How to Compare Midjourney and ChatGPT Images for a Visual Task
Research guide · 6 min read
The old “Midjourney vs DALL·E 3” framing is no longer current. OpenAI says the DALL·E GPT in ChatGPT has been retired and points users to ChatGPT Images; Midjourney has moved beyond the older V7 model. This page keeps its URL for continuity and provides a way to compare the products currently documented. It does not claim a winner or report a side-by-side test by AI Pickz.
Use a brief that exposes your real requirements
Write one short visual brief with a specific subject, composition, aspect ratio, required text or details, and intended use. Include one edit request as a second task. Use the same brief and reference materials in both products, and check that you have the rights to upload every reference.
Fixed same-prompt exercise
Example task — not performed by AI Pickz. Give both products this prompt: “Create a square editorial still life of one cobalt-blue ceramic teapot on a pale stone counter with one lemon and soft morning window light. No text or extra objects.” After saving all initial results, ask each product: “Change only the background to muted sage green. Keep the teapot, lemon, lighting, and crop unchanged.”
Midjourney documents an Edit model for written image changes and an Editor for masked inpainting/outpainting. ChatGPT Images lets you select an area and describe an edit, or request an edit without a selection; OpenAI notes that edits may extend beyond the selected area. Record which route you used and whether the change stayed local. Because the first images are generated separately, this exercise compares workflow and rubric performance, not pixel-matched output from a shared seed.
| Workflow detail | Midjourney | ChatGPT Images |
|---|---|---|
| Targeted edit | Edit model can use written instructions; Editor supports masked inpainting and outpainting. | Use the selection tool or describe an edit without a selection; selected regions are not guaranteed boundaries. |
| Version/access record | Record the selected model/version and plan; the official version guide lists which editor/model capabilities differ. | Images are documented for all tiers, but current image features and account controls can still change. |
| Useful check | Did the masked area change without unintended edits to the subject? | Did the requested background change, and did it spill beyond the selected region? |
Make the comparison reproducible
- Record the date, Midjourney version and plan, ChatGPT plan/model availability, prompts, and settings.
- Save every result from the initial generation and from the edit request.
- Score each output against the brief, especially layout, required details, text accuracy, and edit locality.
- Record the amount of rerunning and manual cleanup required to reach an acceptable file.
- Compare export format, resolution, privacy settings, ownership terms, and total cost for your intended use.
Do not compare a single lucky output
Image generation has variation. Save the full set, note how many generations you ran, and agree on a scoring rubric before viewing results. If more than one person will use the tool, repeat the exercise with another task and reviewer. Keep a clear record of subjective preferences separately from checkable criteria.
Privacy and usage rights
Midjourney says creations can be publicly discoverable by default; its Stealth option and terms have specific conditions. OpenAI documents creation and editing in ChatGPT Images, but availability and data handling depend on current account settings and terms. Review both providers’ current policies, and do not use confidential assets without authorization.
Sources and verification
Official Midjourney and OpenAI docs checked October 22, 2026. Feature names and access may change by plan or region.
- Midjourney — Version guide
- Midjourney — Edit model
- Midjourney — Editor
- Midjourney — Creating on Web
- Midjourney — Privacy controls
- OpenAI Help Center — Images in ChatGPT
Limit: No matched prompts, image outputs, time log, or price receipts were supplied for this comparison. This is a reader-run method, not an empirical ranking.