Curious how others balance speed versus control in real use, not theory.
I’ve been thinking a lot about how much control I actually want when using AI image generators. On one hand, automation is great when I’m in a hurry or just testing ideas, but on the other, I sometimes feel disconnected from the result. When everything is one-click, the image looks fine but doesn’t really feel like “mine.” I’ve noticed that when tools offer sliders, depth tweaks, or small manual adjustments, I spend more time but also feel more satisfied. Curious how others balance speed versus control in real use, not theory.
8 Views
I get what you’re saying, and I’ve run into the same issue. Full automation is convenient, especially when you’re experimenting or trying to understand what a tool can do, but it often feels like the AI is making all the creative decisions for you. From my experience, the best results come when automation handles the boring parts and I can still step in to fine-tune things like structure, focus, or depth.
I’ve played around with a few generators recently, including ones like this: deepsukebe
. What stood out to me wasn’t the speed, but the fact that you can adjust things after the initial generation instead of starting over every time. That changes how you work. Instead of “generate, discard, repeat,” it becomes more like editing a draft.
For example, I was working on an image where the automated result looked okay at first glance, but the depth felt off and the lighting didn’t match the mood I wanted. Being able to tweak those details manually saved time in the long run and gave me a result that actually matched my intention. Too much automation can feel efficient, but it also limits learning. When I’m allowed to make small mistakes and corrections, I understand the tool better and get more consistent outcomes.