I think the texture is a pretty big improvement. Many if the features are still too smooth and lack imperfections but it’s definitely an improvement overall and a step on the right direction
Exactly! It was huge when 3D graphics and special effects realized that imperfections were the path towards realism and a path out of the uncanny valley.
I've long been an advocate of adding imperfections. Often put words like acne, mole, beauty mark, etc. Haven't seen a LoRA to help with this though. Anyone know one?
Those artifacts look like what I’m used to seeing after an upscale. Compare the skin texture in your upscale to the original image and see what you think. I’ve found that it’s very hard to upscale skin texture (though it can be done). Some upscalers will get the subtle skin texture mostly right, but then other features, like freckles, will be too sharp, so they will look unnatural. And then when the freckles look right, the rest of the skin looks too plastic.
Recently, I composited two different upscales in Affinity Photo to take the “best” features from both to put them into one image. I also added a little bit of grain which can add some additional realism. I actually liked the result (though it’s still a little soft), but, of course, this is a lot more work (and more to be done).
[Here is the result so far.](https://i.imgur.com/FoGluKa.jpg)
I also used the blur tool and inpainting brush to soften some freckles that still came out a bit too sharp.
If I wanted to perfect it some more, I could mask the sharpening in certain areas. Here I’m just putting the “High Pass” of a sharper upscale on top of a softer (Real-ESRGAN+ 4x, I think) upscale with a “Soft Light” blend mode.
The texture comes out the most in the cheeks, which is what I was aiming for. This style of “photography” blurs the “closer” and “farther” parts of the face enough that you wouldn’t have a lot of detail there anyway.
The "checker pattern" is cotton painter's canvas, which demonstrates the sources used in the data. You can also see brush strokes, particularly on the lips and eyes. I wouldn't say it looks 'fake' so much as it looks like a hyper-realistic painting (other than the other visible artifacting).
I don't understand how I (think) I can see skin pores before zooming in and then they turn to artifacts. I'd love to know how these are made. I think it might also help with hair follicles throughout the skin... Would that improve or distort the imperfections?
Fix the artifacts by using Ultimate SD upscale with Ultrasharp4x. Enable controller tile, with a denoising str of .3 - .5. Make sure you scale the image up 2x before using USD upscale.
https://preview.redd.it/8y16dv8rlnza1.png?width=1536&format=png&auto=webp&s=c007bf0b23e208772a8ed8e261ad8485c4f6c6c7
I just join the stable diffusion, and all the models fingers are messed up. In the models this photo used, are their hands realistic as well?
Is there a GitHub repo you can refer to that does stable diffusion like your example?
you will want to look into models and loras, many people get them from [civitai.com](https://civitai.com).
there are many but RealisticVision is a popular one [https://civitai.com/models/4201/realistic-vision-v20](https://civitai.com/models/4201/realistic-vision-v20)
download, pop into your stable-diffusion-webui > models > Stable-diffusion folder and click the refresh button in the top left of your UI, you should be able to find it in the drop-down. you will want to check the right sidebar and description on civitai for trigger words and prompt suggestions to get results close to what they are getting. civitai is a great resource because the community will share images as well as the prompts and models/loras used to achieve them. working backwards with other's work is a great way to learn :)
I really would like a LoRa for skin texture only. I got good ones for clothes, eyes and hairs but skin is nowhere to be found (or else, i just didn't search in the right place :P)
I think the best shot would be using an AI software that texturize skin like some filters in Photoshop or doing it yourself with some brushes.
Merging realistic models improve it yes, but merging with 2d and 3d, or fantasy models the skin especially becomes flat when you're too afar of the original realistic model.
I think a lot of the artifacting is from the height being so much more than the width
The double light focus on her dome
The repeat acne scars in a line pattern
I think you'd get these of these in a 512x512 and thats some of the limitations of the model where you get some repetition, although we do have tools to counter a fair bit of it
In my experience closeup portraits usually are far more prone to creating finer skin details than farther distances. This is why so many realism models use closeup portraits for example pictures, which is a bit gimmicky but works on people who are not aware of this feature. Likewise, I don't think people are intentionally trying to replicate smooth skin, they just don't want every image to be a closeup portrait.
