4 ms·
I don't think there is any hard evidence except people looking at correlations. SDXL, one of the preceding versions, is allegedly less censored and happens to d
by tavavex 2y ago
I don't think there is any hard evidence except people looking at correlations. SDXL, one of the preceding versions, is allegedly less censored and happens to do anatomy better than the examples in the article. Logically, it makes sense that omitting good data would lead to worse results - nudity filters or not, anatomy is very complex and humans are very sensitive to inaccuracies in human looks, so a giant dataset with as many different poses as possible is the way to go. But in terms of actual empirical tests and measurements - I haven't seen that yet.