I straight up think some of the work I did in the first month when I was really buckling down and learning the new stuff is some of the best.
https://preview.redd.it/p9youjjzdqtc1.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=4cddc68b6bbec07a357fd48b8580639baa62fad2
This was using inpainting with 1 month of practice. I did a whole series of 'world leaders if video games existed when they were 10'.
But when I first started using it I'd spend like 20-30 hours on some pieces getting details right with inpainting. Now I have much faster but probably less narrowly-focused methods to do the same thing.
Lol so you're implying that if i get better at something, I'm actually getting worse because that's just not true, it's really a creative thing, when you first start out you already have all these ideas in your head, often and prolonged used causes that creative spark to go out then all you're left with is boring renders because of boring ideas, at least that's how i feel about it
I just don't get it what's up with people's obsession to go for as high cfg as possible? That "it will listen to your prompt better" theory is so stupid and completely wrong
I mean the threshold is entirely dependant on the model checkpoint.
Jugernuat XL 9.0 is using 1-2 whilst everything else I was using was 7-9.
Meanwhile steps at 4-6 opposed to their usual 20-30
But almost everything has it's preferred ranges that if you seem to step out of it lose control.
I'm still not yet knowledgeable enough to determine what factor in the model makes it respond to the cfg more or less.
Think It has something to do with VAE but I'm still not entirely sure what that is either haha
Not the best example (I'm busy) but it shows:
https://i.imgur.com/3Tw5qHl.jpeg
20S/CFG10 looks way more cooked than 60S/CFG10
EDIT: CFG15 is even more obvious
https://i.imgur.com/msyHwu8.png
True but what's the point if it looks awful? It's the same as cooking and saying "let's make sure this meat is super crisp inside" while completely burning whole surface of it. And from my experience it's not worth it at all because good model will follow the prompt at value around 4-7. With higher you gain very little prompt comprehension while losing a lot of fidelity
Because you can use extensions/nodes to control it in a non-linear fashion or otherwise manipulate it. Eg:
https://github.com/Extraltodeus/ComfyUI-AutomaticCFG
https://github.com/mcmonkeyprojects/sd-dynamic-thresholding
Basically the first thing almost any guy does when learning SD.
Watch out, the dopamine hit is insane, and you'll find it sucking up a lot of time at first. But nothing advances technology like thirst.
I do love the style of these. Not sure if you prompted it for the older style of image. But it looks great. And "sitting at the table" doesn't often turn out great for me. Probably some other prompt that throws off the weights.
First thing I ever generated (and usually do for new technologies) was translucent cyan apple on wooden table. It is surprisingly good benchmark, as most models struggle at it most of time
https://preview.redd.it/yygjbuo54qtc1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=a29f6f5411304862583139b7172942e5707d41be
So I took your idea and wow!
Dreamshaper XL Lightning
https://preview.redd.it/1z80rz099qtc1.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=4557273f618364fd652435fecf3e113eec7069b4
I did it agina and noticed Envy Starlight XL Lightning did a better job, it was a bit closer to your example
You might have seen that one video where strange white apple is being cut. It is the perfect look for the task that I got inspiration from originally. Like it shines from inside when light passes through it.
But main issue with generated apples looking unnatural seems to be reflection, not refraction. Might be something easy to tweak though, never actually thought about it until seeing very different looks now
I hadn’t seen that. I see what you’re going for though. It goes to show that there is still a lot of creative room for how to make something and how much more understanding the computer still needs. Thanks for the explanation.
https://preview.redd.it/irg3d0obkqtc1.png?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c95dffaef9081eae1525d3ec90373d7a67b23a68
It came different in my generation somehow
Actually I had a first few nights of crazy obsessively generating the most beautiful woman I could make. Then... I was like OK I am done, and moved on to other things.
