Google’s Nano Banana AI image editing is finally coming to Google Photos

Google's Nano Banana is powering a raft of new features in the app.

See full article...

 

[tie]

Since I got my Pixel 10 a couple of months ago, the Photos app has been getting more and more annoying to use. The UI was redesigned again for gazillionth time. Editing tools were made more difficult and confusing to use. Almost any editing, even a simple non AI Enhance, now forces "Save a copy" instead of "Save" - even with Ultra HDR off in the Camera app. Sometimes even just adjusting brightness requires to save a copy. Super frustrating. The last few weeks I've been mostly using a computer browser to adjusts photos. The basic tools there still work good.

I'm the only holdout in the family with Android and have been swearing to move to Apple but every time I help a family member with their iPhone it reminds me why I'm still with a Pixel...

Google, stop f-ing around and ruining every single thing!!! Sick of UI changes! And the AI crap!

I don't care either way about the AI stuff. But I absolutely agree that the Photos app seems to be on a path of steady destruction. There are no longer any nondestructive edits; everything requires saving a copy. Clearly defined functionalities have been mashed together into the same page. It is just terrible.

 

[spartan56]

Which other photo app are peeps using instead? I'm sick and tired of AI on everything. I'm really waiting on which snapdragon phone Graphneos will be supporting.

I'm not fancy so I just use Fossify Gallery from Fdroid. Works fine for me. Has basic editing things in it.

I am happy to mostly be rid of Google at this point. I don't see any QoL benefits from any of this anymore. Almost like digital minimalism moving away from them.

 

[adamsc]

Do most people even want these tools? I remember thinking the delete tool was revolutionary, I could remove unwanted people/objects from photos easily. But I take photos to remember trips/events/etc and don't really want to dramatically transform them into something they're not.

There’s definitely a tension here. I see photographs as a memory so I generally only edit to fix technical issues or match the mood of the scene (e.g. a sunset can have more dynamic range than my camera could capture), but I know other people who have had situations like wanting to remove the ex they went through a bitter divorce with from photographs of major life events or family gatherings, and I think that’s a valid position — if you’re thinking of the last photo with your grandparents, you don’t need another person at dinner to be included every time, it’s not like you couldn’t have taken the same photo without them in the first place.

 

[agpob]

Since I got my Pixel 10 a couple of months ago, the Photos app has been getting more and more annoying to use. The UI was redesigned again for gazillionth time. Editing tools were made more difficult and confusing to use. Almost any editing, even a simple non AI Enhance, now forces "Save a copy" instead of "Save" - even with Ultra HDR off in the Camera app. Sometimes even just adjusting brightness requires to save a copy. Super frustrating. The last few weeks I've been mostly using a computer browser to adjusts photos. The basic tools there still work good.

I'm the only holdout in the family with Android and have been swearing to move to Apple but every time I help a family member with their iPhone it reminds me why I'm still with a Pixel...

Google, stop f-ing around and ruining every single thing!!! Sick of UI changes! And the AI crap!

For simple photo tweak/enhancement/panorama I use ancient CD copies of "PS4" and "ArcSoft" loaded on my WINXP, never connected PC.

 

[Happy Medium]

This is a serious question that has been bothering me.

What exactly is the market reason for companies shoving AI down our throats so aggressively? I can understand developing new features, showing where options are, even adding buttons--but the degree to which it's being pushed and how hard it is to turn off (if it can be turned off at all) is what I find hard to understand.

Who benefits by me making a picture of my neighbor's cat into a pizza delivery driver with high server-side compute costs? Is this supposed to be a loss leader when eventually those services will be indispensable and charged for?

I'm not generally anti-AI (it has its uses for me--not mission critical, but useful), but I also don't want AI to edit my photos, suggest a restaurant, tell me what I should do today, or anything of that sort. So how does Google benefit if I do? Eventual built-in advertising like everything else?

Edit: I guess Nano-Banana is device side? I wasn't aware of that. Anyway, the rest of my question still stands.

