to the gemini admins, i bought the pro package not to wait half a day for a photo

Addressing User Concerns About the Gemini Pro Package: A Candid Overview

As a dedicated user of AI-generated imagery tools, I recently invested in the Gemini Pro package, expecting enhanced efficiency and quality. However, my experience has highlighted several issues that I believe other potential users should be aware of. This article aims to objectively analyze these concerns and offer constructive feedback to the Gemini development team.

Unanticipated Rejections and Lack of Transparency

One of the most frustrating aspects has been the prompt rejection of submissions without detailed explanations. Often, prompts are declined with a generic statement citing “violation” without clarifying what specific part of the request exceeded community standards or guidelines. This lack of transparency hampers users’ ability to modify their prompts effectively and hinders progress.

Inconsistent Output Performance

Despite submitting identical prompts, the system exhibits inconsistency, sometimes producing the desired images and at other times failing to generate visuals. This unpredictability can be disruptive, especially for users relying on consistent results for professional projects.

Delays and Missing Deliverables

While the system occasionally announces that an image is complete, users are sometimes left without the actual visual output. These delays or missing files can significantly impact workflow and project timelines.

Content Filtering and Sensitivity Filters

The platform appears to be overly sensitive concerning certain themes, notably feminism. It often scans common words or phrases, potentially limiting creative freedom or requiring additional effort to bypass filters. Striking a balance between moderation and creative flexibility remains essential.

Lack of Image Size Specifications

Another area for improvement is the omission of image dimension details. Knowing the output size is crucial for integrating images seamlessly into various projects, and clear specifications would help users plan accordingly.

Quality Deterioration Over Time

A noticeable decline in image quality has been observed, particularly regarding finer details such as fabric textures, lighting, and overall realism. Maintaining high-quality output consistently is vital for professional use.

Unpredictable Behavior of the VEO 3.1 Model

The VEO 3.1 model occasionally adds actions or elements that do not align with user prompts, which can be frustrating. Comparing it directly to Sora 2 might be unfair, but users familiar with diverse models may notice these differences. Further refinement and clear guidelines could enhance user experience.

Regional Limitations in Facial Accuracy

It’s worth noting that while many European and American users might find Gemini proficient in face creation, users from Asian backgrounds may encounter limitations due to data training sets. S