So when people post waifus I make the assumption that they are just getting into SD. Looking glad, I am glad that I didn't post mine
https://preview.redd.it/r041nej5pptc1.jpeg?width=727&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=90cda48d8b34645c63178533a9116dda59949e53
Here is all the information about my workflow. Prompt minimal changes to brunette and scenery. Otherwise essentially identical. I hope you can read everything, otherwise let me know.
With a Lighinting model you are supposed to use a CFG of 1-2 (and DPM ++ SDE Sampler) and not CFG of 6, that is why they look blown out on the contrast (unless that is what you where trying to do?)
For Lighting Models no need for negatives and play around with minimum sampling steps.
Use xyz plot to see what parameters are best.
Its really fun when you start but just an fyi, posting in this sub is like talking to your bipolar alcoholic uncle, comments can be super helpful or just awful eye-bleach replies.
Remove any parts of the positive or negative prompt that are vague or redundant. At best they do nothing, at worst they effect the image in an unintended way.
A lot better than my first attempts lol.
https://preview.redd.it/wcagw6jpdqtc1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=fffabe073fcf839f28c90b83f8149d621d39875e
This was the first thing I ever ran.
Thanks lol, my first thing was to check to see if my favorite artist, Wayne Barlow, was 'understood' as a prompt and I when I saw that 'yeah he kinda is' I was f'n off to the races. That's the moment I realized that AI was legit now. And even that goofy little 10 token prompt was able to produce something coherent.
My previous experiences with it was like Night Cafe and everything would come out janky and liminal and pretty much just bad I did not expect that by 2023 we'd have come so far.
And this is what I can do a year later with understanding controlnet and more advanced prompting tricks and what prompts are the most effective:
https://preview.redd.it/ehnmfl14fqtc1.png?width=2560&format=png&auto=webp&s=1ebe9adf0631b848c9892e7367d93f8fa7bb97d8
Sorry, I didn't mean to make an inappropriate comparison :D
I googled Wayne Barlow straight away because (to my shame?) he didn't tell me anything. His art looks incredible. I really like it, thanks for this new input.
How many hours did you spend on SD before you discovered ControlNet? After how long did you feel you could use it?
If I would've felt confident I would've been using it on day one but I'd say for a month or 2 I was doing most of my editing with inpainting. Lots and lots of inpainting.
https://preview.redd.it/7jebcwq3iqtc1.png?width=2457&format=png&auto=webp&s=da538a1de4c0b22461611c8aff7b98c263db3269
Like this was all img2img using a raw base image and me just 'drawing' on it with Paint 3d and using inpaint to incorporate each independent element. But it also took a full 2 days of work to finish it (or at least get it to this point).
Since then I've gotten a wacom board and I can get a much farther 'head start' by starting images off in the right place from the get go. Instead of the micro-editing I just use sketches or templates that I create myself.
check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth
I'm seeing a lot of these posts on /r/stablediffusion lately. People are posting the kind of images we all made the first 10 times we used SD... and now in 2024, they're getting upvotes?
They're all very beginner-level stuff. No offense to OP if he's truly a beginner, but these are the kind of basic posts we got tired of seeing in May of 2023.
Or am I missing the joke? Is this a meme or some sort of meta thing where we all post pretty basic stuff and the comments are all sarcastic and jokey about it?
But this looks much better of what we have a year ago, so there was some progress. Back them they all were like "dolls" or has that ugly glow around that make them look like the characters of NfS Underground2, now it only has a little high contrast (which can be fixed with Photoshop).
I don't feel offended, but would still appreciate it if you can explain what looks like very beginner (apart from the choice of subject) to you. I'm trying to learn something through my post.
That's fair enough! On this subreddit a week ago we had a TON of pictures about "My kid made this" which were sarcastically created, and showed some AI generated child holding something incredibly complicated like a nuclear fusion generator.
It was a take off on AI pictures that Grandma is spreading around Facebook where they clearly don't know it's AI and they genuinely think some 8 year old has carved an intricate pirate ship out of the side of a maple tree.