They're all desperate to find the "killer use case" for AI so that they can win the "AI arms race" and make all the money. They're running on the theory that if they can "win AI" they'll be able to fudge in monetization after they achieve monopoly status when all their competitors have collapsed due to the exorbitant cost in datacenters/energy that the AI bubble is requiring. To anyone with a functioning, non tech-bro brain, this seems to be a very good way of spending all your money without achieving a functional product that will cost less than it brings in, but right now they're too blinded by the need to be the winner to realize that.

 

[StillHere4Siracusa]

This is a serious question that has been bothering me.

What exactly is the market reason for companies shoving AI down our throats so aggressively?

The stock market is propped up by AI, so all of the companies involved in AI have to keep adding features to keep the price pumped up. This is completely unsustainable.

I'm not generally anti-AI (it has its uses for me--not mission critical, but useful), but I also don't want AI to edit my photos, suggest a restaurant, tell me what I should do today, or anything of that sort. So how does Google benefit if I do? Eventual built-in advertising like everything else?

I haven't used AI directly, but I can see some uses for audio processing and light image
and video editing once we get past the slop-and-hallucination stage. I don't ever want it writing for me. And I want it to be local. Some of the hype appears to be total nonsense.

 

[Scone Muncher]

I've been running Immich of my NAS for few months, so far it's been a great experience. And it looks so much like Google Photos, it's crazy.

Thanks for the tip. I've been putting off setting up a self-hosting solution but I'm pushed closer to the edge with every update.

 

[GameBoyColor]

God damnit I really need to get off gphotos

Look into Immich if you're comfortable self-hosting. Don't use it your only backup, but it looks and feels similar to Google Photos and you own/control your own data.

 

[Granadico]

I've been running Immich of my NAS for few months, so far it's been a great experience. And it looks so much like Google Photos, it's crazy.

I'd love an Ars article about building a NAS to combat rising streaming costs, and another one about locally run AI models that are actually useful. I enjoy the practice of putting a disc in the player, and I just use an external HDD as a backup for photos/etc., but I'd love to have an easy starting point if/when I want to start that project.

 

[jbriano]

Do users really feel they need to upload these 'artificial moments' to their social streams - pretending they are real - to stay seen in the social cesspit?

Why would you even ask that? Wait... are you still holding out hope for humanity?

 

[NGC-253]

I'm not fancy so I just use Fossify Gallery from Fdroid. Works fine for me. Has basic editing things in it.

I am happy to mostly be rid of Google at this point. I don't see any QoL benefits from any of this anymore. Almost like digital minimalism moving away from them.

I love the Fossify apps. I actually purchased them when they were still "Simple" apps but switched to Fossify when Simple sold out.

The Simple gallery used to have a little better editor with some lighting and color adjustments but I guess those weren't open source so they had to be removed.

I've asked around here and the best I've come up with for simple adjustments is Snapseed, but I've never really liked it.

I'm hoping Fossify will add simple lighting and color adjustments back into their app.

 

[ridgeguy]

See that sounds like the perfect use-case for an AI tool. Unfortunately I think you'd need one designed for that task; I think the more comprehensive, generative tools like Google's have too high of a tendency to make shit up.
Also I thought I'd maybe try this out (I don't use Photos often). To even use the tool, you need to agreed to allow Google Photos to organize your photos by similar faces. Not sure I want that, so I haven't tried it yet.

I agree. I think this is a case for (1) an AI limited to this single use, which can (2) learn what I regard as dust & scratches.

I spend lots of time doing this task already. It would be really nice if the time spent also trained an AI for ongoing improvement.

 

[android_alpaca]

I scan slides and negatives from my earlier photographs. A time-consuming PITA is removing dust and scratches. If this could actually do as good a job as I do when I spend 30 minutes on an image, I'd think about consorting with the Dark Side.

