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

SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

stability.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 157 posts

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#91

Post by torginus »

kmeisthax wrote: post #48

Noncommercial use - aside from being one of my licensing pet peeves - seems to indicate that the money is drying up. My guess is that the investors over at Stability are tired of subsidizing the part of the generative AI market that OpenAI refuses to touch[0]. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure there's a paying portion of the market? Yes, I've heard of people paying for ChatGPT because it answers programming questio…

Isn't literally every imagegen AI that's not DALL-E or Midjourney based on Stable Diffusion?

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#92

Post by 3abiton »

minimaxir wrote: post #13

Hugging Face released a Colab Notebook for generation from SDXL Turbo using the diffusers library: https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1yRC3Z2bWQOeM4z0FeJ0... Playing around with the generation params a bit, Colab's T4 GPU can batch-generate up to 6 images at a time at roughly the same speed as one.

So the new SD model requires higher end hardware compare to the rest?

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#93

Post by ozr »

DeathArrow wrote: post #88
Jackson__ wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only truly successful commercial use of SDXL I know of is by NovelAI. Said company appears to have used an 256xH100 cluster to finetune it to produce anime art. Open source efforts to produce a similar model seem to have failed due to the extreme compute requirements for finetuning. For example, Waifu Diffusion using 8XA40[0] have not managed to bend SDXL to their will after potentially months of training. If you…

>Open source efforts to produce a similar model seem to have failed due to the extreme compute requirements for finetuning. A distributed computing project similar to SETI @ Moon wouldn't help with training?

Not really with our current techniques. The increased latency and low bandwidth between nodes makes it absurdly slow.

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#94

Post by PeterStuer »

kmeisthax wrote: post #48

Noncommercial use - aside from being one of my licensing pet peeves - seems to indicate that the money is drying up. My guess is that the investors over at Stability are tired of subsidizing the part of the generative AI market that OpenAI refuses to touch[0]. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure there's a paying portion of the market? Yes, I've heard of people paying for ChatGPT because it answers programming questio…

Are you suggesting the only use for locally run free SD derived models is porn?

Creating illustrations for articles/presentations and stock photo alteratives are huge!

The ability to run for free on your local machine allows for far more iterations than using SaaS, and the checkpoint/finetune ecosystem the openness sprouted has created models performing way better for these use cases than standard SD.

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#96

Post by cubefox »

torginus wrote: post #91
kmeisthax wrote: post #48

Noncommercial use - aside from being one of my licensing pet peeves - seems to indicate that the money is drying up. My guess is that the investors over at Stability are tired of subsidizing the part of the generative AI market that OpenAI refuses to touch[0]. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure there's a paying portion of the market? Yes, I've heard of people paying for ChatGPT because it answers programming questio…

Isn't literally every imagegen AI that's not DALL-E or Midjourney based on Stable Diffusion?

There are exceptions, e.g. https://generated.photos/human-generator uses a GAN based model.

Edit: Also, Adobe uses its own model for Photoshop integration (inpainting via cloud). That model seems to be the same as this one: https://www.adobe.com/sensei/generative-ai/firefly.html

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#97

Post by [deleted] »

godelski wrote: post #63
kmeisthax wrote: post #48

Noncommercial use - aside from being one of my licensing pet peeves - seems to indicate that the money is drying up. My guess is that the investors over at Stability are tired of subsidizing the part of the generative AI market that OpenAI refuses to touch[0]. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure there's a paying portion of the market? Yes, I've heard of people paying for ChatGPT because it answers programming questio…

> Porn. It's always porn. I've been surprised at the explosion of porn. Well, not actually. Automatic1111 made that easy and anyone that CivitAI knows all too well what those models are being used for. I mean when you give teenagers the ability to undress their crushes[0] what do you think is going to happen (do laws adequately protect people (kids)? Can they? Will this force a shift towards actually chasing producer…

[deleted]

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#98

Post by visarga »

__loam wrote: post #90
senseiV wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The so called "AI People" built the entire architecture, something people didn't think was possible at the scale and quality a year ago, and the matter of "artists should get whatever they want" because it trained on their works isn't the point. Diffusion Models don't rip parts of pictures together, they happen to be trained to make art out of noise, finding patterns in art. same things happening with LLM's in court…

These models can't exist without the training sets. Their value is entirely derived from existing data. The ml architecture does not matter at all. Sure, throw enough compute and data at a problem, do a little parallelization, and you can extract plenty of patterns. Does that mean the ml engineers understand art? Or are they just using glorified brute force to alienate people who actually make things from their labor…

If these creations inspire such violent disgust, then it's likely that you perceive them as authentic art. If AI images were devoid of meaning or value, they wouldn't have sparked such passion.

You cannot claim ownership over culture, nor can AI. Culture is a collaborative process, and no one can barricade themselves from the input of others. Artists using AI are simply exercising their right to contribute to the collective creative pool. Art flourishes in an open environment where it can stimulate other artistic endeavors. The only art off-limits to AI is the art that remains unpublished.

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#99

Post by gliptic »

thot_experiment wrote: post #8

I've been mucking with this stuff again and the SDXL + LCM sampling & LoRA makes 1280x800 images in like 2 second, so about a ~5x speed increase for me (so this would be roughly 2x faster than LCM (??, napkin math)). I've found that the method isn't as good at complex prompts. They claim here this can outperform SDXL 1.0 WRT prompt alignment, but I'm curious what their test methodology is. I searched the paper and I…

They seem to be comparing against SDXL 1.0 at 512x512 which makes no sense to me as SDXL 1.0 is horrible at 512x512.

> Using four sampling steps, ADD-XL outperforms its teacher model SDXL-Base at a resolution of 512^2 px

Re: SDXL Turbo: A Real-Time Text-to-Image Generation Model

#100

Post by CaptainFever »

kmeisthax wrote: post #82
godelski wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Porn. It's always porn. I've been surprised at the explosion of porn. Well, not actually. Automatic1111 made that easy and anyone that CivitAI knows all too well what those models are being used for. I mean when you give teenagers the ability to undress their crushes[0] what do you think is going to happen (do laws adequately protect people (kids)? Can they? Will this force a shift towards actually chasing producer…

>do laws adequately protect people (kids)? Can they? Will this force a shift towards actually chasing producers, distributors, and diddlers? It's extremely complicated. Actual CSAM is very illegal, and for good reason. However, artistic depictions of such are... protected 1st Amendment expression[0]. So there's an argument - and I really hate that I'm even saying this - that AI generated CSAM is not prosecutable, as…

> AI generated CSAM is not prosecutable

This is true, though "AI CSAM" is an oxymoron. There is no abuse in the creation of such works, and such it is not abuse material, unless of course real children are involved.

Post reply on HN