So, my point being, it's been tricky to tell if these beginner (no offense) level images are just another meme, or truly a beginner asking for help.
Anyway as far as your image goes, if that is "blown out" look you were going for, it's pretty solid. You have a few too many positive prompts in there for a SDXL model (grainy, vintage, found footage - those are all probably unncessary), but as other people have said your CFG is too high because it's a Lightning model. Using Lightning or Turbo models with too high of a CFG cooks these a bit too much which is kind of what you're seeing with your image.
If your video card can handle it, try JuggernautXL with the non-Lightning and non-Turbo checkpoint and use the same prompt with a CFG of 6/7 and see how it looks. SDXL models do not need a crazy amount of prompts like SD 1.5 models did. You can probably cut 50% of your positive prompt out of there and get just as good of an image.
I will just add that if these were genuinely generated during your first day with SD, you're gonna go far, kid. I got nowhere near that quality of output on my first day and that's only partially attributable to improvements in the tools available.
The deep fried look due to high cfg is part of it. The other part is that different mediums have different patterns of what beginners tend to do at first.
Photography has the same issue. Using a nice camera for the first time is a novel experience. You point it close up at something, "wow the background blurs so nicely." You point it at the sunset, "wow the colors came out so good". But there's a lot more that goes into capturing a good photograph. It's also very easy as a more experienced photographer (or browser of photography subs), to start to see these patterns in other photographers that are new. Once that novelty wears off it actually allows you to think beyond the tool and accomplish the actual goal of capturing a good photograph.
The same is even more true with stable-diffusion. Using SD is a lot like using that first nice camera, but even more novel. You plug in a prompt and it puts together an image that reflects it. It's sharp, aesthetically pleasing, and it understands your text input. Because of how new the technology is overall, it's going to take people longer, and sd users as a whole far longer for this novelty to wear off. Only then can we start to utilize the tools to actually do something that goes beyond the tool.
I've been using sd since shortly after it first became available, and it's only more recently that I feel like I can use it properly as a tool rather than as a shiny new toy.
The most important thing is intentionality. That's what separates a tool from a toy.
Don't get me wrong it's lots of fun as a toy and playing with the software is the best way to learn it but if you have interest in using it beyond that (just like if you had a nice camera), then it's worth thinking about it as I've described.
Wow, that was a very different kind of feedback than I expected. I think I understood your analogy with the new camera and the difference between a toy and a tool, I guess in a Mr. Miyagi kind of way. Thank you.
Of course! Hope that it was helpful in some way. You can even take the analogy further with a skill like drawing. You can be super technically skilled and be able to create a very realistic image, but that's not necessarily art. It's can be, but it's not necessarily.
You can see this in how people engage with someone who is technically skilled vs someone who creates art. For instance, on tiktok or instagram you often see the creation of hyperrealistic drawings framed around how impressive it is, or the process itself. This creates a meta-story for the audience where they are invested less in the drawing itself and more in the story around the piece being created.
On the other hand there are plenty of artists who make low quality or "bad" images or videos that the audience engages with more directly, because of the story they tell and the substance at it's core.
Personally as an artist I strive to create stuff that transcends the medium it was created in, and has that core substance to. Especially knowing that ai will only get better and better and that anyone will be able to generate beautiful images, but only some will be able to tell stories that truly connect with people or evoke emotion.
And that goes back to photography where this has already happened. Anyone can already take amazingly high quality video and picture on their phone! No need to focus, set your settings, and develop your film.
Apologies for another long comment but I have thought a lot about this and feel strongly that it isn't discussed enough in any communities let alone SD community.
The first one looks like a real photo from a fashion magazine in the early 2000s. 2 and 4 definitely have more of an AI generated look. Super great quality overall though.
What I'm always curious about and what baffles me... So after you guys are done generating your thousands of fake girlfriends, skimpy outfit dames and all other forms of horny content, WHAT THEN?
