I tried it again. Picked the OG picture in PNG info, send to text2image, removed the "extras" thick, picked an upscaler, and boom:
It's again creating the second image. WTF
I tried it again. Picked the OG picture in PNG info, send to text2image, removed the "extras" thick, picked an upscaler, and boom:
It's again creating the second image. WTF
- Jan 24, 2020
- 1,401
- 3,805
Sometimes SD start to misbehave this is when we put him in the corner to think of what he did...I tried it again. Picked the OG picture in PNG info, send to text2image, removed the "extras" thick, picked an upscaler, and boom:
View attachment 3002941
It's again creating the second image. WTF
Try reboot SD and load your image again. If it's still the same then I don't know. We would need to trouble shoot it then.
- Jan 24, 2020
- 1,401
- 3,805
Why would it not show me the seed of the exact picture I put in?
And where did you get the correct seed then?
Edit: ah, saw it in the PNG info.
Last edited:
- Jan 24, 2020
- 1,401
- 3,805
With NMDK with multiplier:2 28 sampling steps and 56 hiresteps denoising 0.3 and cfg 8
The left eye (her right), is a bit wonky but sd has typically difficulties with sideglanses etc
The left eye (her right), is a bit wonky but sd has typically difficulties with sideglanses etc
Last edited:
- Dec 31, 2016
- 316
- 708
What optimising settings are you using, is "rng" from cpu, gpu or nv?
Seed isn't 110% regardless of being the same value IF it's being fed through different things.
Old version of xformers wasn't deterministic, same is true for one of the sdp variations too i believe.
Though if you're throwing variation seed into the mix that'll really screw with things...
Seed isn't 110% regardless of being the same value IF it's being fed through different things.
Old version of xformers wasn't deterministic, same is true for one of the sdp variations too i believe.
Though if you're throwing variation seed into the mix that'll really screw with things...
Okay both seed don't work for me
2549670335 is what automatically gets extracted from png info -> send to text2img.
That one results in our infamous second picture:
The other variation seed you shared ( 822547809 )doesn't work either, you can tell from the preview it's again creating something new:
- Dec 23, 2018
- 611
- 2,573
I really like this pic. Here's a slightly amended version in Juggernaut XLRe-running the exact same thing with increased "Upscale by" slider from 1 to 2 (I think the previous one was blurry because 1 meant = same resolution?), I got this:
View attachment 3002841
So already way better in terms of sharpness, although I am not 100% satisfied with the result.
But funny that it did now recreate 1:1 the same picture.
Although the seed is still from the previous picture.
Why does SD not recreate from the seed, I don't get it
And here's how I got it
Main changes were the sampling method (I like Adaptive samplers as more steps = better imo), the CFG and the upscaler.
Shows the difference using a different checkpoint can make.
- Jan 24, 2020
- 1,401
- 3,805
There's an extra section you can use a variation seed to find variations with the same image.Why would it not show me the seed of the exact picture I put in?
And where did you get the correct seed then?
The original seed :2549670335 . The variations seed: 822547809.
Out of curiosity I used the "variation seed" as the image seed. Meaning no extra selected and no variation but with 822547809 as the main seed. Hope I'm being clear..
Without hiresfix:
With hiresfix:
I like the perspective but the face isn't great.
Last edited:
What's the difference between my default one and the one you picked? Aren't the steps just determined by the step slider? Or do you mean that it works better with higher step numbers?
Both don't work for me, see my post above! Really weird. https://f95zone.to/threads/stable-diffusion-prompt-sharing-and-learning-thread.146036/post-11948620
You even get a closer result with the variation seed than I do with the OG seed.. (although mine made use of hiresfix)
Last edited:
- Dec 31, 2016
- 316
- 708
it recreates it for YOU yes, but if you share images with the intention of others being able to recreate it or you trying to recreate other ppls images, two of those options have very specific conditions.
GPU will only give the same results IF both have the same GPU.
Nvidia should work for anyone using Nvidia cards but it's not very commonly used.
CPU is the one that's most "stable" and most easily shared.
So, nobody knows what's going on?
I pick the exact same seed as you guys, use the same settings, thick the same boxes, but get wildly new creations. Or do you see any mistakes?
I pick the exact same seed as you guys, use the same settings, thick the same boxes, but get wildly new creations. Or do you see any mistakes?
- Dec 31, 2016
- 316
- 708
Think the two of you just happen to have the same GPU, seem to remember both of you having 1070, unless i'm mixing up some detailsMine is set to GPU... I don't remember if I changed it or if it's default.
I'm not at all convinced this is the issue.
- Dec 31, 2016
- 316
- 708
CFG Scale is twice as high
And seed is wrong
HMMMMMMMMM. At 8 it worked. But when I played around with it earlier and tried extrem high and low values it didn't.
But 16 is from the original seed. Why would I need to change the CFG scale if it's set to the one that had the OG seed / picture as outcome?
So let's say I create a brand new picture I like with CFG set to 16. Then I take that seed to generate it again, shouldn't the CFG stay at 16 to have the same generation settings as before? I mean, I want the same pic.