Midjourney (2025): Full Review & Verdict

Midjourney Review: I Finally Caved and Tried the AI Art Everyone's Obsessed With

I've been testing Midjourney recently, and honestly? I thought it was gonna be another overhyped AI thing.

I needed images for my content and stock photos just weren't cutting it anymore. Every single image looked like it came from the same boring corporate photoshoot, you know? And hiring someone to make custom graphics was way out of my budget. So when I kept seeing Midjourney mentioned everywhere – Twitter, Reddit, random Discord servers – I figured why not finally see what the fuss is about.

But here's the thing – it actually surprised me. Not gonna lie, the image quality is way better than I expected. Like, some of the stuff it creates looks almost too good to be AI-generated.

What is Midjourney?

Midjourney is basically an AI tool that creates images and videos from text descriptions. You type what you want, and it generates it. The whole pitch is that you can get professional-looking visuals without needing design skills or spending hours in Photoshop.

The main hook is their Version 7 release, which supposedly has way better photorealism and can now do video generation too. After testing it, I'd say it delivers on the image quality part. The video stuff is newer and a bit more hit-or-miss, but we'll get to that.

My Real Experience

Alright, let's get into the actual testing. When I first tried Midjourney, my impression was... confused? Because it runs through Discord, which felt super weird. I was expecting a normal website with a button that says "generate image" or whatever, but instead I had to join their Discord server and type commands in chat channels with a bunch of strangers.

But once I got it working? Pretty impressive, honestly. I tested it with some basic prompts first – like "sunset over mountains" and "modern coffee shop interior" – and the results were actually usable. Processing took typically 10-15 minutes for most videos, which was faster than I expected for the video generation stuff. The output quality was decent for social media use, though the videos definitely aren't Hollywood-level or anything.

My first real test was creating some header images. I typed something like "minimalist workspace with laptop and coffee, natural lighting, clean aesthetic" and got back four variations. Three of them were genuinely good. The fourth one had some weird lighting thing going on, but whatever. Three out of four is better odds than I get with stock photo searches.

Then I tried getting more specific. "Cyberpunk city street at night, neon signs reflecting in puddles, cinematic" – and yeah, it nailed that vibe. The detail was wild. Like, you could zoom in and see individual raindrops and reflections. That's when I realized this thing is actually powerful.

The video generation was more experimental for me. I tried creating short clips of things like "waves crashing on a beach" and "camera flying through a forest." The results were... interesting? Sometimes amazing, sometimes a bit wonky. The beach waves looked pretty realistic, but the forest fly-through had some weird morphing effects where trees would kinda melt into each other. Still, for quick social media content, it worked.

Here's where things get annoying though. Every single image you create in the public channels is visible to everyone. Which means if you're testing out weird ideas or making mistakes with your prompts (and you will), everyone sees it. There's a private mode, but that costs extra. More on that in the pricing section, because ugh.

Key Features

Version 7 Image Generation

This is probably the star of the show. The V7 update they released is legitimately impressive. The images have this quality where they don't immediately scream "AI-generated" like older versions did.

I tested it side-by-side with some older V5 images I found online, and the difference is noticeable. V7 handles things like skin texture, lighting, and proportions way better. Hands still get messed up sometimes (classic AI problem), but less often than before.

The photorealism is no joke. I generated a portrait of a person who doesn't exist, and it looked like an actual photograph. Little details like fabric texture, hair strands, eye reflections – all there. It's honestly a bit creepy how good it is.

Text-to-Video Capabilities

This is newer territory for them. You can now generate short video clips from text prompts, which sounds amazing in theory. In practice? It's cool but limited.

The videos are short – we're talking a few seconds, not full clips. And the quality varies a lot depending on what you're asking for. Simple motion works well (camera pans, slow zooms, basic movements). Complex action scenes with multiple moving elements? That's where it struggles.

I tried making a video of "person walking down a city street" and the result had this dreamlike, slightly morphing quality. Not unusable, but you can definitely tell it's AI. For abstract stuff or artistic content though, that aesthetic actually works.

Processing time is longer than images, obviously. Those 10-15 minutes I mentioned earlier felt like forever when I was testing, but to be fair, rendering video normally takes way longer if you're doing it manually.

