226 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
226 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
slug: too-many-models-problem
|
|
title: "You Don't Need 47 Image Models. You Need One That Works Consistently."
|
|
status: inbox
|
|
created: 2024-12-27
|
|
source: research
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Idea
|
|
|
|
## Discovery
|
|
|
|
**Source:** Weekly digest 2024-12-27, Hacker News, Reddit
|
|
**Evidence:**
|
|
|
|
HN Quote:
|
|
> "It is just very hard to make any generalizations because any single prompt will lead to so many different types of images. Every model has strengths and weaknesses depending on what you are going for."
|
|
> — Hacker News, December 2024
|
|
|
|
Community Pain:
|
|
- Fal.ai offers dozens of models
|
|
- Replicate has 100+ image models
|
|
- Runware positioning as "one API for all AI models"
|
|
- Developers overwhelmed by choice
|
|
|
|
**Reddit Pain Point:**
|
|
- Constant questions about "which model for X?"
|
|
- No consensus on best practices
|
|
- Switching costs high (prompts don't transfer between models)
|
|
|
|
## Why This Matters
|
|
|
|
**Strategic Rationale:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Counter-Positioning**
|
|
- Competitors compete on model variety
|
|
- We compete on consistency and simplicity
|
|
- "Less but better" positioning
|
|
|
|
2. **Developer Pain Point**
|
|
- Choice paralysis is real
|
|
- Prompt engineering doesn't transfer across models
|
|
- Inconsistent results kill production workflows
|
|
|
|
3. **Our Differentiation**
|
|
- @name references solve consistency problem
|
|
- Curated models, not marketplace
|
|
- Project-based organization
|
|
- "Pick once, use forever" philosophy
|
|
|
|
## Potential Angle
|
|
|
|
**Anti-complexity manifesto + practical guide**
|
|
|
|
**Hook:**
|
|
"Replicate has 100+ image models. Fal.ai offers dozens. Runware promises 'all AI models in one API.' Meanwhile, you just want to generate a consistent hero image for your blog posts."
|
|
|
|
**Structure:**
|
|
|
|
1. **The Model Explosion Problem**
|
|
- Screenshot Replicate's model marketplace
|
|
- Show 47 variations of Stable Diffusion
|
|
- Developer quote: "Which model do I use for photorealistic portraits?"
|
|
- **The answer:** "It depends" (unhelpful)
|
|
|
|
2. **Why More Models ≠ Better Results**
|
|
- Prompt engineering is model-specific
|
|
- What works in SDXL breaks in Flux
|
|
- Production consistency requires same model
|
|
- Switching costs: re-engineering all prompts
|
|
|
|
3. **The Hidden Cost of Choice**
|
|
- Time: Testing 10 models to find "the one"
|
|
- Money: Burning credits on experiments
|
|
- Maintenance: Model versions update, prompts break
|
|
- Quote: "I spent 3 hours picking a model, then realized my prompts sucked anyway"
|
|
|
|
4. **What You Actually Need**
|
|
- ONE good model for your use case
|
|
- Consistent prompting patterns
|
|
- Version control for working prompts
|
|
- Project organization (context matters)
|
|
|
|
5. **How Banatie Solves This**
|
|
- Curated models: We picked the best, you focus on building
|
|
- @name references: Consistency across generations
|
|
- Project organization: Context preserved automatically
|
|
- **Philosophy:** "We're opinionated so you don't have to be"
|
|
|
|
6. **Practical Guide: Pick Your Model Once**
|
|
```
|
|
IF photorealistic portraits → Flux Realism
|
|
IF illustration/concept art → SDXL
|
|
IF speed matters → Flux Schnell
|
|
IF need control → Flux Dev
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Then STOP. Use that model. Build workflow around it.
