studioglobal
Trending Discover
AnswersPublished11 sources

GPT Image 2 vs. Nano Banana: Benchmarks, Use Cases, and the 2026 Verdict

GPT Image 2 is the benchmark favorite for text to image: Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 2 (high) first at 1331 Elo. Choose GPT Image 2 for exact text, complex layouts, and prompt adherence; choose Nano Banana when Google/Gemini integration, documented 4K output, or fast iteration matters more.

Search & fact-check with Studio Global AIBrowse more from Discover
14K0
The image contains bold text announcing the introduction of ChatGPT Images 2.0, accompanied by a red circle and a blue rectangle, with the tagline "A new era of image generation" a
ChatGPT Images 2.0: OpenAI Launches Image Generation Model WithThe image contains bold text announcing the introduction of ChatGPT Images 2.0, accompanied by a red circle and a blue rectangle, with the tagline "A new era of image generation" at the bottom.

If your decision is based on the clearest public benchmark signal, GPT Image 2 wins the text-to-image comparison. Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 2 (high) first in its Text to Image Arena with a 1331 Elo score, ahead of GPT Image 1.5 and Nano Banana 2 in the visible ranking snippet [31]. But that is not the same as saying GPT Image 2 is the best choice for every workflow: Google’s Nano Banana documentation explicitly shows selectable 512, 1K, 2K, and 4K resolutions, and Google describes Nano Banana/Gemini image generation as supporting high-speed generation, prompt-based editing, and visual reasoning [35][43].

The short verdict

  • Text-to-image benchmark winner: GPT Image 2. The strongest leaderboard evidence available here is Artificial Analysis, where GPT Image 2 (high) leads with 1331 Elo [31].
  • Editing winner: too close to call from one leaderboard. Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 2 (high) at 1251 Elo for editing and Nano Banana Pro at 1250, while GPT Image 1.5 leads that specific editing leaderboard at 1267 [30].
  • Workflow winner: depends on your constraints. Nano Banana has clearer official evidence for 4K output options in the provided Google docs [35], while OpenAI provides clearer official GPT-image-2 pricing and tiered rate-limit details in the provided sources [13][14].

What exactly is being compared?

OpenAI’s developer documentation lists GPT Image 2 as gpt-image-2-2026-04-21 and shows tiered rate limits for the model [13]. OpenAI’s pricing page lists GPT-image-2 as a state-of-the-art image generation model and provides token-based prices for image inputs, cached image inputs, image outputs, text inputs, and cached text inputs [14].

Nano Banana is less tidy as a label because the provided sources use it across multiple Gemini image-generation routes. Google’s image-generation documentation presents Nano Banana image generation through the Gemini API using gemini-3.1-flash-image-preview in the visible code example [35]. Google Skills describes Gemini 2.5 Flash Image, also called Nano Banana, as a model for high-speed image generation, prompt-based editing, and visual reasoning [43]. Artificial Analysis’ editing leaderboard snippet also refers to Nano Banana Pro as Gemini 3 Pro Image [30].

That naming difference matters: when a benchmark names Nano Banana 2, Nano Banana Pro, or Gemini Flash Image, it may not be measuring the same route.

Benchmark comparison table

QuestionWhat the available evidence saysPractical read
Who leads text-to-image quality?Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 2 (high) first with 1331 Elo, followed by GPT Image 1.5 and Nano Banana 2 in the visible snippet [31].GPT Image 2 has the strongest benchmark case for text-to-image.
Who leads image editing?Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 1.5 first at 1267 Elo, GPT Image 2 second at 1251, and Nano Banana Pro third at 1250 [30].GPT Image 2 and Nano Banana Pro look effectively tied in that snippet.
Do third-party arena reports agree?Neurohive and CalcPro report a large GPT Image 2 lead, including a claimed +242 Elo margin in arena-style rankings [16][28].Directionally pro-GPT, but verify live leaderboards and methodology.
Which is better for exact text and layouts?Analytics Vidhya says GPT-image-2 makes sense when text inside images must be correct, prompts involve multiple constraints or layouts, or consistency matters [6].GPT Image 2 is the safer first test for ads, posters, packaging, diagrams, and UI mockups with text.
Which has clearer 4K workflow evidence?Google’s Nano Banana docs show a resolution setting with 512, 1K, 2K, and 4K options [35].Nano Banana is easier to validate from official docs when 4K is a hard requirement.
Which is easier to price from official docs?OpenAI lists GPT-image-2 pricing at $8 per 1M image input tokens, $2 per 1M cached image input tokens, and $30 per 1M image output tokens [14].OpenAI’s official pricing is clearer in the provided source set.
Which is faster or cheaper?Google Skills positions Nano Banana as high-speed [43], and Analytics Vidhya says Nano Banana 2 is cheaper at scale, especially with batch processing [6].Nano Banana may be better for fast or cost-sensitive production, but verify current pricing and latency.