See that sounds like the perfect use-case for an AI tool. Unfortunately I think you'd need one designed for that task;

Adobe actually just released some "quality of life" convenience AI features including dust removal, auto-culling (basically remove blurry/dark photos or with people eyes closed or faces looking away - culling settings are tweakable) and auto-stacking (group similar photos together in a stack). If/when they work will, they would be a boon to event/wedding/sport photographers that have to go through hundreds/thousands of photos.

There are also better selection and removal tools. I too think feature that simplify tedious tasks are where AI should be as computers don't get distracted or bored and can do basic tasks really fast.

https://petapixel.com/2025/11/03/li...-dust-removal-color-variance-slider-and-more/

The problem is with these type of "make my life easier" features is.you don't get investors to dump billions of dollars to cover the electricity and compute costs - so companies who need funding (or need mindshare in hopes to stay relevant like Google) don't try to hype those up.

 

[android_alpaca]

The example (make this photo a renaissance picture) seems kind of gimmicky. I might use it once or twice to show people but it's not something I particularly need in my photo app. Unblur, open eyes, etc. seems more useful. I can see it being useful for designers and other creatives but for pictures of my life not so much and certainly not when it requires atmosphere munching data centres for it.

As I just said my previosu post above, I do think the best AI photo features are "quality of life" thing that remove the tedium of going through and editing photos.

However, I could see the "make this photo a renaissance or cartoon picture" use for parents/kids making some type of party theme for say a birthday invitations (pirates vs ninjas) or school event signs - but in no way would it be a "killer app." To me that's like how many car company market SUV/trucks for their offroad/ruggedness to project freedom and adventure... instead of their soccer mom convenience to every day commuters and parents.

 

[Fatesrider]

What's the privacy implications here? Like are we signing away the rights to our photos if we use the AI model? I assume this is processed non-locally, right?

This tells me it's not local:

Google says the updated Help Me Edit feature has access to your private face groups, so you can use names in your instructions. For example, you could type “Remove Riley’s sunglasses,” and Nano Banana will identify Riley in the photo (assuming you have a person of that name saved) and make the edit without further instructions. You can also ask for more fantastical edits in Help Me Edit, changing the style of the image from top to bottom.

Assuming that's using Facebook's private face groups, it access the Internet, and therefore does NOT operate entirely locally.

IMHO, you sign away your rights to your photos by using any program that manipulates them to whatever cloud server you use (assuming you use it). Facebook would be a cloud server. So whatever you do with the program will be kept AT LEAST for data analysis, and whatever else Facebook decides to do behind your back.

That it requires access to your private Facebook groups in the first place tells ME it's not to be trusted, simply because Facebook isn't to be trusted.

Remember, there are no contracts and only unilateral TOS's for the use of these "services" that are generally free. So your data has ALWAYS been a potential source to generate revenue and "value" for a cloud provider and accessible by them at any time regardless of what they say. THEY make the locks AND the keys, so the math there adds up to full access to the shit you put out there. And before the "yeah, but's" start... Just stop at "yeah". The point is once it's out of your immediate control, it is in the possession of whoever is running the service and used according to the TOS's that are always moving goalposts to the advantage of the provider of that service.

And since virtually all the apps on your phone require some kind of service access, your data is their open book. Assuming otherwise is... unwise.

 

[Kenjitsuka]

More downgrades, thanks, I hate it!

 

[Jeff S]

This tells me it's not local:

Assuming that's using Facebook's private face groups, it access the Internet, and therefore does NOT operate entirely locally.

IMHO, you sign away your rights to your photos by using any program that manipulates them to whatever cloud server you use (assuming you use it). Facebook would be a cloud server. So whatever you do with the program will be kept AT LEAST for data analysis, and whatever else Facebook decides to do behind your back.

That it requires access to your private Facebook groups in the first place tells ME it's not to be trusted, simply because Facebook isn't to be trusted.

Remember, there are no contracts and only unilateral TOS's for the use of these "services" that are generally free. So your data has ALWAYS been a potential source to generate revenue and "value" for a cloud provider and accessible by them at any time regardless of what they say. THEY make the locks AND the keys, so the math there adds up to full access to the shit you put out there. And before the "yeah, but's" start... Just stop at "yeah". The point is once it's out of your immediate control, it is in the possession of whoever is running the service and used according to the TOS's that are always moving goalposts to the advantage of the provider of that service.

