Hands-On with Imagen 4: Is Google's Latest Upgrade a Step Back?

Google DeepMind's new Imagen 4 arrived with big promises—sharper details, better textures, and improved text rendering. But after extensive testing, I'm left wondering: Did Google take a step backward?Here's my unfiltered experience—where Imagen 4 shines, where it fails, and how to squeeze the best results out of it.

What Google Promised vs. Reality

At Google I/O 2025, Imagen 4 was pitched as a major leap forward:✔ Hyper-realistic details (fabrics, fur, water droplets)✔ Better text rendering—ideal for posters, comics, and designs✔ 2K resolution support and more aspect ratiosBut does it actually deliver?

Putting Imagen 4 to the Test

Test 1: A Military Base Scene

Prompt: "Soldiers gearing up for battle at a military base."Result: A decent environment, but the soldiers? Disappointing.

• Faces looked smudged, generic.
• No distinction between characters.
• Details like gear and uniforms lacked realism.

Verdict: 5/10 — Passable, but not impressive.

Test 2: A Woman by the River (Fish-Eye Lens)

Prompt: "A woman sitting by a river, shot with a fish-eye lens."Result: Three hands. Yes, three.

• The composition was fine, but the extra limb ruined it.
• Same prompt in Imagen 3? Flawless execution.

Verdict: 3/10 — A glaring failure in basic anatomy.

Test 3: Futuristic Hovercraft Over a Neon City

Prompt: "A sleek hovercraft speeds over a neon-lit city at night, rain streaking across the frame, glowing red lights reflecting off wet surfaces, dramatic low-angle shot."Result? Stunning.

• Looked like a AAA game cinematic.
• Perfect lighting, reflections, motion blur.
• Every detail matched the prompt.

Verdict: 9/10 — Proof that Imagen 4 can excel—if drowned in details.

Final Test: A Retro Shark Movie Poster

Prompt: "A vintage 80s-style shark movie poster with bold typography, vibrant colors, and a dramatic shark attack scene."Result:✅ Gorgeous retro aesthetic.❌ Half the text was garbled.Verdict: 6.5/10 — Beautiful but unusable for its intended purpose.

The Big Problem: Inconsistency

Imagen 4 is brilliant one moment, broken the next.

• Works best with ultra-detailed prompts.
• Struggles with human figures and text.
• Prompting system feels clunky compared to Imagen 3.

For now, Imagen 3 remains more reliable for consistent results.

A Better Alternative? Try AdpexAI

While Google irons out Imagen 4’s quirks, AdpexAI is quietly becoming the go-to tool for AI-generated art. Why?✔ Multiple models in one place (Imagen, GPT-4o, Stable Diffusion, Runway, Luma AI)✔ No Photoshop skills needed—edit images with AI-powered tools✔ Video effects & templates for quick, professional content✔ Free trial with full access—no watered-down demoIf you need dependable, high-quality outputs without the frustration, AdpexAI is the smarter choice.

Final Verdict: Should You Use Imagen 4?

✅ Use it if:

• You need hyper-detailed scenes (landscapes, sci-fi, abstract art).
• You’re willing to tweak prompts endlessly.

❌ Avoid it if:

• You rely on human figures, text, or consistency.
• You need quick, reliable results without guesswork.

Bottom line? Imagen 4 has potential, but right now, it’s not the upgrade we hoped for. Stick with Imagen 3 for reliability, or switch to AdpexAI for a smoother creative workflow.