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.
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.
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.
> 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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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).
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.
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'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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
I've had this idea years ago and searched extensively for a way to turn images into nice line art, but it turns out there needs to be a good bit of creativity (AI) to do so. Old school computer science techniques don't cut it.
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.
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.
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 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…
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.
$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.
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)
It seems the loophole on this site, is the examples (by my best guess) are AI.
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.
I think the Ghiblipocalypse has gotten people on edge.
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
> 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.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43801189
Here's some generic cartoon styles to look at: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/04/ef/5f04ef77ce3beb272a61...
The cartoon owl at the top has a different vibe and would probably work for the comics as well.
> Generate a version of this photo that can be used as a coloring sheet
> 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.
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!
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
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.
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.
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.
The intention and cost of something like that is not at all comparable to what is being offered here.
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.
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.
Some of these replies seem rather dismissive to the artists’ plight.
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.
You can see where this is going, right? In the end, humanity and even artists will be fine overall, even if the world changes.
for the cost of showing ads?
Almost nobody is paying $100 or more for a custom 5-page coloring book.
This service isn’t taking work from human artists.
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!
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?
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?
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).
Love the idea! Good luck.
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.
Edit: I've implemented this! It's a lot of code changes so I hope I didn't break anything.
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?
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.
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.
* 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.
I didn't add a PDF but I added some photos of the real end product to the bottom of the landing page now.
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.
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
Also, I request you to expand further, why Gemini is not better?
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.
I always use LLMs for meta-prompting. They know themselves better than others :>
No worries, just wondering how that should work.
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.
Things like your coloring book, instant sticker/tshirt/swag creation, video game assets, etc.
Also love the "tap 5 times for a discount" feature.
I wonder if printing services (Lulu?) have a automatic API or if it requires some manual intervention? (And the shipping part?)
Sora: https://clevercoloringbook.com/samples/3_cartoon.png
I've had this idea years ago and searched extensively for a way to turn images into nice line art, but it turns out there needs to be a good bit of creativity (AI) to do so. Old school computer science techniques don't cut it.
Demo: https://v0-story-maker.vercel.app/
The chat: https://v0.dev/chat/ai-story-book-creator-zw7TrmkN2Eb
Any idea how much it costs to create a book?
How much does the api cost to run? Do you have any safe guards in place in case bots try to build 1000 stories?
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