And since virtually all the apps on your phone require some kind of service access, your data is their open book. Assuming otherwise is... unwise.

What makes you think it's using Facebook's anything? Maybe, but I just presumed that Google has it's own tech for you to basically say, "Hey, this is Riley". Which might be saved locally on the phone?

Although Google also really wants you to backup everything to Google Cloud - although I think those backups are supposed to be encrypted?

 

[jbblanchet]

I think this is my plan. I just need to make sure it's reliable enough for family use.

I'm paranoid about backups. I have both cloud backups AND an unencrypted hard copy on portable hard drives sitting in my bank lockbox with some notes joined to my testament on how to access it.

But it's stable now, Android app works great, their machine learning stuff is surprisingly useful. Also there's a cool command line tool to upload pictures straight from a Google Takeout archive.

 

[jaynor_]

TFA: This menu will offer pre-formed prompts based on popular in-app edits. Some of the options you’ll see include “put me in a high fashion photoshoot,” “create a professional headshot,” and “put me in a winter holiday card.”

Honestly, I’m just so tired of this. As a part-time creative artist who spent this past weekend with a team doing (very fun and challenging) photoshoots for the launch of a client’s new small business, all I can say is “hammers up, fellow Luddites”

If you want to do these things, spend a little time learning about how to, hire a photographer, and just TRY IT. It will teach you SO much about yourself and the world. And you might even have some fun

 

[Bzored]

I don’t understand the point of taking a photo then editing it to the point it’s no longer the same photo, if you don’t want sunglasses in a photo take the fucking things off.

We are turning into the stupidest, laziest species.

 

[nzod]

Not a fan of Google, nor do I use this app, but - I scan slides and negatives from my earlier photographs. A time-consuming PITA is removing dust and scratches. If this could actually do as good a job as I do when I spend 30 minutes on an image, I'd think about consorting with the Dark Side.

 

[iamsupremeaz]

See that sounds like the perfect use-case for an AI tool. Unfortunately I think you'd need one designed for that task; I think the more comprehensive, generative tools like Google's have too high of a tendency to make shit up.
Also I thought I'd maybe try this out (I don't use Photos often). To even use the tool, you need to agreed to allow Google Photos to organize your photos by similar faces. Not sure I want that, so I haven't tried it yet.

Tested it with a file I downloaded on the internet. Asked Google Photos to remove dust and scratches. Took 7 seconds. Here was the end result. Curious to see other examples of this.

 

[GFKBill]

This tells me it's not local:

Assuming that's using Facebook's private face groups, it access the Internet, and therefore does NOT operate entirely locally.

Reading comprehension fail mate - Google "face groups" != Facebook Groups.

 

[GFKBill]

Tested it with a file I downloaded on the internet. Asked Google Photos to remove dust and scratches. Took 7 seconds. Here was the end result. Curious to see other examples of this.

It's doing some odd eye stuff, lifting brows and changing eyelines to off-camera

 

[WereCatf]

I have no need for editing pictures I take on my phone. I don't take pictures of people. If I take pictures or video, it's of some electronics components or something I'm inspecting or similar things. I also like to be fully in control of my own pictures instead of feeding them to Google or whatever. As such, I run an Immich server and an Immich app on my phone -- it just syncs all of the pictures and videos I take to my Immich server while presenting a nice, uncluttered interface to them.

I wouldn't recommend Immich to just everyone, but if you're experienced in sysadmin and running your own servers, I would definitely suggest giving it a burl.

 

[123username]

Sigh, another recent Android update for Photos was a "downgrade" (IMO) in terms of ease-of-use for the editing tools.
Add in AI slop and the app is gonna be full trash soon

(edit) Example: the "crop" tool used to have crisp sharp corners, and now they are big fat rounded corners, and the image itself is presented with rounded-off corners. WHY? If you want to crop the image to a very specific corner spot, it's obscured in dumb rounded image corners.

