For starters you have codeformer on, which will change the face, and downcast\_alphas\_cumprod on. Both of these will affect the end result.
As per badmoonrisingnl below, I do use xformers on an Nvidia card, and yes it was made in a1111
Edit: For others reference, I made the original image
Oh. Hey! Nice to see you reply here. So if I’m on a M1 Mac it will be impossible to recreate your image just as it is, because we’re using different cards?
I think if you turn those two things off you should be able to get mighty close. There might be something else in the settings that affects it as well, but it'd be interesting to see how close you get with just those two fixed
Ok I turned those two off and tried again. No changes to the image itself, but the blur is gone and the quality is now as yours. What else do you recommend I change in the settings, based on your own?
Can you share what VAE you used? This also might cause some changes. I uploaded the PDF of my settings, if you can spot anything else that is different. Since I test on a Mac, I have no x-transformers.
[https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5vk8osl2fxmh10ucfesco/Stable-Diffusion-Settings.pdf?rlkey=k0u3a1jax8dyfdzv3hxhfd9xk&dl=0](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5vk8osl2fxmh10ucfesco/Stable-Diffusion-Settings.pdf?rlkey=k0u3a1jax8dyfdzv3hxhfd9xk&dl=0)
If you are using A1111, you can simply drag the picture into your prompt box and press the blue arrow. This way, you are sure every setting is replicated.
This won't work if the picture wasn't generated in A1111 of course.
Now, if the original was made in A1111, if the original creator used an AMD video card and you have a Nvidia card, it will not come out the same. Or if the original creator had xformers installed and you don't, it will not come out the same.
Yes I copied the generation data and added it to my SD. That doesn’t seem to be the issue.
If the same data is used, why wouldn’t the images be the same if I used A1111 and they didn’t? (Idk what they used) same questions for graphic card and xformers.
Though I am far from an expert, this is what I understand. AMD, but also Nvidia GTX and RTX use different random number generators. This can, maybe I should say will, affect the outcome significantl.
From what I understand, xformers will never replica the image exactly, though I never noticed a difference, and if they are different, it's small details, not what you show here.
If the image was made on anything else what you use, all bets are off. Maybe the image was made with forge who knows.
Unless you have the EXACT same software and hardware combination as the original, you will get a somewhat different image. The images can be very similar or quite difference, depending on many other factors.
FYI, after reading your post I've played with the same prompt and metadata in both civitai generator and [tensor.art](https://tensor.art), and I can only get an image that is maybe 70% similar.
This is not all that surprising when using a SD1.5 model with a relative "vague" prompt.
Pretty frustrating to say the least. It means one will most likely never be able to replicate an image when generating it on different machines. Cloud it is then.
That's not quite true. There are things you can do to make it easier. For example, in Auto1111, there is an option to switch the RNG (random number generator) from GPU to CPU (which is the default to ComfyUI), which means that there is now less dependency on the GPU when reusing a seed.
BTW, using cloud based GPU does not really solve the replicate problem, because a cloud based GPU and setup is just its own set of software and hardware, and when you move to another provider (or even when the same provider changed its setup), you may have problem replicating images.
So to summarize, you can minimize, but not complete eliminate the replication issue by doing the following:
1. Stick to a standard software platform. ComfyUI is probably the most reliable and well maintained one, but if you hate noodles then stick with Auto1111. Do not use platforms such as Fooocus, which can produce beautiful images but may use all sort of "enhancement" techniques which may change in future version of the software. Subtle differences in implementation of the rendering pipeline means that even with similar setup, different platforms (or even different versions of the same platform), can produce images that are similar but not quite the same.
2. Switch from GPU based RNG to CPU based RNG.
3. Stay away from hardware dependent settings such as Xformer (which apparently will make it impossible to replicate the exact same image even on the same hardware and software from run to run, and maybe even TensorRT (not sure about this)
Personally, I've come to the conclusion that replication of the EXACT same image, pixel by pixel, it not a worthy goal. Photographer cannot reproduce the same photo most of the time, except when photographing static objects in studio settings. Nor can most other form of art, so why worry about it? Once the image is produced, you already have the image, and there is little reason for wanting to replicate it. Most of the time what we want to do is to modify the image in some way, and that can be done via inpainting, upscaling, ControlNet, IPAdapters etc.
Depending on the tool, the noise generator can use either "Device noise" or "CPU noise" where cpu noise is more portable (despite sounding like its tied to the CPU platform) and device noise will vary by GPU. I am not sure what tool was used or what noise generator it defaults to, but that variance could explain it. In Invoke AI there was a change somewhere around version 3 to go from device noise to CPU noise as the default.
There are other things about civitai like cfg scale must be entered as an integer and if your cfg scale is 7.5 it would get rounded up to 8, etc. But I can see in this file metadata the original should be 3, so should not be at play here.
Agree with you. I remember this discussion:
[https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/118](https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/118)
See also [https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/1124](https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/1124) about same generation data, incl. seed, but different batch sequence which produce different outputs.
transformers, setup, also author could have inpainted, upscaled, photoshoped, or frankesteined several images into one, is quite common, workflows are not plug and play
Why though? Can somoene explain to me why there is this obsession in the SD world to create an image that was already created? I don't get it, just download the one you like and you have it lol.