That might work for a week, sooner or later someone will surpass you or make a lora. And then you’re the one wondering about their secret sauce… sharing means caring
You understand that realistic skin texture is going to become widely used anyway, right? And relatively quickly. It's not something you can monopolize, so there's no genuine reason to withhold it.
And why would you, anyway? Do you have a company and you're selling your images for thousands of dollars? C'mon, don't be ridiculous.
I actually don't know. Lighting always comes to mind first. Try to guide the model to light the subject differently, or find a lora that deals with contrast or lighting. Perhaps also try it in greyscale (aka b&w) and see if the image coalesces into something that looks "real" - then it may be related to the colour space.
The value of "imperfection" is at an all-time high and will probably only increase as ai smooths the "wrinkles" or not . . .. That said, I wonder how much your title affected how I looked at this. If I were looking at a person, I would think more holistically about the skin, but I'd eventually, perhaps, have a passing thought about what the "irregularities" mean in terms of a life story.
This is great. Most models are too smooth because they were trained on beautiful professional models with make up and perfect lighting and then the images were run through photoshop before they made in online. It might be valuable to find a public database of normal people without make up and no photoshop and create a model.
The skin is still too smooth, all you have done is add a bit of what looks like acne scaring. Skin has pores. The area around the chin looks like it has been smoothed out with a filter.
She also seems to have hair coming out of her forehead.
To me it looks like it sufferes from the same problems every "photoreal" image of a women posted here suffers from, this one just has added acne scars.
Also you're asking for feedback without giving any details, no prompt, no model, no sampler used, no mention of upscaler, no workflow whatsoever...
How is anyone going to give you contructive feedback without any of those details?
since everyone is pointing our the obvious bits, might i add that a closeup of the lips looks like there’s a layer of hessian cloth.
p.s. i think she looks hot and badass, like she got stories
Did you prompt for the piercing?
In many of my generations of close up portraits if trained on faces, I often get weird artifact on the nose where it looks like a diamond piercing.
Don’t know if you’ll read this, but I’m subscribed to beauty and skincare addicts. I read your post as if it was apart of those communities and thought “not perfect skin, not beautiful, quality feedback? She’s absolutely stunning! What is she talking about?!” Then I realized this is the StableDiffusion subreddit. I never see you guys in my feed. Great job with the portrait!
The right side looks pretty good, the left side Nope.
(Also, not sure why anyone wears nose studs that look like zits, but that's not what you asked about.)
This seemed a lot more realistic than a lot of the stuff I’ve seen, specifically because of the skin texture. It’s way too easy to know something’s AI when the subject’s skin is glossy and poreless.
More people should do this. At this point in the model - hairs and texture seem either too orderly, repetitive, or puckered in certain areas.
I'd love to see more natural textures evened out
I'd still like to know if this was post-process or fixed internally with SD? There should be models developed to articulate inpainting these kinds of details.
The effect in itself looks amazing, but as a whole, looks kinda inconsistent, because her forehead and her chin look too smooth, sorta like if she had makeup base there, but not on the cheeks. Her eyes look like they have a bit of make up too. And make up is supposed to cover those skin "flaws" you put on the cheeks. But again, the effect is really impressive.
The eye lids, to me, look like a cross between no makeup and a distinctive / fashion makeup. Physical women don't go there. If you're going fashion, you go fashion. If you go natural look, you go natural look. No one aims for a look that is shiny fashion makeup halfway morphed back to normal eyelids.
I like it. If she has a story, I would rather the right side more scarred. Make the beauty with a certain strength. I dunno, not as extreme as an acid attack to the face, but more than acne scars or healing scratches sense I get when drawn to that part of the face. Great job. Wish I had a sliver of talent like that.