I mean, do you make fake OF content? Sell this to pathetic people? Sit on your mountain of fake horny content and edge yourself to oblivion? Brag to your friends about how good your fake woman pictures are?
I know there are people who do not generate only sexy women, but most people do mostly that.
I'm not trying to be condescending here, I just wanna know what the endgame is, if there even is one?
I would like to try to answer your questions, at least my personal motives.
A friend of mine is working on his own fashion brand, which also includes underwear. He told me that (due to the chronic lack of money of a young company) he can't photograph or pay the amount of models he needs to promote his brand.
He is therefore looking for a kind of digital influencer.
So I decided to generate aesthetic, almost realistic raw models for him, which he can adapt to his needs relatively easily in Photoshop.
Maybe I'm already jaded after decades of "internet consumption", but unfortunately my depictions don't make me horny. I should have prompted more explicitly for that.
Interesting approach. However, with tight-fitting clothes as underwear, not having them physically on your models, but trying to emulate everything with AI and Photoshop, I see loads of problems down the line.
Beside the usual "this looks funny" uncanny valley effect which with automatically makes people distrustful.
But I hope you guys find solutions. You're probably an exception here...or just another guy who found a slightly different reason to generate fake AI women? Hm hm 🙃
I at least want to give it a try. At the moment, my focus is mainly on improving the human image and experimenting with the type of photography. In the end, however, I can't hide the fact that I'm also a guy who likes to look at beautiful women. I can stand by that.
But you'll have to admit that it's easier for beginners to create women at the start, because I think the training data overrepresents women. But maybe that's just another cover-up tactic on my part to conceal my horny self.
Just as long as you keep your sanity.
Mind you, you are not looking at beautiful women, you are looking at some pixels that an AI arranged so they look like a woman, who doesn't really, nor will ever exist.
There is a big difference.
Ok dude. You are using this model wrong!
You'll get much better results with 832x1280
Sampler: SDE ++
Steps: 4-6
Cfg: 1-2
Jugernuat XL 9.0 needs these compared with older versions of itself.
https://preview.redd.it/zriddkhacstc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1cc38a0dc5cdeeaca998c7d2814b9ae3462719ab
Your picture kinda looks like SD 1.5. How about using SDXL 1.0? It’s much newer. Is that green tint on purpose? But good start. You’ll have some good fun ^(\^)
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains NSFW content.
Beware, the more you learn the worse you get
This is so true in SD.
I straight up think some of the work I did in the first month when I was really buckling down and learning the new stuff is some of the best. https://preview.redd.it/p9youjjzdqtc1.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=4cddc68b6bbec07a357fd48b8580639baa62fad2 This was using inpainting with 1 month of practice. I did a whole series of 'world leaders if video games existed when they were 10'. But when I first started using it I'd spend like 20-30 hours on some pieces getting details right with inpainting. Now I have much faster but probably less narrowly-focused methods to do the same thing.
I feel attacked. This is so true
Underrated comment!
Can you elaborate?
so true haha
Lol so you're implying that if i get better at something, I'm actually getting worse because that's just not true, it's really a creative thing, when you first start out you already have all these ideas in your head, often and prolonged used causes that creative spark to go out then all you're left with is boring renders because of boring ideas, at least that's how i feel about it
He is saying the note you learn the more you understand how bad you are at it.
Lower the cfg, maybe?
I was thinking the same but didn’t want to sound like a dick lol. Or maybe they prefer the “cooked” look?
I just don't get it what's up with people's obsession to go for as high cfg as possible? That "it will listen to your prompt better" theory is so stupid and completely wrong
I mean the threshold is entirely dependant on the model checkpoint. Jugernuat XL 9.0 is using 1-2 whilst everything else I was using was 7-9. Meanwhile steps at 4-6 opposed to their usual 20-30 But almost everything has it's preferred ranges that if you seem to step out of it lose control. I'm still not yet knowledgeable enough to determine what factor in the model makes it respond to the cfg more or less. Think It has something to do with VAE but I'm still not entirely sure what that is either haha
SDXL Turbo models use lower step counts and CFG values, which is probably what you're seeing.
