Midjourney has a meaningful external review base, but the sources diverge sharply. G2 currently reports 4.4/5 from 102 reviews, with recent validated 2026 reviews emphasizing artistic quality, polished visuals, concept-art and branding use, and continued model improvements.10
TrustRadius currently reports 8.3/10 from 11 reviews. July 2026 reviews describe real image/video production and digital-marketing use, with positives around output and production speed and negatives around iterative credit waste, video cost and interface or workflow constraints.8 Crozdesk surfaces an 88/100 Crozscore and 88% user-happiness signal; because that is a composite rather than a pure user star rating, it is best read as secondary corroboration.11
Trustpilot presents a much weaker service signal: roughly 1.6/5 from about 369 reviews at the current crawl, with recurring complaints about account bans, renewal or cancellation, support, credit use, moderation and prompt adherence, alongside a smaller set of positive quality reviews.9 This is useful evidence about customer-service and account experience, but it should not be treated as interchangeable with product-quality review samples.
Midjourney also publishes a current public summary of training content covering its image and video model family and referencing V8, V8.1 and V8.2.12 That does not resolve copyright or commercial-rights questions by itself, but it provides more transparency than a platform with no public training-content disclosure.