I just cancelled my Midjourney subscription, it feels like it's fallen too far behind for the stuff I'd like to do. Spent a lot of time considering using Replicate as well as Ideogram.
FLUX is fast and it's open source
21–30 of 127 posts
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#22Flux is the leading contender for a locally hosted generative systems in terms of prompt adherence, but the omnipresent shallow depth of field is irritatingly hard to get rid of.
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#23Text to image models feels inefficient to me. I wonder if it would be possible and better to do it in separate steps, like text to scene graph, scene graph to semantically segmented image, segmented image to final image. That way each step could be trained separately and be modular, and the image would be easier to edit instead of completely replace it with the output of a new prompt. That way it should be much easier to generate stuff like "object x next to object y, with the text foo on it", and the art style or level of realism would depend on the final rendering model which would be separate from the prompt adherence.
Kind of like those video2video (or img2img on each frame I guess) models where they enhance the image outputs from video games:
https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/12/22432945/intel-gta-v-real... https://www.reddit.com/r/aivideo/comments/1fx6zdr/gta_iv_wit...
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#24i think we (krea) are faster at the time of writing this comment (but i’ll have to double-check on our infra)
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#25Text to image models feels inefficient to me. I wonder if it would be possible and better to do it in separate steps, like text to scene graph, scene graph to semantically segmented image, segmented image to final image. That way each step could be trained separately and be modular, and the image would be easier to edit instead of completely replace it with the output of a new prompt. That way it should be much easie…
That's essentially what diffusion does, except it doesn't have clear boundaries between "scene graph" and "full image". It starts out noisy and adds more detail gradually
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#26[flagged]
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#27[flagged]
What prompt did you give it? Is it capable of animation?
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#28Text to image models feels inefficient to me. I wonder if it would be possible and better to do it in separate steps, like text to scene graph, scene graph to semantically segmented image, segmented image to final image. That way each step could be trained separately and be modular, and the image would be easier to edit instead of completely replace it with the output of a new prompt. That way it should be much easie…
The issue with this is there's a false assumption that an image is a collection of objects. It's not (necessarily).
I want a picture of frozen cyan peach fuzz.
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#29Text to image models feels inefficient to me. I wonder if it would be possible and better to do it in separate steps, like text to scene graph, scene graph to semantically segmented image, segmented image to final image. That way each step could be trained separately and be modular, and the image would be easier to edit instead of completely replace it with the output of a new prompt. That way it should be much easie…
[deleted]
Re: FLUX is fast and it's open source
#30My favorite thing to do with Flux is create images with a white background for my substack[1] because the text following is amazing and I can communicate something visually through the artwork as well.
[1]https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_...