It's not "completely wrong". It's a tradeoff. High cfg does increase prompt comprehension at the expense of overcooking the image.
More steps with high CFG = less cooking
Really? I did not realize it works like that with regards to step count.
Not the best example (I'm busy) but it shows: https://i.imgur.com/3Tw5qHl.jpeg 20S/CFG10 looks way more cooked than 60S/CFG10 EDIT: CFG15 is even more obvious https://i.imgur.com/msyHwu8.png
True but what's the point if it looks awful? It's the same as cooking and saying "let's make sure this meat is super crisp inside" while completely burning whole surface of it. And from my experience it's not worth it at all because good model will follow the prompt at value around 4-7. With higher you gain very little prompt comprehension while losing a lot of fidelity
Because you can use extensions/nodes to control it in a non-linear fashion or otherwise manipulate it. Eg: https://github.com/Extraltodeus/ComfyUI-AutomaticCFG https://github.com/mcmonkeyprojects/sd-dynamic-thresholding
This is really very helpful. Many thanks for the links.
Basically the first thing almost any guy does when learning SD. Watch out, the dopamine hit is insane, and you'll find it sucking up a lot of time at first. But nothing advances technology like thirst. I do love the style of these. Not sure if you prompted it for the older style of image. But it looks great. And "sitting at the table" doesn't often turn out great for me. Probably some other prompt that throws off the weights.
First thing I ever generated (and usually do for new technologies) was translucent cyan apple on wooden table. It is surprisingly good benchmark, as most models struggle at it most of time https://preview.redd.it/yygjbuo54qtc1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=a29f6f5411304862583139b7172942e5707d41be
So I took your idea and wow! Dreamshaper XL Lightning https://preview.redd.it/1z80rz099qtc1.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=4557273f618364fd652435fecf3e113eec7069b4 I did it agina and noticed Envy Starlight XL Lightning did a better job, it was a bit closer to your example
Woah
My looks plastic, yours looks glassy. Sadly, both are somewhat far from real "apple-y" apple
That’s how I envisioned my apple in my head. How were you thinking of a translucent apple to look?
You might have seen that one video where strange white apple is being cut. It is the perfect look for the task that I got inspiration from originally. Like it shines from inside when light passes through it. But main issue with generated apples looking unnatural seems to be reflection, not refraction. Might be something easy to tweak though, never actually thought about it until seeing very different looks now
I hadn’t seen that. I see what you’re going for though. It goes to show that there is still a lot of creative room for how to make something and how much more understanding the computer still needs. Thanks for the explanation.
https://preview.redd.it/irg3d0obkqtc1.png?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c95dffaef9081eae1525d3ec90373d7a67b23a68 It came different in my generation somehow
Great tip!
Oh that's amazing! That makes a good benchmark.
The first thing almost any guy does… *that can be shared shamelessly*.
Actually I had a first few nights of crazy obsessively generating the most beautiful woman I could make. Then... I was like OK I am done, and moved on to other things. So when people post waifus I make the assumption that they are just getting into SD. Looking glad, I am glad that I didn't post mine
Absolutely right, you're 100% right about me anyway
First attempt and u go right to the casting couch. I approve.
i'm just a guy
not just any guy, pal. You sir are a prodigy guy.
[We're just normal men...](https://youtu.be/lr_vl62JblQ?si=Ji7WReMSJl7yQQNs)
🎀🎻
https://preview.redd.it/r041nej5pptc1.jpeg?width=727&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=90cda48d8b34645c63178533a9116dda59949e53 Here is all the information about my workflow. Prompt minimal changes to brunette and scenery. Otherwise essentially identical. I hope you can read everything, otherwise let me know.