Advanced Prompt Control

Here's where things get technical. Midjourney has all these parameters you can add to your prompts to control the output. Things like aspect ratio, stylization level, chaos values, quality settings.

At first, I ignored all of this because it seemed complicated. But once I started playing with it? Game changer. Wait, no, I hate that phrase. Let me rephrase – it actually made a big difference.

The stylize parameter controls how artistic versus literal the AI gets. Low values give you more straightforward interpretations, high values get more creative and abstract. I found myself using lower values (like --stylize 50) for product images and higher values (--stylize 200) for more artistic stuff.

The aspect ratio control is super useful. Need a vertical image for Instagram Stories? Just add --ar 9:16. Horizontal for YouTube thumbnails? --ar 16:9. Beats having to crop things afterward.

3D Rendering Improvements

Honestly? I haven't used this feature as much, but from what I've tested, it's pretty solid. You can generate 3D-looking renders that have proper depth and lighting.

I tried creating some isometric room designs and architectural renders. The results had that professional 3D render quality without needing to know Blender or Cinema 4D. For someone who's tried and failed to learn 3D modeling multiple times, this felt like cheating (in a good way).

Upscaling and Variations

After you generate an image, you can upscale it to higher resolution or create variations of a specific result you liked. The upscaling is actually really good – it doesn't just make the image bigger, it adds detail.

The variation feature is clutch when you get something that's 90% perfect but not quite right. You can generate variations that keep the same general vibe but change details. Way faster than starting from scratch with a new prompt.

Pricing

Here's where I get annoyed. The pricing structure is confusing, and there's no free tier to test things out before committing.

From what I could find, they have Basic, Standard, and Pro subscription plans. All monthly. There's supposedly annual options that save you money, but the pricing isn't super clear on their website – you have to actually go through the signup process to see exact numbers.

For people who need to create images regularly, the subscription model makes sense I guess. But if you just want to test it out or only need images occasionally? You're stuck paying for a full month. There's apparently some group buy services where you can get access cheaper, but that feels sketchy and I haven't tried it.

The Basic plan limits how many images you can generate per month, and everything you create is public (visible to everyone on Discord). If you want privacy, you need to upgrade to Standard or Pro. Which feels like they're holding a basic feature hostage, but whatever.

No free trial is a real bummer. Most AI tools let you test with limited credits or a trial period. Midjourney used to have a free tier apparently, but they got rid of it. So now you're committing to a subscription without knowing if it'll actually work for what you need.

Check out Midjourney if you want to see the current pricing, but be prepared to either subscribe or stay confused.

Pros

• The image quality is legitimately impressive - Like, some outputs look professional enough to use commercially. The photorealism in V7 is way beyond what I expected from AI-generated images.

• Fast generation times for images - Most images take 30-60 seconds to generate. That's fast enough that you can iterate quickly and try different prompts without losing momentum.

• The variety of styles it can handle is wild - Photorealistic portraits, anime art, oil paintings, pencil sketches, 3D renders, abstract art – it can do all of it. And it actually understands different artistic styles, not just slapping filters on things.

• Upscaling doesn't look terrible - The AI adds actual detail when upscaling, not just blur. I've upscaled images to use as large prints and they held up surprisingly well.

• Community aspect has unexpected benefits - Yeah, the Discord thing is weird, but seeing what other people are creating gives you ideas. I've learned better prompting techniques just from watching the public channels.

• Regular updates and improvements - They're constantly pushing new versions and features. V7 came out recently and it's a huge jump from V6. Shows they're actively developing it, not just coasting.

• Works for both realistic and artistic content - Whether you need a realistic product photo or abstract album art, it handles both. That versatility is actually rare – most tools are better at one or the other.

• The variation feature saves tons of time - When you get something close to what you want, creating variations is way faster than starting over. This alone has saved me hours of tweaking prompts.

Cons

• No free tier or trial is ridiculous - Just let people test it with limited credits or something. Making people commit to a subscription without trying it first feels greedy, especially when competitors offer free trials.

• The Discord interface is confusing at first - Why not just make a normal website? Having to learn Discord commands and navigate servers feels unnecessary. I still don't love it after weeks of using it.

• Public generation on basic plans is annoying - Everything you create is visible to everyone unless you pay extra. Privacy should be a basic feature, not a premium add-on.