|
|
|
|
7. **When Model Variety Actually Helps**
|
|
- Experimentation phase (before production)
|
|
- Specific artistic styles (Ghibli, pixel art)
|
|
- Niche use cases (medical imaging, architecture)
|
|
|
|
**But:** 80% of developers need consistency, not variety.
|
|
|
|
**Call to Action:**
|
|
- Try Banatie's opinionated approach
|
|
- Download our "Model Selection Worksheet"
|
|
- Join workflow-first developers
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Keyword Research
|
|
|
|
**Conducted:** 2025-12-27 by @strategist
|
|
**Tool:** DataForSEO (Google Ads Search Volume)
|
|
**Location:** United States
|
|
**Language:** English
|
|
|
|
## Primary Keywords Tested
|
|
|
|
All tested keywords returned **zero or negligible search volume**:
|
|
|
|
| Keyword | Volume | Status |
|
|
|---------|--------|--------|
|
|
| too many ai models | 0 | No data |
|
|
| consistent ai image generation | 0 | No data |
|
|
| ai image api comparison | 0 | No data |
|
|
|
|
## Assessment
|
|
|
|
**Opportunity Score:** 🔴 Low (for direct SEO)
|
|
|
|
**Findings:**
|
|
- **Problem-aware keywords have zero volume** — people don't search for the problem this way
|
|
- Developers experience this pain but don't articulate it in search queries
|
|
- This is a "solution-unaware" problem:
|
|
- They feel choice paralysis
|
|
- They don't search "too many models"
|
|
- They search specific model names or comparisons
|
|
|
|
**Strategic Value:**
|
|
- **Not an SEO play** — won't rank for high-volume keywords
|
|
- **Thought leadership piece** — articulates unspoken frustration
|
|
- **Social/community distribution** — Hacker News, Reddit, Twitter
|
|
- **Counter-positioning** — differentiates from competitors' "more is better"
|
|
|
|
**Alternative Keyword Strategy:**
|
|
|
|
Instead of problem-focused keywords, target:
|
|
- "stable diffusion vs flux" — comparison searches (volume unknown)
|
|
- "best ai image model" — solution-seeking searches
|
|
- "ai image generation best practices" — educational queries
|
|
|
|
**Distribution Strategy:**
|
|
|
|
Since SEO potential is low, focus on:
|
|
1. **Hacker News** — controversial opinion pieces do well
|
|
2. **r/MachineLearning, r/StableDiffusion** — community discussion
|
|
3. **LinkedIn** — CTOs/tech leads resonate with "less is more"
|
|
4. **Twitter** — thread format, tag model providers
|
|
|
|
**Recommendation:**
|
|
|
|
Write this as **opinion/manifesto piece** for:
|
|
- Brand differentiation (not SEO)
|
|
- Community discussion (HN front page potential)
|
|
- Thought leadership (shows market understanding)
|
|
|
|
**Do NOT write if:**
|
|
- Primary goal is organic traffic
|
|
- Need immediate SEO results
|
|
- Looking for high-volume keywords
|
|
|
|
**DO write if:**
|
|
- Want to establish counter-positioning
|
|
- Have strong opinion to share
|
|
- Targeting social/community distribution
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Keywords (original notes)
|
|
|
|
Potential:
|
|
- "best AI image model for developers"
|
|
- "stable diffusion vs flux"
|
|
- "consistent AI image generation"
|
|
- "too many AI models"
|
|
- "image generation best practices"
|
|
|
|
## Notes
|
|
|
|
**Tone:**
|
|
- Empathetic (we get the frustration)
|
|
- Opinionated (we have a thesis)
|
|
- Practical (actionable advice)
|
|
- NOT arrogant ("competitors are dumb")
|
|
|
|
**Risk:**
|
|
Sounds like we're limiting features.
|
|
|
|
**Mitigation:**
|
|
Frame as "opinionated defaults with flexibility underneath"
|
|
- We curate, but you CAN use any model
|
|
- Most developers need simplicity, power users get flexibility
|
|
- Better to be excellent at 3 models than mediocre at 47
|
|
|
|
**Competitor Response:**
|
|
- Replicate will say "but choice is good!"
|
|
- We say "choice without guidance is paralysis"
|
|
- Different philosophies for different developers
|
|
|
|
**Production Notes:**
|
|
- Need quotes from developers about model confusion
|
|
- Screenshot model marketplaces (Replicate, fal.ai)
|
|
- Create decision tree for model selection
|
|
- Test prompt portability across models (show it breaks)
|
|
|
|
**Similar Positioning:**
|
|
- 37signals (Basecamp): "Less software, more results"
|
|
- Apple: "Curated ecosystem vs Android chaos"
|
|
- Notion: "One tool vs 10 specialized tools"
|
|
|
|
We're applying same philosophy to AI image generation.
|