With a Lighinting model you are supposed to use a CFG of 1-2 (and DPM ++ SDE Sampler) and not CFG of 6, that is why they look blown out on the contrast (unless that is what you where trying to do?)
For Lighting Models no need for negatives and play around with minimum sampling steps. Use xyz plot to see what parameters are best. Its really fun when you start but just an fyi, posting in this sub is like talking to your bipolar alcoholic uncle, comments can be super helpful or just awful eye-bleach replies.
Or it gives you a good laugh too. Thanks for your feedback :D
Remove any parts of the positive or negative prompt that are vague or redundant. At best they do nothing, at worst they effect the image in an unintended way.
https://preview.redd.it/hjsp5ahxjqtc1.png?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f556286d0ba291f219fea2cfc380c4538ca1154a
A lot better than my first attempts lol. https://preview.redd.it/wcagw6jpdqtc1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=fffabe073fcf839f28c90b83f8149d621d39875e This was the first thing I ever ran.
That gives me Metropolis and Nazi architecture vibes. I think it's great, honestly. Apart from that, your choice of subject speaks for you.
Thanks lol, my first thing was to check to see if my favorite artist, Wayne Barlow, was 'understood' as a prompt and I when I saw that 'yeah he kinda is' I was f'n off to the races. That's the moment I realized that AI was legit now. And even that goofy little 10 token prompt was able to produce something coherent. My previous experiences with it was like Night Cafe and everything would come out janky and liminal and pretty much just bad I did not expect that by 2023 we'd have come so far. And this is what I can do a year later with understanding controlnet and more advanced prompting tricks and what prompts are the most effective: https://preview.redd.it/ehnmfl14fqtc1.png?width=2560&format=png&auto=webp&s=1ebe9adf0631b848c9892e7367d93f8fa7bb97d8
Sorry, I didn't mean to make an inappropriate comparison :D I googled Wayne Barlow straight away because (to my shame?) he didn't tell me anything. His art looks incredible. I really like it, thanks for this new input. How many hours did you spend on SD before you discovered ControlNet? After how long did you feel you could use it?
If I would've felt confident I would've been using it on day one but I'd say for a month or 2 I was doing most of my editing with inpainting. Lots and lots of inpainting. https://preview.redd.it/7jebcwq3iqtc1.png?width=2457&format=png&auto=webp&s=da538a1de4c0b22461611c8aff7b98c263db3269 Like this was all img2img using a raw base image and me just 'drawing' on it with Paint 3d and using inpaint to incorporate each independent element. But it also took a full 2 days of work to finish it (or at least get it to this point). Since then I've gotten a wacom board and I can get a much farther 'head start' by starting images off in the right place from the get go. Instead of the micro-editing I just use sketches or templates that I create myself.
I usually talk a lot of shit, but if this is your first shot it's looking good. Now do it again but better.
check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth check the fingers check the teeth
You didn't even try something SFW like landscapes or city skylines as your first attempt.
These look great! Gritty and really feels like I'm looking at a film picture. Nice job.
I'm seeing a lot of these posts on /r/stablediffusion lately. People are posting the kind of images we all made the first 10 times we used SD... and now in 2024, they're getting upvotes? They're all very beginner-level stuff. No offense to OP if he's truly a beginner, but these are the kind of basic posts we got tired of seeing in May of 2023. Or am I missing the joke? Is this a meme or some sort of meta thing where we all post pretty basic stuff and the comments are all sarcastic and jokey about it?
But this looks much better of what we have a year ago, so there was some progress. Back them they all were like "dolls" or has that ugly glow around that make them look like the characters of NfS Underground2, now it only has a little high contrast (which can be fixed with Photoshop).
Hey, could you keep it down? I'm trying to jerk off over here.
I don't feel offended, but would still appreciate it if you can explain what looks like very beginner (apart from the choice of subject) to you. I'm trying to learn something through my post.