Text-to-image benchmarks: GPT Image 2 has the clearest lead

The cleanest benchmark signal in the provided sources is the Artificial Analysis text-to-image leaderboard snippet. It lists GPT Image 2 (high) as the top text-to-image model with a 1331 Elo score [31].

That does not prove GPT Image 2 will beat Nano Banana on every prompt. Elo-style leaderboards reflect aggregate preferences under a specific evaluation setup, and model rankings can shift as prompts, sampling, and model versions change. Still, if the question is which model has the stronger text-to-image benchmark evidence in this source set, the answer is GPT Image 2 [31].

Several third-party reports are even more favorable to GPT Image 2. Neurohive reports that GPT Image 2 took first place across image-generation categories with a +242 Elo lead over the nearest competitor, citing LM Arena [16]. CalcPro reports a 1512 text-to-image score and a +242 lead over Nano Banana 2 [28]. Those reports support the same general direction, but they should be treated as secondary evidence unless you verify the live leaderboard and evaluation method yourself.

Editing benchmarks: closer than the hype suggests

The editing picture is much less one-sided. In the Artificial Analysis editing leaderboard snippet, GPT Image 1.5 leads with 1267 Elo, GPT Image 2 (high) is second with 1251, and Nano Banana Pro is third with 1250 [30]. A one-point difference between GPT Image 2 and Nano Banana Pro is not enough to support a sweeping claim that GPT Image 2 dominates editing.

Another caveat: Arena.ai’s image-editing leaderboard snippet shows 

gemini-2.5-flash-image-preview (nano-banana)
at 1300±3 Elo, but the visible snippet does not show GPT Image 2 in the same row range [29]. That makes it useful as evidence that Nano Banana is competitive in editing arenas, but not sufficient by itself to rank GPT Image 2 against Nano Banana in that leaderboard.

The practical conclusion: for editing, test both on your own image types. The available leaderboard evidence does not justify treating GPT Image 2 as an automatic editing winner over Nano Banana Pro [30].

Where GPT Image 2 earns its advantage

GPT Image 2 is the better first choice when the image has to obey text, layout, or instruction constraints. Analytics Vidhya’s comparison summary says GPT-image-2 makes sense when text inside images must be correct, prompts involve multiple constraints or layouts, or output consistency matters [6]. A hands-on comparison reached a similar mental model: GPT wins where “every character matters,” while Nano Banana wins where “every pixel of light matters” [3].

That maps directly to common production use cases. Start with GPT Image 2 for:

  • Ad creatives with exact headlines or calls to action.
  • Posters, menus, signage, and product labels.
  • UI mockups, app screens, and web graphics with readable interface copy.
  • Diagrams, infographics, and educational visuals with annotations.
  • Prompts with many objects, spatial relationships, or layout rules.

This does not mean Nano Banana cannot do those tasks. It means the available comparison evidence gives GPT Image 2 the stronger first-test case when text and structure are expensive to fix later [3][6][31].

Where Nano Banana remains the practical pick

Nano Banana’s strongest supported advantage in this source set is workflow clarity around Gemini and high-resolution output. Google’s image-generation docs show aspect-ratio choices ranging across square, portrait, landscape, and ultrawide formats, plus selectable resolutions of 512, 1K, 2K, and 4K [35]. If 4K output is a hard requirement, that is easier to validate from the provided Google documentation than from the provided OpenAI snippets.

Nano Banana is also positioned around speed and iteration. Google Skills describes Gemini 2.5 Flash Image, or Nano Banana, as a model for high-speed image generation, prompt-based editing, and visual reasoning [43]. The hands-on comparison that ended with 2 GPT wins, 2 Nano Banana wins, and 2 ties also found a more balanced real-world picture than the most aggressive leaderboard headlines suggest [3].