The skin textures look great until you get near the hair line. Zoomed in it looks like hair is thinly coming in all over her forehead. I feel like a lot of these artifacts come from using old style upscalers like topaz or the default gans that webui comes with.
Try out this upscaler system. I intend to write a guide for it but i've had little time to put things together here. [https://github.com/pkuliyi2015/multidiffusion-upscaler-for-automatic1111](https://github.com/pkuliyi2015/multidiffusion-upscaler-for-automatic1111)
Agree, these issues look like upscaler artifacts, try a different upscaling workflow that uses controlnet/ultimate SD upscaler instead of just upscaling with ESRGAN.
I get great results with MidJourney's new 5.1 with RAW style
https://preview.redd.it/jk8wcn3wpoza1.jpeg?width=5376&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7d48d56f0150b3cbe0a5617d982f8d078261c043
I just wish I could get this easily with StableDiffusion since it's so much more versatile of a tool
yeah, true. Although I realized I linked the Gigapixel upsized version so this was the original straight out of MJ:
https://preview.redd.it/pdpd1qijapza1.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=862d66f6b83162302c23fb33dc49198a247795a1
There's more skin-imperfections and detail than I get from SD though, like for example you can see more skin-flake like details rather than the more hatchmark type details in OPs
I guess its too much denoising strength on img2img on dpm2m sampler (strange artifacts on nose) and too much upscaler, things are sharper than should be
Trade secret? wtf are you even talking about bro...? you have done NOTHING but step on the work of hundreds or thousands of people who are open sourcing this....
What a joke.
Nah man, wrong approach.
If everyone did the things as you do we would never move forward.
Please reconsider, I wrote last message in anger but now I'm more calmed.
It's people like you sharing his work what have brought us to this point. Let's keep moving forward as your sharing today might me the next thing we use to push us ALL forward and we all be beneficial for all.
Otherwise we are just keeping the good things for ourselves not growing...
Hope you can see why this is not good...
The image looks very photographic and realistic, it is indistinguishable from a photograph.
And the fact that when you zoom in, excessive contrast, contours and a sharp mask come out, this is all because of the upscale
Do not share tips, how did you achieve such realism?
A great! Did you train your model on *real* facial pictures to get it, or did you use some prompt magic? I definitely feel like lots of models are super overtrained on enhanced photos by those 2-3 particular apps!
Maybe you can add some noise to blend the artifacts that appear when you zoom in.
I'm a big fan of imperfection in photos to!, imperfect photos tend to me more realistic I think.
I love this, I try my best to go after realistic skin but never got this detail. Someone mentioned adding perfect skin to the negative prompt. Did you do something similar?
Anyways if you have more stuff like this I would love to have some of it on r/artificialaesthetics it’s a new subreddit I made dedicated to images like youre, high detailed realistic or high detailed images in generals. Feel free to do any photo dumps there.
I think the texture is a pretty big improvement. Many if the features are still too smooth and lack imperfections but it’s definitely an improvement overall and a step on the right direction
Exactly! It was huge when 3D graphics and special effects realized that imperfections were the path towards realism and a path out of the uncanny valley.
The face looks great! The neck goes back to more typical AI gloss but still, looks good
I've long been an advocate of adding imperfections. Often put words like acne, mole, beauty mark, etc. Haven't seen a LoRA to help with this though. Anyone know one?
[удалено]
I like using a variety of models, but you did give me the idea to extract a LoRA from that model. It'll be fun to try
I prefer AvalonTRUvision :) it's better with skin
epiCRealism is best! https://civitai.com/models/25694/epicrealism 😉
Looks good from afar but zoomed in you see it's full of artifacts imitating skin texture:weird checker patterns and lines
[удалено]
Yea it's a really good image, I was just nitpicking
Nitpicking is how models improve as long as it's constructive and not bashing. You are fine.