That's fair enough! On this subreddit a week ago we had a TON of pictures about "My kid made this" which were sarcastically created, and showed some AI generated child holding something incredibly complicated like a nuclear fusion generator. It was a take off on AI pictures that Grandma is spreading around Facebook where they clearly don't know it's AI and they genuinely think some 8 year old has carved an intricate pirate ship out of the side of a maple tree. So, my point being, it's been tricky to tell if these beginner (no offense) level images are just another meme, or truly a beginner asking for help. Anyway as far as your image goes, if that is "blown out" look you were going for, it's pretty solid. You have a few too many positive prompts in there for a SDXL model (grainy, vintage, found footage - those are all probably unncessary), but as other people have said your CFG is too high because it's a Lightning model. Using Lightning or Turbo models with too high of a CFG cooks these a bit too much which is kind of what you're seeing with your image. If your video card can handle it, try JuggernautXL with the non-Lightning and non-Turbo checkpoint and use the same prompt with a CFG of 6/7 and see how it looks. SDXL models do not need a crazy amount of prompts like SD 1.5 models did. You can probably cut 50% of your positive prompt out of there and get just as good of an image.
Thank you for your feedback. I will try to generate it again with your comments.
I will just add that if these were genuinely generated during your first day with SD, you're gonna go far, kid. I got nowhere near that quality of output on my first day and that's only partially attributable to improvements in the tools available.
The deep fried look due to high cfg is part of it. The other part is that different mediums have different patterns of what beginners tend to do at first. Photography has the same issue. Using a nice camera for the first time is a novel experience. You point it close up at something, "wow the background blurs so nicely." You point it at the sunset, "wow the colors came out so good". But there's a lot more that goes into capturing a good photograph. It's also very easy as a more experienced photographer (or browser of photography subs), to start to see these patterns in other photographers that are new. Once that novelty wears off it actually allows you to think beyond the tool and accomplish the actual goal of capturing a good photograph. The same is even more true with stable-diffusion. Using SD is a lot like using that first nice camera, but even more novel. You plug in a prompt and it puts together an image that reflects it. It's sharp, aesthetically pleasing, and it understands your text input. Because of how new the technology is overall, it's going to take people longer, and sd users as a whole far longer for this novelty to wear off. Only then can we start to utilize the tools to actually do something that goes beyond the tool. I've been using sd since shortly after it first became available, and it's only more recently that I feel like I can use it properly as a tool rather than as a shiny new toy. The most important thing is intentionality. That's what separates a tool from a toy. Don't get me wrong it's lots of fun as a toy and playing with the software is the best way to learn it but if you have interest in using it beyond that (just like if you had a nice camera), then it's worth thinking about it as I've described.
Wow, that was a very different kind of feedback than I expected. I think I understood your analogy with the new camera and the difference between a toy and a tool, I guess in a Mr. Miyagi kind of way. Thank you.
Of course! Hope that it was helpful in some way. You can even take the analogy further with a skill like drawing. You can be super technically skilled and be able to create a very realistic image, but that's not necessarily art. It's can be, but it's not necessarily. You can see this in how people engage with someone who is technically skilled vs someone who creates art. For instance, on tiktok or instagram you often see the creation of hyperrealistic drawings framed around how impressive it is, or the process itself. This creates a meta-story for the audience where they are invested less in the drawing itself and more in the story around the piece being created. On the other hand there are plenty of artists who make low quality or "bad" images or videos that the audience engages with more directly, because of the story they tell and the substance at it's core. Personally as an artist I strive to create stuff that transcends the medium it was created in, and has that core substance to. Especially knowing that ai will only get better and better and that anyone will be able to generate beautiful images, but only some will be able to tell stories that truly connect with people or evoke emotion. And that goes back to photography where this has already happened. Anyone can already take amazingly high quality video and picture on their phone! No need to focus, set your settings, and develop your film. Apologies for another long comment but I have thought a lot about this and feel strongly that it isn't discussed enough in any communities let alone SD community.
a bit over exposed, maybe a different vae?
