Google Photos' new Gemini helper sorts photos well but can ruin edits

Google has added a new helper to Google Photos that can sort, filter and edit many pictures from one typed request. A reviewer at Android Police tried it on dozens of photos and found it good at organizing and color work, but unreliable at removing objects across a batch.

What changed

Google recently expanded Spark, now called Task, to Photos. It is part of Gemini, Google's AI assistant. Task handles multistep jobs, such as finding photos, putting them in an album and editing them, all in one command. Before, the reviewer could only process one picture at a time.

What worked

Sorting was the clear win. The reviewer asked for shots from Snow Monkey Park that showed only himself. Gemini showed a preview, then built an album that appeared in the library right away. It can also pull photos by tag or category, such as a trip to Tokyo or pictures of family.

Color work also impressed. Gemini could reduce noise across a folder, and a follow-up request could refine the look. The reviewer called it a nice alternative to batch editing in Adobe Lightroom.

What went wrong

Removing people and objects from family portraits worked most of the time. It came close to Google's Magic Eraser but fell slightly short. Sometimes Gemini invented strange artifacts or added layers nobody asked for. In a batch, that can mangle some shots or spoil a whole album.

• Edits are saved as copies, so the originals stay untouched.
• Edited copies have lower resolution and smaller file size.
• Colors and lighting looked slightly less rich than the originals.
• Each image, or the whole batch, must be saved by hand.

How fast it is

Simple jobs, like grouping an existing album or applying a filter, finished in about a minute or less. Multistep jobs, such as grouping, adjusting light and preparing a share link, often took two minutes or longer.

What to do

The reviewer's advice is to check each edit before saving or sharing. For 27 pictures in a row, that gets tedious, so he would use Google Photos' built-in Copy Edits instead. His verdict: much smarter than before, but not ideal for people who want fine control or instant results.