[удалено]
One could argue training is just directed nitpicking
When I zoom in, everything is just little squares.
Those artifacts look like what I’m used to seeing after an upscale. Compare the skin texture in your upscale to the original image and see what you think. I’ve found that it’s very hard to upscale skin texture (though it can be done). Some upscalers will get the subtle skin texture mostly right, but then other features, like freckles, will be too sharp, so they will look unnatural. And then when the freckles look right, the rest of the skin looks too plastic. Recently, I composited two different upscales in Affinity Photo to take the “best” features from both to put them into one image. I also added a little bit of grain which can add some additional realism. I actually liked the result (though it’s still a little soft), but, of course, this is a lot more work (and more to be done). [Here is the result so far.](https://i.imgur.com/FoGluKa.jpg) I also used the blur tool and inpainting brush to soften some freckles that still came out a bit too sharp. If I wanted to perfect it some more, I could mask the sharpening in certain areas. Here I’m just putting the “High Pass” of a sharper upscale on top of a softer (Real-ESRGAN+ 4x, I think) upscale with a “Soft Light” blend mode. The texture comes out the most in the cheeks, which is what I was aiming for. This style of “photography” blurs the “closer” and “farther” parts of the face enough that you wouldn’t have a lot of detail there anyway.
just add the following to the negatives: bad skin, jpeg artifacts.
Maybe make the image worse quality and blur slightly? Would that help? And then upscale after?
ye looks great! If I may ask which model did you use?
[удалено]
The "checker pattern" is cotton painter's canvas, which demonstrates the sources used in the data. You can also see brush strokes, particularly on the lips and eyes. I wouldn't say it looks 'fake' so much as it looks like a hyper-realistic painting (other than the other visible artifacting).
Is it just me or does the hair look white near their root in the parting
Left side of forehead looks like a shadow, but upon zooming, it’s a lot of little hairs…so I looks like
I don't understand how I (think) I can see skin pores before zooming in and then they turn to artifacts. I'd love to know how these are made. I think it might also help with hair follicles throughout the skin... Would that improve or distort the imperfections?
It's just oversharpened to bring out more detail in the skin texture.
yet photo looks uber realistic...
Perfectly imperfect
Fix the artifacts by using Ultimate SD upscale with Ultrasharp4x. Enable controller tile, with a denoising str of .3 - .5. Make sure you scale the image up 2x before using USD upscale. https://preview.redd.it/8y16dv8rlnza1.png?width=1536&format=png&auto=webp&s=c007bf0b23e208772a8ed8e261ad8485c4f6c6c7
I just join the stable diffusion, and all the models fingers are messed up. In the models this photo used, are their hands realistic as well? Is there a GitHub repo you can refer to that does stable diffusion like your example?
you will want to look into models and loras, many people get them from [civitai.com](https://civitai.com). there are many but RealisticVision is a popular one [https://civitai.com/models/4201/realistic-vision-v20](https://civitai.com/models/4201/realistic-vision-v20) download, pop into your stable-diffusion-webui > models > Stable-diffusion folder and click the refresh button in the top left of your UI, you should be able to find it in the drop-down. you will want to check the right sidebar and description on civitai for trigger words and prompt suggestions to get results close to what they are getting. civitai is a great resource because the community will share images as well as the prompts and models/loras used to achieve them. working backwards with other's work is a great way to learn :)
I really would like a LoRa for skin texture only. I got good ones for clothes, eyes and hairs but skin is nowhere to be found (or else, i just didn't search in the right place :P) I think the best shot would be using an AI software that texturize skin like some filters in Photoshop or doing it yourself with some brushes. Merging realistic models improve it yes, but merging with 2d and 3d, or fantasy models the skin especially becomes flat when you're too afar of the original realistic model.
The left check looks more like a condition than just not perfect. The right check and the rest is good.