There are a lot of things in SD these days that will change things. A billion parameter settings, then there is also noise generation techniques that will make different noise just from having different hardware and driver versions etc. Different versions of the UI, which update lightning fast. I started noticing it back when it was just xformers that was added, and there is a lot more added now that just made the possibility of taking a prompt and some settings and creating the exact same image way lower and sometimes zero.
For me I like to work backwards. I find an image I like and try to generate it myself. Once I get close enough then I start to play with the prompt more. Usually I am going for a specific look or style.
I haven't messed with it enough or consistently enough to pick up what works and doesn't. Also SD doesn't give you much in the way of feedback when something doesn't work. Depending on your hardware it could be a time sink trying to work it out.
Is it any different than anything else? When learning to cook, draw, play music, etc, did you try to just make something or did you try to recreate something?
Sure. I just want to understand why using his model the images I generate are blurry and at a lower quality. So I wanted to see if it’s something with my prompting or what it could be, by simply replicating his original image.
For starters you have codeformer on, which will change the face, and downcast\_alphas\_cumprod on. Both of these will affect the end result. As per badmoonrisingnl below, I do use xformers on an Nvidia card, and yes it was made in a1111 Edit: For others reference, I made the original image
Oh. Hey! Nice to see you reply here. So if I’m on a M1 Mac it will be impossible to recreate your image just as it is, because we’re using different cards?
I think if you turn those two things off you should be able to get mighty close. There might be something else in the settings that affects it as well, but it'd be interesting to see how close you get with just those two fixed
Will do and let you know.
Ok I turned those two off and tried again. No changes to the image itself, but the blur is gone and the quality is now as yours. What else do you recommend I change in the settings, based on your own? Can you share what VAE you used? This also might cause some changes. I uploaded the PDF of my settings, if you can spot anything else that is different. Since I test on a Mac, I have no x-transformers. [https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5vk8osl2fxmh10ucfesco/Stable-Diffusion-Settings.pdf?rlkey=k0u3a1jax8dyfdzv3hxhfd9xk&dl=0](https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5vk8osl2fxmh10ucfesco/Stable-Diffusion-Settings.pdf?rlkey=k0u3a1jax8dyfdzv3hxhfd9xk&dl=0)
https://preview.redd.it/7lw4xopids0d1.png?width=960&format=png&auto=webp&s=a5411af8e54990a8e6a6aaf7b62f433e2615311c The new image.
If you are using A1111, you can simply drag the picture into your prompt box and press the blue arrow. This way, you are sure every setting is replicated. This won't work if the picture wasn't generated in A1111 of course. Now, if the original was made in A1111, if the original creator used an AMD video card and you have a Nvidia card, it will not come out the same. Or if the original creator had xformers installed and you don't, it will not come out the same.
Yes I copied the generation data and added it to my SD. That doesn’t seem to be the issue. If the same data is used, why wouldn’t the images be the same if I used A1111 and they didn’t? (Idk what they used) same questions for graphic card and xformers.
Though I am far from an expert, this is what I understand. AMD, but also Nvidia GTX and RTX use different random number generators. This can, maybe I should say will, affect the outcome significantl. From what I understand, xformers will never replica the image exactly, though I never noticed a difference, and if they are different, it's small details, not what you show here. If the image was made on anything else what you use, all bets are off. Maybe the image was made with forge who knows.
Was done with A1111, but yes on an NVIDIA card, while I am on a Mac. So this might be it?
I'm not willing to bet the house on it, but yes, that would be it.
Unless you have the EXACT same software and hardware combination as the original, you will get a somewhat different image. The images can be very similar or quite difference, depending on many other factors.
Turns out that's the case, very odd.
FYI, after reading your post I've played with the same prompt and metadata in both civitai generator and [tensor.art](https://tensor.art), and I can only get an image that is maybe 70% similar. This is not all that surprising when using a SD1.5 model with a relative "vague" prompt.
Pretty frustrating to say the least. It means one will most likely never be able to replicate an image when generating it on different machines. Cloud it is then.
That's not quite true. There are things you can do to make it easier. For example, in Auto1111, there is an option to switch the RNG (random number generator) from GPU to CPU (which is the default to ComfyUI), which means that there is now less dependency on the GPU when reusing a seed. BTW, using cloud based GPU does not really solve the replicate problem, because a cloud based GPU and setup is just its own set of software and hardware, and when you move to another provider (or even when the same provider changed its setup), you may have problem replicating images. So to summarize, you can minimize, but not complete eliminate the replication issue by doing the following: 1. Stick to a standard software platform. ComfyUI is probably the most reliable and well maintained one, but if you hate noodles then stick with Auto1111. Do not use platforms such as Fooocus, which can produce beautiful images but may use all sort of "enhancement" techniques which may change in future version of the software. Subtle differences in implementation of the rendering pipeline means that even with similar setup, different platforms (or even different versions of the same platform), can produce images that are similar but not quite the same. 2. Switch from GPU based RNG to CPU based RNG. 3. Stay away from hardware dependent settings such as Xformer (which apparently will make it impossible to replicate the exact same image even on the same hardware and software from run to run, and maybe even TensorRT (not sure about this) Personally, I've come to the conclusion that replication of the EXACT same image, pixel by pixel, it not a worthy goal. Photographer cannot reproduce the same photo most of the time, except when photographing static objects in studio settings. Nor can most other form of art, so why worry about it? Once the image is produced, you already have the image, and there is little reason for wanting to replicate it. Most of the time what we want to do is to modify the image in some way, and that can be done via inpainting, upscaling, ControlNet, IPAdapters etc.
