big when we get back.
Interesting presumption. I know about the 100-page coloring books because I've bought them. Paying $1 per page at the speed they get colored would cause me to go bankrupt. I presume you're fabulously rich, and it doesn't matter.
zengineer
today at 7:01 AM
You may want to give dibulo.com a try. We also launched a photo -> coloring page, but we will go one step further that you can bring it to life again.
My 5 year old will start coloring, get bored and scribble all over it.
Thanks! I priced it as low as I could given the costs of printing the book, Sora's API costs, and the human effort that goes into it (there are some creative choices to be made too!). The 100 page books you see on Amazon aren't personalized and probably not the best quality. I'm also hoping a completed page from one of these books will be a nice keepsake for the parents as well as being more of an incentive for a child to exercise some creativity.
osigurdson
today at 4:29 AM
I tried copying the one of the photos into ChatGPT and asked it to make me a coloring book style image out of it. It is definitely not as good as this site (i.e. I don't think kids would recognize themselves). Good prompting!
Ask GPT to give you a prompt that would create a color book :-)
I always use LLMs for meta-prompting. They know themselves better than others :>
avereveard
today at 8:40 AM
They have an api now? amazing! I have been using gemini flash but results are... less than stellar.
Yes! https://openai.com/index/image-generation-api/
I was very excited when it came out. Google have Imagen 3 (is that the same as Gemini Flash?), but you need special access to be able to edit images. I haven't tested it yet but I think it's a lot cheaper than OpenAI
Gemini has released new models, maybe they are better.
Also, I request you to expand further, why Gemini is not better?
abaymado
yesterday at 10:48 PM
I like GPT wrapper's that let me personalize/customize existing real world things, and this a good example of that. I like it.
darkxanthos
today at 1:48 AM
Wow a lot of criticism. I'm considering a similar business. I think this is too expensive when printing this is so easy these days. But charging some small about per printable coloring book would be very attractive.
The printing aspect of this wasn't too easy... I wish I could charge less but as it stands (especially with surprising API costs) I'm barely making a profit on this.
Terretta
yesterday at 11:44 PM
Seems like this cat (and various variants in similar settings) was a top rated image in Sora's explore/images a week ago. Was it yours, should it be credited, or did you hit edit prompt<enter> to get a variant?
No worries, just wondering how that should work.
Wow, yes you're right. I did in fact take that image from the Sora homepage because I thought it was cute.
I pretty much just assumed they're all in the public domain. I can't find the image anymore so I've decided to remove it for now. I generated the other three myself.
themanmaran
yesterday at 10:43 PM
Nice and simple! I'm excited for all the fun micro businesses that get enabled by the new image API.
Things like your coloring book, instant sticker/tshirt/swag creation, video game assets, etc.
Also love the "tap 5 times for a discount" feature.
Thank you! I was happy with the discount thing alright but it's not useful for tracking referrals unfortunately.
This is a great idea and looks well done.
I wonder if printing services (Lulu?) have a automatic API or if it requires some manual intervention? (And the shipping part?)
Thanks! There is a good bit of manual effort involved on our side - we generate the images, regen any that don't look great, choose the best cover, and then send the PDF to Lulu. It's dropshipped, we never see the physical book.
gitroom
yesterday at 11:52 PM
Nicely done, Ive always wanted something like this for my family pics. you think AI-generated art will ever feel as special as something handmade?
I mean it's pretty close. The handmade element comes from coloring it in.
Can you preview the images? I uploaded one image and don't see the outline-version.
No, it's not a real-time process. We have an admin panel to generate the images, cover and PDF. There is a good bit of human input involved.
schuettla
today at 7:47 AM
great idea!
how did you realize the actual producing of the book? you connect to some print on demand api like from printify?
Yes I use the Lulu API. It's great!
How did the launch go? Could you share Revenue stats after the first 24 hours of the launch?
sabslikesobs
today at 2:08 AM
Do you ever handle the physical book, or is this a fully automated drop-shipping operation?
There is a good bit of manual effort involved on our side before we send the book to print - we generate the images, regen any that don't look great, choose the best cover, and then send the PDF to Lulu. Yes it's dropshipped, we never see the physical book.
transformi
today at 1:05 AM
Why don't you use canny/HED filter :O? (seems pretty overkill for this job..)
Do you not think the AI output looks far more polished and print-ready? Canny edges have a lot of noise and don't look at all clean for coloring book purposes.
irishmansevilla
today at 4:20 AM
Your contact form is not working . Try using FabForm !
Oh nice catch! Fixed, thanks.
Is there somewhere to download a PDF to print out?
No, but perhaps I could add this as a paid option.
pelagicAustral
today at 12:36 AM
Awesome idea, implementation and design!
kelvinjps10
yesterday at 10:57 PM
Why not just an option to print the image?
You can simply open up Chatgpt and generate the image yourself, faster than it’d take to transact with this third party. The cool thing is that they are printing a physical book for you.
Presumably, it’s more profitable to sell a physical book, which makes sense.
MaxLeiter
today at 12:51 AM
For those interested in building something similar, I prompted a story book generator using v0 and Gemini’s image generation a few weeks ago:
Demo: https://v0-story-maker.vercel.app/
The chat: https://v0.dev/chat/ai-story-book-creator-zw7TrmkN2Eb
The quality of the images is incredible! Great job
How much does the api cost to run? Do you have any safe guards in place in case bots try to build 1000 stories?
MaxLeiter
today at 2:21 AM
That’s all Gemini, I did very little prompting
I’m just using Geminis rate limits, because its pretty ridiculously cheap. You can get pretty far on just their free tier last I checked (when I made this the image model was 100% free)
I wrote about it a little bit here: https://x.com/max_leiter/status/1906492622551884187
wow!!!!
Any idea how much it costs to create a book?
jaredcwhite
today at 2:02 AM
[flagged]