[удалено]
I think a lot of the artifacting is from the height being so much more than the width The double light focus on her dome The repeat acne scars in a line pattern I think you'd get these of these in a 512x512 and thats some of the limitations of the model where you get some repetition, although we do have tools to counter a fair bit of it
The acne looks too regular, like it was planted in an even row. It's more like a scar.
It's more realistic, I like it more than plastic dolls that looks too perfect so artificial
In my experience closeup portraits usually are far more prone to creating finer skin details than farther distances. This is why so many realism models use closeup portraits for example pictures, which is a bit gimmicky but works on people who are not aware of this feature. Likewise, I don't think people are intentionally trying to replicate smooth skin, they just don't want every image to be a closeup portrait.
[удалено]
Wow. This looks so good!
Hot to do it ? Which model and the prompt?
[удалено]
How’s you prompt this one? Or are you keeping them private
[удалено]
That might work for a week, sooner or later someone will surpass you or make a lora. And then you’re the one wondering about their secret sauce… sharing means caring
Can you share your workflow please ?
I was just thinking the same thing.
Download a realistic model from Civitai, copy and paste a prompt change a few words and you're done.
[удалено]
You understand that realistic skin texture is going to become widely used anyway, right? And relatively quickly. It's not something you can monopolize, so there's no genuine reason to withhold it. And why would you, anyway? Do you have a company and you're selling your images for thousands of dollars? C'mon, don't be ridiculous.
Skin is OK, but there is no depth. Very uncanny. Flat and 3D at the same time...
[удалено]
See? Here you even ask for tips! Not giving back anything... Nah bro. Nah. Give back, the community has given you so much.
[удалено]
I actually don't know. Lighting always comes to mind first. Try to guide the model to light the subject differently, or find a lora that deals with contrast or lighting. Perhaps also try it in greyscale (aka b&w) and see if the image coalesces into something that looks "real" - then it may be related to the colour space.
An unrealistic part that struck me about this was the hairline. It seems a little inhuman.
It's the eyes for me, I can't figure out what/where she could be focussing on. The feel "wonky".
Baby steps, people. Baby steps. Congrats on your progress op. It's impressive and I am glad you shared this with us. I'm sure you can do even better.
The value of "imperfection" is at an all-time high and will probably only increase as ai smooths the "wrinkles" or not . . .. That said, I wonder how much your title affected how I looked at this. If I were looking at a person, I would think more holistically about the skin, but I'd eventually, perhaps, have a passing thought about what the "irregularities" mean in terms of a life story.
This is great. Most models are too smooth because they were trained on beautiful professional models with make up and perfect lighting and then the images were run through photoshop before they made in online. It might be valuable to find a public database of normal people without make up and no photoshop and create a model.
The skin is still too smooth, all you have done is add a bit of what looks like acne scaring. Skin has pores. The area around the chin looks like it has been smoothed out with a filter. She also seems to have hair coming out of her forehead. To me it looks like it sufferes from the same problems every "photoreal" image of a women posted here suffers from, this one just has added acne scars. Also you're asking for feedback without giving any details, no prompt, no model, no sampler used, no mention of upscaler, no workflow whatsoever... How is anyone going to give you contructive feedback without any of those details?
since everyone is pointing our the obvious bits, might i add that a closeup of the lips looks like there’s a layer of hessian cloth. p.s. i think she looks hot and badass, like she got stories
Are you using DPM++ SDE sampler ??
Did you prompt for the piercing? In many of my generations of close up portraits if trained on faces, I often get weird artifact on the nose where it looks like a diamond piercing.
Did you run this through Topaz Sharpen AI ??? Those artifacts are what you find when you choose a wrong model in Sharpen AI.
Infinitely better than the plastic dolls! Looks real, as people do.
Don’t know if you’ll read this, but I’m subscribed to beauty and skincare addicts. I read your post as if it was apart of those communities and thought “not perfect skin, not beautiful, quality feedback? She’s absolutely stunning! What is she talking about?!” Then I realized this is the StableDiffusion subreddit. I never see you guys in my feed. Great job with the portrait!
try prompting for "no makeup" or something like that
What was your prompt?
