Open binarytahr opened 2 weeks ago
Rather than being a compatibility issue, it's a characteristic of the model. Things like conditioning combine actually interfere with and intervene in the model's learned image generation process. FLUX handles this more flexibly and effectively, while SD3.5 doesn't handle it well.
Experimentation is needed, such as narrowing down the area or adjusting the number of steps.
thanks for your answer! i am sorry i originally thought it was because the code wasn't adapted for sd 3.5 embedding's operation, now I know it's because the model itself. i have made some simple test including narrow down the aera before asking the question and it doesn't seem to work, i will experiment with other parameters next.
Your question
i test ConditioningSetArea and ConditioningCombine node with sd 3.5 large and flux.1 dev. flux.1 dev's results are what it supposed to be: dog in the center, robot in the right corner, without quality loss. sd 3.5 large's results are disordered. so i am thinking if there are some compatibility issue?
flux.1 dev:
sd 3.5 large:
Logs
No response
Other
No response