Start with Nano Banana when:

  • Your application already uses Gemini, Google AI Studio, or Google developer tooling [35][43].
  • You need documented 4K image-generation options in the API path [35].
  • You are generating high volumes of drafts, variants, or ideation images.
  • Visual polish, lighting, and overall realism matter more than exact embedded text [3].
  • Cost is a major constraint, while remembering that third-party cost claims should be verified against current pricing [6].

Pricing and rate limits: what the official sources show

OpenAI’s official pricing page gives a clear token-based structure for GPT-image-2. The provided pricing snippet lists image inputs at $8 per 1M tokens, cached image inputs at $2 per 1M tokens, image outputs at $30 per 1M tokens, text inputs at $5 per 1M tokens, and cached text inputs at $1.25 per 1M tokens [14].

OpenAI’s GPT Image 2 model page also shows tiered rate limits. In the visible snippet, Free is not supported; Tier 1 is listed at 100,000 TPM and 5 IPM; and Tier 5 reaches 8,000,000 TPM and 250 IPM [13].

For Nano Banana, the provided official Google image-generation snippet confirms model routing, aspect ratios, and resolution options, but it does not expose a comparable price table [35]. Analytics Vidhya says Nano Banana 2 is significantly cheaper at scale, especially with batch processing [6], but that is a third-party comparison claim. For budget planning, verify the current Google route, model variant, resolution, batch mode, and billing page before committing.

The best production strategy: route by job, not brand

For most serious workflows, the strongest answer is not one universal winner. It is prompt routing.

Use GPT Image 2 for tasks where mistakes are costly: exact copy, multilingual text, UI screens, diagrams, product packaging, signage, posters, and multi-constraint layouts. That recommendation matches the available benchmark lead in text-to-image and the comparison evidence around text and layout fidelity [3][6][31].

Use Nano Banana for fast visual exploration, Gemini-native apps, high-resolution workflows, 4K-oriented output paths, and images where final text can be added or corrected later in a design tool. That recommendation matches Google’s documented resolution options and the positioning of Nano Banana/Gemini image generation as high-speed and editing-capable [35][43].

How to run your own fair benchmark

Public leaderboards are useful, but image generation is unusually prompt-sensitive. One hands-on comparison even concluded that prompt quality moved GPT Image 2 by a full tier, which can be a bigger effect than the model-vs-model gap in some tests [3].

A practical benchmark should include:

  1. The same prompts and reference images for both models. Do not compare a polished GPT prompt against a casual Nano Banana prompt.
  2. Separate scoring categories. Score text accuracy, prompt adherence, composition, photorealism, editing quality, latency, and cost separately.
  3. Real production constraints. Include your actual aspect ratios, resolution needs, rate limits, and budget assumptions, because those are documented differently across the provided OpenAI and Google sources [13][14][35].
  4. Exact model names. Record whether you tested GPT Image 2, Nano Banana 2, Nano Banana Pro, Gemini Flash Image, or another route, because the naming varies across sources [30][35][43].
  5. Blind review when possible. Human preference can change when reviewers know which model produced which image.

Final verdict

GPT Image 2 wins the benchmark headline for text-to-image quality in the available evidence, with Artificial Analysis listing GPT Image 2 (high) first at 1331 Elo [31]. But Nano Banana remains a practical production choice where Gemini integration, documented 4K output options, speed, and cost-sensitive iteration matter more than maximum text fidelity [35][43].

If you are building a single default route, start with GPT Image 2 for text-heavy and layout-sensitive images. If you are building a production system, route tasks: GPT Image 2 for precision, Nano Banana for high-resolution Gemini-native iteration, and your own benchmark prompts for the final call.

Studio Global AI

Search, cite, and publish your own answer

Use this topic as a starting point for a fresh source-backed answer, then compare citations before you share it.

Search & fact-check with Studio Global AI

Key takeaways

  • GPT Image 2 is the benchmark favorite for text to image: Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 2 (high) first at 1331 Elo.
  • Choose GPT Image 2 for exact text, complex layouts, and prompt adherence; choose Nano Banana when Google/Gemini integration, documented 4K output, or fast iteration matters more.
  • Treat third party arena claims as directional, not final procurement evidence. Verify live leaderboards, pricing, latency, and failure cases with your own prompt set.

