Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 182 posts

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#131

Post by soligern »

__loam wrote: post #127
soligern wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enforcing artificial scarcity is idiotic and counter progressive. There will be other things that will continue to be uncommon that humans will continue to appreciate. This is what human progress looks like. Imagine someone said this when agriculture started up- “The great thing about fruits and vegetables is that they taste so sweet the few times we find them. We shouldn’t grow them in bulk”

AI Art models are completely dependent on human labor to function. "Out-competing" human generated images will damage the commons and make it harder to train these models over time as they push human creative labor out of the market, if we believe it's even competitive. Personally I think this guy has a point and he's pointing to something that I don't believe a lot of ai art advocates have considered: the attention…

So what if art is devalued? We are hardwired to appreciate beauty so art of some form will always be sought. Obviously there is the matter of artists losing their livelihoods but that is also an inevitable outcome of progress and always has been.

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#132

Post by brnaftr361 »

starik36 wrote: post #112
jyap wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Different use case. I can run SDXL 1.0 offline from my home. I can’t do this with Midjourney. A closed source model that doesn’t have the limitation of running on consumer level GPUs will have certain advantages.

What type of setup do you have at home? What type of GPU? MJ completes a pretty high quality photo in about a minute. Does SD compare?

I haven't done it in a while but I was cranking images out at 11s/output on a 3080. But it depends on your workflow, too. I started low res/low samples (32-64) and scaled up or used recursion until I got a desirable result or found a nice seed. I think I was doing 512x916 or something close to that.

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#133

Post by vitorgrs »

amilios wrote: post #61

I always wondered why the vision models don't seem to be following the whole "scale up as much as possible" mantra that has defined the language models of the past few years (to the same extent). Even 3.5 billion parameters is absolutely nothing compared to the likes of GPT-3, 3.5, 4, or even the larger open-source language models (e.g. LLaMA-65B). Is it just an engineering challenge that no one has stepped up for ye…

Do we know the amount of parameters Dall-e have these days, Firefly or Midjourney, etc?

If we are talking about Stable Diffusion, the reality is that... more parameters mean it will be hard to run locally. And let me tell you something, the community around Stable Diffusion only cares with NSFW... And want local for that...

Stable Diffusion 2 was totally boycotted by the community because they... banned NSFW from there. They had now to allow it again on SDXL.

Also, more parameters mean it will be more expensive to community finetunners to train as well.

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#134

Post by blagie »

It's often said porn drives technology.

I clicked through the links in the article, since they sounded technically interesting. They led to AI-generated porn. Those, in turn, led to pages about training SD to generate porn. Now, two disclaimers:

1) I am not interested in AI-generating porn

2) I haven't followed SD in maybe 6-9 months

With those out-of-the-way, the out-of-the-box tools for fine-tuning SD are impressive, well beyond anything I've seen in the non-porn space, and the progress seems to be entirely driven by the anime porn community:

https://aituts.com/stable-diffusion-lora

10 images is enough to fine-tune. 30-150 is preferred. This takes 15-240 minutes, depending on GPU. I do occasionally use SD for work. If this works for images other than naked and cartoon women, and for normal business graphics, this may dramatically increase the utility of SD in my workflows (at least if I get around to setting it up).

I want my images to have a consistent style. If I'm making icons, I'd like to fine-tune on my baseline icon set. If I'm making slides for a deck, I'd like those to have a consistent color scheme and visual language. Now I can.

Thanks creepy porn dudes!

The other piece: Anyone trying to keep the cat in the bag? It's too late.

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#136

Post by vitorgrs »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #52
latchkey wrote: post #46

Amazing that their examples at the bottom of the page still show really messed up human hands.

Some of them look surprisingly correct, so it looks like there's been at least some progress on that front. I would assume these are among the best examples of many, many attempts so it still seems to be a ways off.

I for sure generated hands better than they showed :)

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#137

Post by elishah »

starik36 wrote: post #112
jyap wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Different use case. I can run SDXL 1.0 offline from my home. I can’t do this with Midjourney. A closed source model that doesn’t have the limitation of running on consumer level GPUs will have certain advantages.

What type of setup do you have at home? What type of GPU? MJ completes a pretty high quality photo in about a minute. Does SD compare?

With SD you have a lot of control over not just basics like image size and prompt complexity, but also things like how many iterations of which different sampler(s) get used.

So speed can vary wildly depending on how you're choosing to use it. And that's without even getting into the wide variance of hardware.

But generally speaking, it will usually be significantly faster than one image per minute.

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#138

Post by elishah »

knicholes wrote: post #50
lacker wrote: post #40

I'm out of date on the image-generating side of AI, but I'd like to check things out. What's the best tool for image generation that's available on a website right now? Ie, not a model that I have to run locally.

I've found https://firefly.adobe.com/ pretty good at composing images with multiple subjects. [disclaimer - I work at Adobe, but not in the Creative Cloud] But I wouldn't say it's the "best." Just trained on images that weren't taken from unconsenting artists.

I was quite disappointed that the Photoshop generative fill stuff insists on running on Adobe's servers rather than locally. So however good it is, there are many of us who will never use it.

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#139

Post by __loam »

soligern wrote: post #131
__loam wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI Art models are completely dependent on human labor to function. "Out-competing" human generated images will damage the commons and make it harder to train these models over time as they push human creative labor out of the market, if we believe it's even competitive. Personally I think this guy has a point and he's pointing to something that I don't believe a lot of ai art advocates have considered: the attention…

So what if art is devalued? We are hardwired to appreciate beauty so art of some form will always be sought. Obviously there is the matter of artists losing their livelihoods but that is also an inevitable outcome of progress and always has been.

Lol. I hate this industry sometimes. It's not obvious, to me at least, that our society should accept the automation of the production of culture. Maybe I'm a luddite or whatever lazy quip you'd like to use, but I prefer the story of a human mastering a skill and producing something beyond contextless aesthetic sludge.

Re: Stable Diffusion XL 1.0

#140

Post by kristianp »

capybara_2020 wrote: post #95
jrflowers wrote: post #6

I hope someday there’s a version of this or something comparable to it that can run on <8gb consumer hardware. The main selling point of Stable Diffusion was its ability to run in that environment.

Give InvokeAI a try. https://github.com/invoke-ai/InvokeAI Edit: Spec required from the documentation You will need one of the following: An NVIDIA-based graphics card with 4 GB or more VRAM memory. 6-8 GB of VRAM is highly recommended for rendering using the Stable Diffusion XL models An Apple computer with an M1 chip. An AMD-based graphics card with 4GB or more VRAM memory (Linux only), 6-8 GB for XL rendering.

Thanks for the recommendation.

As an aside, does this irritate anyone else?

"You must have Python 3.9 or 3.10 installed on your machine. Earlier or later versions are not supported. Node.js also needs to be installed along with yarn"

I don't like having to install npm when an existing dev stack (python) is already present.

Post reply on HN