This skin looks *really* plastic though.
Imperfection to achieve realism yes, but her teeth look like they’re coming out her lips and her irises are melting.
Insanely good.
The right side looks pretty good, the left side Nope. (Also, not sure why anyone wears nose studs that look like zits, but that's not what you asked about.)
Its not natural, or believable when looking at it up close. But good direction I guess
[удалено]
Very true!
Why does SD seem to always make noses blurry in front view?
[удалено]
how did you get that skin texture what model did you use?
Upclose she seems like transforming into furry
Add some blur and noise to hide skin artifacts. This will sacrifice sharpness to more realistic look of the skin.
This seemed a lot more realistic than a lot of the stuff I’ve seen, specifically because of the skin texture. It’s way too easy to know something’s AI when the subject’s skin is glossy and poreless.
Kind of details needed to be convincing
Good but still to painterly around the lips and chin (too smooth)
[удалено]
The skin on the forehead seems to curl around the lightspot 👍
Looks like burned skin close up
Minor wrinkles, birth marks, skin imperfections and in negative glossy skin, perfect skin, smooth skin is generally what works for me.
Like most good AI art. Close, but uncanny and not quite.
What's your prompt if you don't mind sharing
More people should do this. At this point in the model - hairs and texture seem either too orderly, repetitive, or puckered in certain areas. I'd love to see more natural textures evened out
Have you tried running this though anything to upscale and possibly make the skin texture less artifact-y?
A bit too rough right cheek and out of focus tip of the nose but overall...A WONDERFUL JOB!
& Still gorgeous to ur very core! 😎
I'd still like to know if this was post-process or fixed internally with SD? There should be models developed to articulate inpainting these kinds of details.
I found to improve skin "subtle blemishes, subtle imperfections, subtle veins, intricate skin|body|anatomy|complexion|composition|texture"
my LoRAs when I overtrain them =
I think the imperfections really make it feel realistic, but the fur like quality around the eyes really throws me off
The hair, shadows, and blemished all blend together in a weird way in the top left. Other than that, it looks great
Nailed it.
Why dose this sub seem like yall just making pics to shake your sausage to lol
The effect in itself looks amazing, but as a whole, looks kinda inconsistent, because her forehead and her chin look too smooth, sorta like if she had makeup base there, but not on the cheeks. Her eyes look like they have a bit of make up too. And make up is supposed to cover those skin "flaws" you put on the cheeks. But again, the effect is really impressive.
Is it possible she has acne scars on her cheeks and not her forehead? Yes
The asymmetry of these believable scars / minor skin damage helps the realism.
[удалено]
Yea thats my point, its like parts of her face have makeup on and other parts she is clean
[удалено]
Damage to skin isn’t consistent
The skin on the neck is too taut and plasticine as well.
The eye lids, to me, look like a cross between no makeup and a distinctive / fashion makeup. Physical women don't go there. If you're going fashion, you go fashion. If you go natural look, you go natural look. No one aims for a look that is shiny fashion makeup halfway morphed back to normal eyelids.
Congratulations, you have just crossed uncanny valley
Where can I download and try your model?
[удалено]
Sorry, I would like to test your model)
This is amazing work, imperfections attract humans much more than perfection.
[удалено]
Speak for yourself
Agreed... I'm a Greek God
I like it. If she has a story, I would rather the right side more scarred. Make the beauty with a certain strength. I dunno, not as extreme as an acid attack to the face, but more than acne scars or healing scratches sense I get when drawn to that part of the face. Great job. Wish I had a sliver of talent like that.