Supporting visuals

Illustration comparing GPT Image 2 and Nano Banana 2 image-generation prompts and benchmarks
stop hyperbolic prompts nano banana 2 gpt image 2 guide en image 0 图示Benchmark signals favor GPT Image 2 for text-to-image quality, while Nano Banana remains strong for Gemini-native and high-resolution workflows.
nano banana 2 speed test 2k 4k image generation guide en image 0 图示
nano banana 2 speed test 2k 4k image generation guide en image 0 图示

People also ask

What is the short answer to "GPT Image 2 vs. Nano Banana: Benchmarks, Use Cases, and the 2026 Verdict"?

GPT Image 2 is the benchmark favorite for text to image: Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 2 (high) first at 1331 Elo.

What are the key points to validate first?

GPT Image 2 is the benchmark favorite for text to image: Artificial Analysis lists GPT Image 2 (high) first at 1331 Elo. Choose GPT Image 2 for exact text, complex layouts, and prompt adherence; choose Nano Banana when Google/Gemini integration, documented 4K output, or fast iteration matters more.

What should I do next in practice?

Treat third party arena claims as directional, not final procurement evidence. Verify live leaderboards, pricing, latency, and failure cases with your own prompt set.

Which related topic should I explore next?

Continue with "MRSA Management in Nursing Homes: Evidence for a Team-Based Approach" for another angle and extra citations.

Open related page

What should I compare this against?

Cross-check this answer against "Should You Retake FRACDS (GDP) Before Orthodontics?".

Open related page

Continue your research

The image illustrates three investigation steps for MRSA management in nursing homes: gathering evidence through collecting medical data and reviewing policies, interviewing witnes

MRSA Management in Nursing Homes: Evidence for a Team-Based Approach

MRSA Management in Nursing Homes: Evidence for a Team-Based Approach

The Fellowship Examination is an assessment of clinical and theoretical knowledge in an experiential context, over a broad base of general dental practice.

Should You Retake FRACDS (GDP) Before Orthodontics?

Should you retake FRACDS (GDP) before orthodontic training?

# Comparing Google Tensor Processor (TPU) with Nvidia, AMD Instinct MI, and Amazon Tranium and Inferentia for AI Training and Inference. When choosing hardware for AI training and

Google TPU vs NVIDIA GPU: Which AI Accelerator Should You Choose?

Google TPU vs NVIDIA GPU: Which AI Accelerator Should You Choose?

Hinge Health to announce first quarter 2026 financial results on May 5, 2026 ... Case study: Financial services. Why and how this global agency prioritizes

Hong Kong Gym Competitor Research: What Public Sources Verify About CrossFit CSTL

How to Build a Source-Backed Competitor Case Study for Hong Kong Gyms

Research conversation

You

Research question

Search for GPT Image 2 vs. Nano Banana benchmarks and compare them as comprehensively as possible.

Studio Global AI40 sources

Cited answer

GPT Image 2 appears to be the stronger benchmark leader, especially for prompt following, text-in-image, spatial reasoning, and edits, while Nano Banana is the better default when speed, cost, Gemini integration, and high-resolution/4K workflow matter more. The evidence is uneven: official docs confirm model availability/features, but many “benchmark” numbers come from third-party arenas or SEO-style comparison posts, so treat exact Elo gaps and category scores as directional rather than definitive.

Key benchmark takeaways

  • GPT Image 2 is listed in OpenAI’s API docs as gpt-image-2-2026-04-21, confirming it is an API model with documented rate limits and access controls [1].

  • Google’s official Nano Banana image-generation docs show support for multiple aspect ratios and selectable resolutions including 512, 1K, 2K, and 4K [2].

  • Third-party benchmark reports generally rank GPT Image 2 above Nano Banana/Nano Banana 2 in overall image-generation quality, with one Arena-related report claiming GPT Image 2 reached about 1512 Elo and led Nano Banana 2 by 242 points in text-to-image [13].

  • Artificial Analysis has a dedicated GPT Image 2 model page comparing quality, generation time, and price against other image models including Nano Banana, but the search result did not expose enough numeric details to independently verify all scores [11].

  • A hands-on comparison found a much closer result: 2 GPT wins, 2 Nano Banana wins, and 2 ties, summarizing GPT as better when “every character matters” and Nano Banana as better when “every pixel of light matters” [9].

