4 ms·
Thanks, interesting because I thought that the styles pictures (available after clicking on the call to action) would serve as samples but I guess I should put
by peteralaoui 4y ago
Thanks, interesting because I thought that the styles pictures (available after clicking on the call to action) would serve as samples but I guess I should put them on the homepage directly. I will try that tomorrow (European timezone ^^)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- smortaz 4y agoyes definitely home page. it’s the first thing i looked for, didn’t immediately see, hit the back button. i would also consider a trial pic for free tied to email.
- angry_moose 4y agoMy problem with it is you only show results for 2 people, for which a solid ~third of the "real life" ones look kinda bad (not even getting into the animated versions). It reads to me like you cherrypicked the two best examples and even those aren't great, whether that's true or not. Edit: Woof, I didn't realize you could get bigger versions of the examples. They were mostly fine as thumbnails but blown up to ~500x500 the the eyes and mouth are rough.
- precompute 4y ago>They were mostly fine as thumbnails but blown up to ~500x500 the the eyes and mouth are rough. That's the result of automated training. If you want good results you need to properly label your dataset (15 or more images of yourself) and then use a proper upscaling solution for it. Dreambooth-based images usually need some manual fine-tuning (and sometimes inpainting) to look presentable at higher resolutions. You can use latent upscaling for adding details but it'd require some manual supervision to weed out the bad generations. Using upscalers like Lanczos is usually foolproof.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- naet 4y agoI think if you showed a full example (including the 15 inputs and the outputs) it would be more clear what I might be able to expect.