Show HN: I used OpenAI's new image API for a personalized coloring book service

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Art Style, “Ghiblification,” and Miyazaki Debate

  • Many commenters see the sample pages as clearly Studio Ghibli–inspired; others insist they’re just generic cartoons.
  • It emerges that the prompt explicitly asks for “simple Studio Ghibli portrait style,” which settles the factual dispute but not the value judgment.
  • Some feel using Ghibli style is disrespectful, especially given Miyazaki’s known skepticism toward certain AI uses; others argue style imitation has always been normal practice and is not legally protected.
  • Several note that public discourse often misquotes or oversimplifies Miyazaki’s earlier “insult to life itself” comments, which were about a grotesque AI animation, not all AI art.
  • A separate critique: the current style often yields “generic” faces that don’t strongly resemble the original people, undermining the personalization pitch.

OpenAI Policy and Child Images

  • One commenter flags a conflict: OpenAI’s policy forbids editing images of real people under 18, yet the site features child examples.
  • Explanations offered:
    • The sample kids might be AI-generated, not “real people.”
    • OpenAI likely focuses enforcement on creepy/abusive use, not family photos.
    • Some interpret the policy as allowing adults to edit their own childhood photos but not those of other minors.
  • The creator says users must be over 18 and have consent from people in photos; they’ll reject policy-violating or obviously copyrighted inputs.

Product Value, Pricing, and Target Users

  • Many like the idea and design, especially for family keepsakes; some expect pages might be framed, not treated as disposable.
  • Others find ~$24–30 for ~24 pages too expensive versus $5/100-page mass-market books, especially given kids’ fast coloring habits.
  • The creator cites high printing and image-API costs (~$7 per 24-page set) plus manual curation as reasons margins are thin.
  • Suggestions: show photos of real printed books, allow PDF-only purchases (later implemented), support smaller “mini books,” and show original photo thumbnails alongside the coloring page.

DIY, Competition, and Technical Choices

  • Multiple commenters note you can already do “photo → coloring sheet” cheaply or free with ChatGPT or other image models using simple prompts.
  • Others who tried say this service achieves noticeably better, more recognizable results, crediting careful prompting and curation.
  • Edge-detection approaches (Canny/HED) are suggested, but dismissed by some as too noisy and unpolished compared to generative models.
  • The implementation uses OpenAI’s image API, manual regeneration for weak pages, and Lulu for print-on-demand; not fully automated.

AI vs. Human Artists and Broader Ethics

  • One side argues you could instead pay human artists, supporting livelihoods instead of AI companies built on scraped work.
  • Counterpoints:
    • A human-drawn custom coloring book of this size would be prohibitively expensive and rare; this is effectively a new market segment.
    • Commissioning artists involves negotiation, waiting, and potential refusal; AI sidesteps that friction.
    • Historically, new media (photography, digital tools, etc.) also triggered moral panics, yet artists and art survived.
  • Others raise systemic concerns: AI models are built on humanity’s collective creative output; some propose tariffs or broad compensation schemes rather than focusing only on a small subset of professional artists.

Business Viability and Barriers to Entry

  • Commenters see this as a good example of a small “AI microbusiness,” but also note that the idea is easy to clone, which dampens some people’s motivation to build similar things.
  • Some discuss SEO opportunities and other adjacent products (AI storybooks, bringing colored pages “to life,” stickers, T-shirts, etc.), suggesting the space will quickly get crowded.