Comparison table

DimensionGPT Image 2Nano Banana / Nano Banana 2Practical winner
Overall arena rankingReported as #1 in some third-party image arenas, with a claimed 1512 Elo and large lead over Nano Banana 2 [13]Reported as #2 in the same comparison, around 1360 Elo in one source [13]GPT Image 2, but verify live leaderboards
Text renderingMultiple comparisons say GPT Image 2 leads on text accuracy and layout-heavy outputs [10][14]Often described as improved but weaker for exact text and multi-constraint typography [9][14]GPT Image 2
Prompt adherenceGPT Image 2 is repeatedly described as stronger on complex constraints, spatial logic, and multi-object instructions [10][14]Nano Banana is competitive for simpler creative prompts and fast production tasks [9]GPT Image 2
Photorealism / lightingHands-on comparison says Nano Banana wins where lighting and pixel-level aesthetics matter [9]Nano Banana is often praised for realism, speed, and polished visuals [9]Nano Banana, depending on prompt
EditingArena-related snippets say GPT Image 2 scored highly on single-image edit tasks [13]Nano Banana is widely positioned as strong for editing and image-grounded workflows, but exact benchmark evidence is thinner in the available results [2][15]Slight GPT Image 2 on benchmark claims; Nano Banana for workflow
ResolutionOpenAI pricing/docs confirm GPT Image 2 exists, but search snippets did not expose a complete official resolution matrix [1][3]Google’s official docs show Nano Banana supports 512, 1K, 2K, and 4K outputs [2]Nano Banana for explicit 4K support
SpeedSome comparison posts claim Nano Banana is faster and more production-efficient [9][14]Official Google docs confirm generation API support but not benchmark speed in the search snippet [2]Nano Banana, based on third-party reports
CostOpenAI’s pricing page lists GPT-image-2 as “state-of-the-art” and gives token-based image pricing categories, but the snippet does not expose full per-image costs [3]Third-party sources claim Nano Banana/Nano Banana Pro can be materially cheaper per image, but exact figures vary across posts [5][14]Likely Nano Banana, but confirm current API pricing
EcosystemGPT Image 2 fits OpenAI/ChatGPT workflows and API usage [1][3]Nano Banana fits Gemini API, Google AI Studio, and Vertex-style workflows [2]Depends on stack

Where GPT Image 2 seems better

  • Use GPT Image 2 when the output must obey complicated instructions, object placement, scene logic, or precise layout constraints, because multiple comparisons describe it as stronger on spatial logic and multi-constraint prompts [10][14].

  • Use GPT Image 2 for images containing readable text, signs, UI mockups, labels, packaging, diagrams, or posters, because comparison posts consistently identify text rendering as a major GPT Image 2 advantage [10][14].

  • Use GPT Image 2 when you care most about benchmark rank, since third-party arena-style sources place it above Nano Banana 2 and report a large Elo lead [13].

Where Nano Banana seems better

  • Use Nano Banana when you need explicit 4K output support through Google’s documented image-generation API, because Google’s docs list selectable output resolutions including 4K [2].

  • Use Nano Banana when speed and cost matter more than maximum instruction fidelity, because third-party comparisons repeatedly position it as faster and more cost-efficient than GPT Image 2 [9][14].

  • Use Nano Banana if your workflow already lives in Gemini, Google AI Studio, or Google’s developer tooling, because Google documents Nano Banana image generation directly in the Gemini API docs [2].

Evidence quality and caveats

  • The strongest sources are the official OpenAI and Google docs for model availability, API support, pricing categories, aspect ratios, and resolutions [1][2][3].

  • The weakest evidence is exact “winner” scoring from SEO-style comparison blogs, because many publish benchmark tables without transparent prompt sets, sample sizes, or reproducible methodology [10][13][14].

  • Arena-style human-preference scores are useful for directional quality, but they can shift quickly as models update, prompts differ, and leaderboards separate text-to-image, editing, and multimodal tasks [8][11][13].

  • Insufficient evidence is available from the search results to state a fully verified, reproducible benchmark suite covering all categories such as typography, photorealism, character consistency, editing, latency, cost, and safety under one methodology.

Practical recommendation

  • Pick GPT Image 2 for: ad creatives with exact copy, infographics, product mockups, UI screenshots, diagrams, posters, multi-object layouts, and prompts where mistakes in text or relationships are unacceptable.

  • Pick Nano Banana for: high-throughput generation, 4K-oriented workflows, quick visual ideation, Gemini-integrated apps, lower-cost production, and photorealistic or lighting-heavy images where exact text is less important.