• Video generation is hit-or-miss - It works for simple stuff, but anything complex gets weird fast. The morphing/melting effect shows up too often, and you can't really control it.

• Learning curve for advanced features - All those parameters and settings are powerful, but figuring out what they do takes time. The documentation exists but it's scattered across their website and community guides.

• Can't edit generated images within the tool - If an image is almost perfect but needs one small change, you can't edit it. You have to generate variations and hope one of them fixes the issue, or export and edit in another program.

• Prompt interpretation is sometimes too creative - Sometimes you want exactly what you typed, but Midjourney adds its own interpretation. The stylize parameter helps, but it's still annoying when you want literal results.

• The subscription adds up quickly - If you need privacy and higher generation limits, you're looking at a decent monthly cost. For casual users, that's hard to justify compared to pay-per-use tools.

Who Should Use It?

Honestly? This is best for people who need to create visual content regularly and don't have design skills or a big budget. If you need custom images for blog posts, social media, presentations, or personal projects, Midjourney could actually save you a ton of time and money compared to hiring designers or buying stock photos.

It's also decent for creative folks who want to experiment with AI art. The variety of styles and the ability to iterate quickly makes it fun to play with. I've spent way too much time just trying random prompts to see what comes out.

Who shouldn't use it? If you need precise, specific results every single time, this won't help much. It's an AI tool, not a design program. You're guiding it, not controlling every pixel. Also, if you care a lot about having unique images that nobody else could generate, you'll probably be disappointed. The AI pulls from patterns it learned, so your outputs might look similar to what others create with similar prompts.

If you need detailed illustrations with specific elements in exact positions, you'll end up frustrated. At that point, you might as well hire an illustrator or learn design software yourself. The AI is great for general concepts and vibes, not precise specifications.

For professional work where you need full control and consistency across multiple images (like branding projects), traditional design tools are still better. Midjourney is more of a creative assistant than a replacement for actual designers.

Alternatives

The closest competitors are probably DALL-E 3 and Stable Diffusion. DALL-E 3 is way better for understanding complex prompts and following instructions precisely, but it doesn't have the same artistic quality that Midjourney has. The images from DALL-E look more "clean" and digital, while Midjourney has more texture and depth.

If you just need quick, simple images, Canva's AI tools or Adobe Firefly might be better options. They're more focused on ease of use and integrate with design workflows, but don't really help with artistic or highly detailed generations.

For video generation specifically, there are tools like Runway ML or Pika Labs, but those are more for video effects and editing rather than text-to-video generation from scratch. Different use cases, really.

Leonardo.ai is another competitor worth mentioning. It's similar to Midjourney but runs on a normal website instead of Discord, which is a huge plus. The image quality is comparable, though I'd give Midjourney a slight edge on photorealism. Leonardo has a free tier though, which is a major advantage.

Final Verdict

Look, I'm not saying Midjourney will solve all your creative needs, but it definitely has its place. If you need custom images regularly and don't have the time or skills to create them yourself, it's worth trying.

The V7 image quality is legitimately helpful, and the speed does save time compared to traditional methods. But the Discord interface is meh, and the lack of a free trial is annoying. The video generation is cool but not quite reliable enough for professional use yet.

I'll probably keep using it because the image quality and speed combo is hard to beat, even though the pricing structure bugs me and the public generation thing is weird. Sometimes "good enough and fast" beats "perfect and time-consuming," you know?

The community aspect grew on me too. At first I hated having my generations public, but seeing what others create actually helped me learn. There's a whole culture around prompt engineering and sharing techniques that's kinda interesting.

Rating: 4.2/5 stars

It's a powerful tool with impressive image quality and regular improvements, but the pricing model and interface quirks hold it back from being perfect.

Bottom line: If you need high-quality AI-generated images and don't mind paying a subscription, Midjourney is worth checking out. Just be prepared for a learning curve with the Discord interface and no chance to test before subscribing.

To be fair, most AI image generation tools are still pretty early in development, so maybe my expectations are too high. But for what it does – turning text into surprisingly good images – it gets the job done. Just don't expect it to read your mind or replace actual designers for complex projects.

You can check it out yourself at Midjourney, but maybe wait until you're sure you'll use it regularly before subscribing. The monthly cost adds up if you're not generating images consistently.