I forgot to put logos and text in negatives. Then this turned out so good that it took me a while to notice after uploading that there are logos all over the bottom. Would delete this is that was an option.
Hey, uploader here. I made a mistake. I mean the Maxwell architecture, not the Pascal architecture. My bad! It has something to do with Cuda 5.x being converted differently, leading to a different starting sampling picture. Anything _starting_ from the Pascel architecture mostly results in the same thing, and I can't wait to try it out when I get my hands on it!
Absolutely no way, this looks amazing! You took my prompt and just made it absolutely beautiful, I was really struggling with it, at some point it just started degrading and I couldn't find the root of it. Love it, great model, good tweaks, and most of all, nice lack of double ears.
Thanks! I saw your commentary about an outdated berrymix and wondered what it would look like with a different model. I really think you should consider upgrading models- a lot of the newer ones are really quite better. Also with negative embeddings you don't really have to go with the giant negative prompt anymore. You can generally just throw one of them in there. The one I used was https://huggingface.co/datasets/gsdf/EasyNegative, but there are a lot.
Absolutely no way, this looks amazing! You took my prompt and just made it absolutely beautiful, I was really struggling with it, at some point it just started degrading and I couldn't find the root of it. Love it, great model, good tweaks, and most of all, nice lack of double ears.
Dayum, really lovely, especially how almost looks like the anime but with a bit more detail around the eyes and hair, I guess it was trained by anime screenshots since there is not too much material about Sunomiya.
Hello, what is your model? I have been searching for a long time but have not found a model named lora:artist-fishine
not sure if i can post a link here, but this specific fishine lora can be found in the gayshit link in the top post of the /hcg/ thread on /h/, ctrl+f fishine in the link and you will find it, i believe it is the first one. there are two other fishine loras, one named artist-hirame, and another named Hirame-v5. those are not the ones i use, but they still work okay. clarity_2 VAE is also required to replicate this output (can be found on huggingface schisim/clarity), but it doesn't show up in the metadata. there is also no other post-processing done here besides basic highres fix.
Amazing image and an amazing mix! I was about to ask if it wasn't called sweet soup before, because that's how I tagged it before but I see you already retagged my post, thanks.
Wow, a really old Favorite of mine. Didnt expected to see an AI version of Irina here. Really underrated Waifu. I just think her breasts are a bit more bigger in the anime but great image.
Having looked into it, the ambiguity here seems to be intentional. The "Average AI enjoyer" used to appear on their twitter but has since been edited out. Further, they tried uploading some stuff over on danbo and, when confronted about it, stated (twice) "I'm not saying that I generate pictures or draw them, I let people think the way they like." Imo this seems like a kinda scuzzy way to go about things so I'm probably not gonna upload any more from them.
I'm not surprised. There's quite a number of people making AI images that try to pass it off as their own original works, which is very annoying and sometimes only makes it harder to differentiate.
The money thing is a matter I don't like, but it wouldn't be as bad if they would just be honest about it everywhere instead of acting like how they did in their danbo comments, trying to (badly) muddy things like that.
I see. I looked around the artist's sites, and I found no indication of their work being AI. Plus, I couldn't find any typical AI mistakes, but I suppose my eyes aren't as attuned as others' might be...
In addition to the "I will share with you my own private Lora's that I use including my style" on their patreon and the "Average AI enjoyer" on their deviantart, I found two images with small errors. In this image you can see the sidelock on the left merging into the shadow and in this image the nails are weird. It's worth keeping in mind that as image models advance, we should expect the kinds of mistakes models are making today to become less frequent.
Having looked into it, the ambiguity here seems to be intentional. The "Average AI enjoyer" used to appear on their twitter but has since been edited out. Further, they tried uploading some stuff over on danbo and, when confronted about it, stated (twice) "I'm not saying that I generate pictures or draw them, I let people think the way they like." Imo this seems like a kinda scuzzy way to go about things so I'm probably not gonna upload any more from them.
I see. I looked around the artist's sites, and I found no indication of their work being AI. Plus, I couldn't find any typical AI mistakes, but I suppose my eyes aren't as attuned as others' might be...
Admittedly I'm not great at differentiating a fair amount either, but I haven't seen any proof to show me their stuff isn't AI generated. Their patreon has language that suggest they do AI stuff mainly and their deviantart profile mentions being into AI stuff too and many of their uploads there are 1024x1024 so it seems to me another sign to be that it's AI stuff.
They probably are just very attentive for any errors or something. If there's proof that confirms otherwise I won't have a problem deleting this.
It is. On their patreon the wording is clear that they use specific loras and a lot of their posts on Twitter have a similar style to this one.
I see. I looked around the artist's sites, and I found no indication of their work being AI. Plus, I couldn't find any typical AI mistakes, but I suppose my eyes aren't as attuned as others' might be...
As newer models come out and improve, I have little doubt that AI backgrounds will also improve too, however I would say expecting every detail to be correct every time isn't reasonable.. at this time anyway.
The background in this image doesn't look that bad to me, even if it may not be 100% correct.
Personally I think backgrounds deserve leeway. Asking for a 100% perfect background with AI is something of an impossibility to say the least.
I totally agree, especially with AI backgrounds! Though I also think that backgrounds should make sense, which is why I was concerned for a sec about the background possibly breaking the rules of eyesight.
I'm not sure if I understand. Are you saying that from the horizontal perspective right to left, it looks sloped due to the left trees looking beneath the right trees? If yes, I can also reason that the ground, up until the river, is sloping down (and therefore, this picture makes sense perspective wise).
Well, I mean, at least that's how I saw this image when I generated it.
Speaking of flagged status, the trees on the left side of the picture are tilted to the right, so the ground is sloped down, and I think there's enough distance to see the lake.
I'm not sure if I understand. Are you saying that from the horizontal perspective right to left, it looks sloped due to the left trees looking beneath the right trees? If yes, I can also reason that the ground, up until the river, is sloping down (and therefore, this picture makes sense perspective wise).
Speaking of flagged status, the trees on the left side of the picture are tilted to the right, so the ground is sloped down, and I think there's enough distance to see the lake.