  • Best production strategy: route difficult text/layout/edit prompts to GPT Image 2, and route bulk, fast, high-resolution, or cost-sensitive prompts to Nano Banana.

Sources

  • [3] GPT Image 2 vs Nano Banana 2: Hands-On 2026 Comparisongenspark.ai

    Net: 2 GPT wins, 2 Nano Banana wins, 2 ties. A much tighter picture than the framing you'll see elsewhere. The mental model that holds up: GPT wins where every character matters. Nano Banana wins where every pixel of light matters. Most real work sits somew...

  • [6] Is GPT Image 2 the Best Image Generation Model? - Analytics Vidhyaanalyticsvidhya.com

    At scale, Nano Banana 2 is significantly cheaper, especially with batch processing. gpt-image-2 makes sense when: Text inside images must be correct Prompts involve multiple constraints or layouts Output consistency matters Otherwise, Nano Banana 2 is the m...

  • [13] GPT Image 2 Model | OpenAI APIdevelopers.openai.com

    gpt-image-2-2026-04-21 Rate limits Rate limits ensure fair and reliable access to the API by placing specific caps on requests or tokens used within a given time period. Your usage tier determines how high these limits are set and automatically increases as...

  • [14] API Pricing - OpenAIopenai.com

    Price Audio: $32.00 / 1M tokens for inputs $0.40 / 1M tokens for cached inputs $64.00 / 1M tokens for outputs Text: $4.00 / 1M tokens for inputs $0.40 / 1M tokens for cached inputs $16.00 / 1M tokens for outputs Image: $5.00 / 1M tokens for inputs $0.50 / 1...

  • [16] ChatGPT Images 2.0: OpenAI Launches Image Generation Model ...neurohive.io

    neurohive logo neurohive logo English Русский English ChatGPT Images 2.0: OpenAI Launches Image Generation Model With Reasoning, 2K Resolution, and Multilingual Text gpt-images-2 gpt-images-2 April 21, 2026, OpenAI released ChatGPT Images 2.0 powered by the...

  • [28] GPT Image 2 Launched April 21, 2026: 242-Point ELO Lead, Reasoning Mode & What It Means for AI Image Generation — CalcPro Blog — CalcProcalcpro.cloud

    10 min read --- Quick Numbers - 🚀 April 21, 2026 — GPT Image 2 ( gpt-image-2 ) official launch date - 🏆 +242 ELO — GPT Image 2's lead over Nano Banana 2 on Image Arena (largest in leaderboard history) - 📊 ELO 1512 — GPT Image 2 text-to-image score; 1513...

  • [29] Image Editing AI Leaderboard - Best Models Comparedarena.ai

    8 89 grok-imagine-image-pro (20260207)") xAI · Proprietary 1316±4 211,473 9 810 grok-imagine-image (20260207)") xAI · Proprietary 1312±4 146,225 10 1014 Bytedance seedream-4.5 Bytedance · Proprietary 1304±3 639,753 11 914 wan2.7-image-pro Alibaba · Propriet...

  • [30] Image Editing Leaderboard - Top AI Image Modelsartificialanalysis.ai

    Generate and compare your own images across top models like Nano Banana and GPT Image. Image Editing LeaderboardArtificial Analysis GPT Image 2 (high) Frequently Asked Questions Which is the best AI image editing model? GPT Image 1.5 (high) currently leads...

  • [31] Text to Image Leaderboard - Top AI Image Models - Artificial Analysisartificialanalysis.ai

    Generate and compare your own images across top models like Nano Banana and GPT Image. Text to Image LeaderboardArtificial Analysis GPT Image 2 (high), MAI-Image-2, ImagineArt 2.0 Frequently Asked Questions Which is the best Text to Image AI model? GPT Imag...

  • [35] Nano Banana image generation - Google AI for Developersai.google.dev

    from google import genai from google.genai import types from PIL import Image prompt = "An office group photo of these people, they are making funny faces." aspect ratio = "5:4" "1:1","1:4","1:8","2:3","3:2","3:4","4:1","4:3","4:5","5:4","8:1","9:16","16:9"...

  • [43] Next 2026 - Image Generation with Gemini - Nano Banana | Google Skillsskills.google

    This content is not yet optimized for mobile devices. For the best experience, please visit us on a desktop computer using a link sent by email. Note: To ensure a consistent and high-performance experience, this lab may provide cached responses for some mod...