I'm still so pissed about that. Also, auto crop.. Literally the only one single editing tool that i ever used was removed and regular cropping got worse. I more have to use the Google photo scan app for this workflow.
I just want a photo storage cloud option with some very few editing and sharing features... Just like Google photos used to be.
I hate all of this newer stuff so much.

Perhaps it's time for Google to explore allowing extensions or plugins for its apps.

Ex. The ai slop plugin for photos..

 

[kurama101]

This is a serious question that has been bothering me.

What exactly is the market reason for companies shoving AI down our throats so aggressively? I can understand developing new features, showing where options are, even adding buttons--but the degree to which it's being pushed and how hard it is to turn off (if it can be turned off at all) is what I find hard to understand.

Google’s dream is you pay them for every prompt, they sell your data to anyone who wants it, who then also pays Google to adjust prompt weightings in whatever way benefits them the most. And once the model is trained they (ideally) can scale this as big as they want with minimal added costs. Infinite upside potential in their mind.

 

[MöbiusTrip1]

Gemini, what is the point of all this?

 

[macosandlinux]

Social media naturally trends towards everything being fake. In a world of emotionally shattered clout chasers and scammers, free yourself by not participating.

Dropped social a long time ago, just Bluesky left for some basic use.

 

[macosandlinux]

Why would you even ask that? Wait... are you still holding out hope for humanity?

A glimmer of hope - maybe.

 

[Yeay right]

Sick of UI changes

Didn't Google got "diagnosed" like 10 years ago with their cancerous company culture as the source of their behaviour? Academy is rotting thanks to "publish or die" and they have "new product or die", leniently allowing "innovative updates" as another path to promotion.

"I maintain feature complete app" is a perfectly fine answer to "what do you do in this company" but somehow it places people dangerously close to the chopping block, as soon as layoffs start.

 

[migrena]

I don't like where these image edits are going (see opening image). Changing people's facial expressions, adding open eyes were they are closed and other artificial 'improvements' just alter what actually happened.
Do users really feel they need to upload these 'artificial moments' to their social streams - pretending they are real - to stay seen in the social cesspit?

i have the same questions. what is even the point of taking a photo if you are going to generate the whole thing in the end anyways? and what is the point of generating the whole thing if it's equivalent to a short sentence... just send the prompt to others and save battery and bandwidth.

 

[migrena]

Why even take a photo in the first place? Just have AI generate the fake slop from the start and save some time!

why generate the image at all, just share the prompt. less bandwidth, less battery used...

 

[JStrider]

I'd love an Ars article about building a NAS to combat rising streaming costs, and another one about locally run AI models that are actually useful. I enjoy the practice of putting a disc in the player, and I just use an external HDD as a backup for photos/etc., but I'd love to have an easy starting point if/when I want to start that project.

I recently setup a home server running Jellyfin - it basically turns my media collection into a self hosted streaming app experience. seems pretty awesome and pretty easy so far.

 

[neodorian]

Eh...went to check it out and it wants me to opt into Gemini. I've somehow managed to avoid doing so until now, so I guess I'm limited to whatever non-banana editing silliness I already have.

I just got a slimmed down version of Qwen Edit working on my 32GB RAM/10GB VRAM PC, so I'll probably just use that sort of thing for dicking around with lazy and/or uncanny edits of photos for grins.

 

[Smartyflix]

This is great! Now all the people who can't afford a real vacation can just have their family stand in the living room, tell Google AI to put them "somewhere tropical", and they can pretend they had the actual experience!

 

[Smartyflix]

I've been running Immich of my NAS for few months, so far it's been a great experience. And it looks so much like Google Photos, it's crazy.

I'd love for Ars to do a whole series on self-hosting, to help people learn how to get off of big tech. Apps like Immich and Nextcloud are absolutely amazing for keeping your data private, while sacrificing very little in terms of experience. Not without some technical knowledge needed up-front, but it's becoming easier every day.