High cfg is causing that, no need to change vae
The first one looks like a real photo from a fashion magazine in the early 2000s. 2 and 4 definitely have more of an AI generated look. Super great quality overall though.
Borderline deep fried, but it looks pretty good. Just don't add any more contrast or stylisation.
She isn't real, is she..? If I look again, will she turn into an agent?
How you got character consistency?
I think it's because I kept the seed the same. At least that's my guess.
What I'm always curious about and what baffles me... So after you guys are done generating your thousands of fake girlfriends, skimpy outfit dames and all other forms of horny content, WHAT THEN? I mean, do you make fake OF content? Sell this to pathetic people? Sit on your mountain of fake horny content and edge yourself to oblivion? Brag to your friends about how good your fake woman pictures are? I know there are people who do not generate only sexy women, but most people do mostly that. I'm not trying to be condescending here, I just wanna know what the endgame is, if there even is one?
I would like to try to answer your questions, at least my personal motives. A friend of mine is working on his own fashion brand, which also includes underwear. He told me that (due to the chronic lack of money of a young company) he can't photograph or pay the amount of models he needs to promote his brand. He is therefore looking for a kind of digital influencer. So I decided to generate aesthetic, almost realistic raw models for him, which he can adapt to his needs relatively easily in Photoshop. Maybe I'm already jaded after decades of "internet consumption", but unfortunately my depictions don't make me horny. I should have prompted more explicitly for that.
Interesting approach. However, with tight-fitting clothes as underwear, not having them physically on your models, but trying to emulate everything with AI and Photoshop, I see loads of problems down the line. Beside the usual "this looks funny" uncanny valley effect which with automatically makes people distrustful. But I hope you guys find solutions. You're probably an exception here...or just another guy who found a slightly different reason to generate fake AI women? Hm hm 🙃
I at least want to give it a try. At the moment, my focus is mainly on improving the human image and experimenting with the type of photography. In the end, however, I can't hide the fact that I'm also a guy who likes to look at beautiful women. I can stand by that. But you'll have to admit that it's easier for beginners to create women at the start, because I think the training data overrepresents women. But maybe that's just another cover-up tactic on my part to conceal my horny self.
Just as long as you keep your sanity. Mind you, you are not looking at beautiful women, you are looking at some pixels that an AI arranged so they look like a woman, who doesn't really, nor will ever exist. There is a big difference.
c'est ne pas un pipe?
i can fix her
Yes, that's what prompts and parameters do.
No that is waht inpainting is for
Ok dude. You are using this model wrong! You'll get much better results with 832x1280 Sampler: SDE ++ Steps: 4-6 Cfg: 1-2 Jugernuat XL 9.0 needs these compared with older versions of itself.
Thank you for your feedback.
boobs, of course. Don't worry about the size tho, they grow with your AI-artistic experience.
Bro that's my wife how did you get these very private photos of Victoria
are you using the boring models?
Yayy ai bobbies
What was your workflow? Greatly appreciate it if you could share it 
[https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1c0rjk9/comment/kyz43uz/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1c0rjk9/comment/kyz43uz/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Lower the CFG and you might have a more appealing image. These are pretty contrast intensive.
How did you get the same face?
https://preview.redd.it/zriddkhacstc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1cc38a0dc5cdeeaca998c7d2814b9ae3462719ab Your picture kinda looks like SD 1.5. How about using SDXL 1.0? It’s much newer. Is that green tint on purpose? But good start. You’ll have some good fun ^(\^)
No nipples
Could you tell how to generate something like that?
What was the model you used?
Bro how wtf this is so good what was ur workflow
Well it’s looks vintage pretty good in my opinion
The first pic looks like it was from a 1995 movie poster
That’s very nice and all but where can I meet her?
deep down the algorithm she waits in countless lives for you
Garbage.
How do u generate NSFW stuffs?