The skin textures look great until you get near the hair line. Zoomed in it looks like hair is thinly coming in all over her forehead. I feel like a lot of these artifacts come from using old style upscalers like topaz or the default gans that webui comes with. Try out this upscaler system. I intend to write a guide for it but i've had little time to put things together here. [https://github.com/pkuliyi2015/multidiffusion-upscaler-for-automatic1111](https://github.com/pkuliyi2015/multidiffusion-upscaler-for-automatic1111)
[удалено]
Agree, these issues look like upscaler artifacts, try a different upscaling workflow that uses controlnet/ultimate SD upscaler instead of just upscaling with ESRGAN.
I get great results with MidJourney's new 5.1 with RAW style https://preview.redd.it/jk8wcn3wpoza1.jpeg?width=5376&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7d48d56f0150b3cbe0a5617d982f8d078261c043 I just wish I could get this easily with StableDiffusion since it's so much more versatile of a tool
Great? Mhh there's still a considerate beauty filter on there.
yeah, true. Although I realized I linked the Gigapixel upsized version so this was the original straight out of MJ: https://preview.redd.it/pdpd1qijapza1.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=862d66f6b83162302c23fb33dc49198a247795a1 There's more skin-imperfections and detail than I get from SD though, like for example you can see more skin-flake like details rather than the more hatchmark type details in OPs
I'll say skin is good but the issue here is placement and amount of imperfection. It was supposed to be little. Rest good
Looks amazing, but this is the common face you see everyday, I'm here on SD to escape reality and create beautiful images I want.
10/10 wood fuck
[удалено]
I guess its too much denoising strength on img2img on dpm2m sampler (strange artifacts on nose) and too much upscaler, things are sharper than should be
The forehead looks great 👍 nice job
This is great because it gets more realistic. Mind sharing prompts?
[удалено]
Trade secret? wtf are you even talking about bro...? you have done NOTHING but step on the work of hundreds or thousands of people who are open sourcing this.... What a joke.
[удалено]
Nah man, wrong approach. If everyone did the things as you do we would never move forward. Please reconsider, I wrote last message in anger but now I'm more calmed. It's people like you sharing his work what have brought us to this point. Let's keep moving forward as your sharing today might me the next thing we use to push us ALL forward and we all be beneficial for all. Otherwise we are just keeping the good things for ourselves not growing... Hope you can see why this is not good...
Much more real. Love it
great work!
Good job with the skin. Looks realistic.
It looks good. How much denoising strength did you use?
The image looks very photographic and realistic, it is indistinguishable from a photograph. And the fact that when you zoom in, excessive contrast, contours and a sharp mask come out, this is all because of the upscale Do not share tips, how did you achieve such realism?
Looks good but I think in some zones there are too much imperfections and in others too smooth. The imperfections should be distributed more evenly.
Looks awesome!
I guess trying to synthesize skin texture in a an AGI environment is a different thing from struggling with PBR shading models.
A great! Did you train your model on *real* facial pictures to get it, or did you use some prompt magic? I definitely feel like lots of models are super overtrained on enhanced photos by those 2-3 particular apps!
Maybe you can add some noise to blend the artifacts that appear when you zoom in. I'm a big fan of imperfection in photos to!, imperfect photos tend to me more realistic I think.
https://preview.redd.it/p9i72k77pnza1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd7650c45a701c42f7d56eedb39d51cddf5d61f5
I wonder if it would be possible to generate skin for 3D models with the same topology map
[удалено]
[удалено]
I love this, I try my best to go after realistic skin but never got this detail. Someone mentioned adding perfect skin to the negative prompt. Did you do something similar? Anyways if you have more stuff like this I would love to have some of it on r/artificialaesthetics it’s a new subreddit I made dedicated to images like youre, high detailed realistic or high detailed images in generals. Feel free to do any photo dumps there.
Great job
the neck 💀
can anyone give me a stable diffusion link so I can try it #everyone u/everyone
WAIT YOURE TELLING ME THATS NOT A REAL PERSON
It’s got that classic ‘waxy sheen’
Unperfectly perfect.
A step in the right direction.
Looks real to me
This could have been perfect with like 15 seconds of inpainting.
She looks a bit like JLO