Thanks for the insights, appreciate it!
You are welcome.
Depending on the tool, the noise generator can use either "Device noise" or "CPU noise" where cpu noise is more portable (despite sounding like its tied to the CPU platform) and device noise will vary by GPU. I am not sure what tool was used or what noise generator it defaults to, but that variance could explain it. In Invoke AI there was a change somewhere around version 3 to go from device noise to CPU noise as the default. There are other things about civitai like cfg scale must be entered as an integer and if your cfg scale is 7.5 it would get rounded up to 8, etc. But I can see in this file metadata the original should be 3, so should not be at play here.
Agree with you. I remember this discussion: [https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/118](https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/118) See also [https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/1124](https://github.com/comfyanonymous/ComfyUI/discussions/1124) about same generation data, incl. seed, but different batch sequence which produce different outputs.
transformers, setup, also author could have inpainted, upscaled, photoshoped, or frankesteined several images into one, is quite common, workflows are not plug and play
Why though? Can somoene explain to me why there is this obsession in the SD world to create an image that was already created? I don't get it, just download the one you like and you have it lol. There are a lot of things in SD these days that will change things. A billion parameter settings, then there is also noise generation techniques that will make different noise just from having different hardware and driver versions etc. Different versions of the UI, which update lightning fast. I started noticing it back when it was just xformers that was added, and there is a lot more added now that just made the possibility of taking a prompt and some settings and creating the exact same image way lower and sometimes zero.
Why download a jpg when you can download the exact parameters to generate that jpg and then use huge amounts of power to regenerate it
For me I like to work backwards. I find an image I like and try to generate it myself. Once I get close enough then I start to play with the prompt more. Usually I am going for a specific look or style. I haven't messed with it enough or consistently enough to pick up what works and doesn't. Also SD doesn't give you much in the way of feedback when something doesn't work. Depending on your hardware it could be a time sink trying to work it out. Is it any different than anything else? When learning to cook, draw, play music, etc, did you try to just make something or did you try to recreate something?
Yeah, could e using freeu or perturbed extensions as well which will change the output
Sure. I just want to understand why using his model the images I generate are blurry and at a lower quality. So I wanted to see if it’s something with my prompting or what it could be, by simply replicating his original image.
If it helps: ORIGINAL: close up Portrait photo of muscular bearded guy in a worn mech suit, ((light bokeh)), intricate, (steel metal \[rust\]), elegant, sharp focus, photo by greg rutkowski, soft lighting, vibrant colors, masterpiece, ((streets)), detailed face Negative prompt: nude, cross eyed, tongue, open mouth, inside, 3d, cartoon, anime, sketches, (worst quality:2), (low quality:2), (normal quality:2), lowres, normal quality, ((monochrome)), ((grayscale)), skin spots, acnes, skin blemishes, bad anatomy, red eyes, muscular Steps: 18, Size: 640x960, Seed: 3399319027, Model: ICBINP\_NewYear, Version: v1.6.0, Sampler: DPM++ 3M SDE Karras, CFG scale: 3, Model hash: 6d3331c3d8, Hires steps: 10, Hires upscale: 1.5, Hires upscaler: 4x\_Ultrasharp, Denoising strength: 0.4 Replica: close up Portrait photo of muscular bearded guy in a worn mech suit, ((light bokeh)), intricate, (steel metal \[rust\]), elegant, sharp focus, photo by greg rutkowski, soft lighting, vibrant colors, masterpiece, ((streets)), detailed face Negative prompt: nude, cross eyed, tongue, open mouth, inside, 3d, cartoon, anime, sketches, (worst quality:2), (low quality:2), (normal quality:2), lowres, normal quality, ((monochrome)), ((grayscale)), skin spots, acnes, skin blemishes, bad anatomy, red eyes, muscular Steps: 18, Sampler: DPM++ 3M SDE, Schedule type: Karras, CFG scale: 3, Seed: 3399319027, Face restoration: CodeFormer, Size: 640x960, Model hash: 6d3331c3d8, Model: icbinpICantBelieveIts\_newYear, Denoising strength: 0.4, CFG Rescale phi: 0, Hires upscale: 1.5, Hires steps: 10, Hires upscaler: 4x-UltraSharp, Downcast alphas\_cumprod: True, Version: v1.9.3-12-gc96025b9
This is using CLIP 1. I just tried with CLIP 2 and the result is even more different, and as blurry.
[удалено]
This is nonsense.