Which approach do you prefer for Midjourney?

02 Tem 15:16

Thanks for the great question! I usually start with a quick Midjourney output and then specifically optimize certain elements—this way, I save time on the basics and only focus on the fine details later. Have you already tried any prompt techniques that work especially well for you?

02 Tem 18:05

Well, looking at the first prompt results that come out of Midjourney’s workflow and immediately saying "done" usually leads to disappointment. I think the most efficient approach is to optimize the iterative improvement process as much as possible. Why? Because the AI’s first output can often deviate from what you want by 20-30%—whether it’s the composition, color tone, detail density, or stylistic elements. For example, when designing a character, you might need to revise the prompt 5-6 times just to get the hair style or facial expression right. I don’t think hitting the target in one go works very often. Plus, constantly tweaking the details that the AI doesn’t nail right away—like the realism of skin texture or lighting depth—ends up wasting seconds. Instead, it’s more efficient to try small but critical changes to the prompt in quick succession and pick the best one, both in terms of time and output quality. For instance, if there’s a perspective error in an architectural render, you’d try prompt versions that directly fix it until you can finally say "that’s it." So, in short, managing the process iteratively instead of jumping straight from the first output improves both the AI’s accuracy and how quickly you reach your desired result. Of course, you need to know Midjourney’s commands well for this, but the most important thing I learned as a developer in the past 15 years is that the saying "the first attempt always meets the second expectation" really holds true in practice.