let me see

Like two characters that look distinctly different? Ai struggles with that in general on almost any model.

@pihlawrkr738 even if they don't look distinctly different, anatomy and stuff goes whack pretty quick

There are loras that will help you with that, generally you'll need strict guidance from something like that

it is indeed e621 model. WITH underscores.

I saw severe distortion when the model is prompted with underscores, my outputs seem to be more consistently distortion-less when prompted with spaces. it really would be nice if the author specified, wouldn't it? they seemed to include everything but how the prompts were constructed.

@Yolup the example prompts they have on huggingface use underscore so i think that's what they use?

this is pure misinformation

@gibobibo1 then what is the correct information, and how did you determine it? because I'd love to know. the author doesn't appear to explicitly state this information anywhere which is particularly infuriating, so we only have the example prompts to go off of.

how about e621 character tags? let say sakura_wadagaki_(odd_taxi) should get tagged as sakura_wadagaki_\(odd_taxi\) ?

@Denatural use tagging extension, remove all underscore tags aka just do what the extension does, this post is complete bs as is the partial fault of seaart for half-assing this models description

I'm trying, but from what I can tell it would appear that Pony Diffusion is essentially poisoned. it isn't working in the slightest. after a merge, the resulting model produces a dot-matrix style of image, it still kinda looks like what you asked it to make, but it is entirely unusable as an output. if you use A1111 you can do a merge yourself and play around with it more if you want, but I don't think there will be much success to be honest.

I assume this is impossible, at least since furryxl uses e621 tags and pony uses booru. Only NL data will merge correctly and, again, i assume this data is already common between them.

try comfyui dare merge

Someone tried it and submitted here the results. The resulting model is Indigo Furry Mix XL.

any artist with over 100 pics should work, over 200 is best

That's not a bug, that's basically how text-to-image generative AI works. If someone came up to you and sad "blep" to you, I bet you would just stand there puzzled. Kind of the same thing happens if you put in unrecognizable words, conflicting words/concepts or just having a too long/too messy prompt, or too many/conflicting LoRa's. Then again, all models have their own inner workings and different breaking points, but all do break if they get too confused.

Have you tried "genital slit" or "cloaca" in your + prompts?

Or "human pussy" to your - prompts?

@Mister_Kaos I've tried everything. Even putting a human pussy in the negative prompt will spawn a pussy on the male reptile.

@hayattexi111222319 You can try a few other things:

1. Turn up the weights on any prompts related to that subject (try 1.5) and see if that fixes it.

2. Make sure "female" is included in your negative prompts (and if it already is, try turning up the weight on it).

3. Try adding "sfw" or "rating_safe" to your + prompts

4. Search around and see if there are any embeddings or LoRAs that specialize in this subject.

@Mister_Kaos Yea.. Sadly most models are so heavily matriarchal that ya basically gotta retrain the damn things to get proper male characters without female parts. Especially if you're doing younger male characters. Cuz it thinks that anything that even mildly resembles a female, Must be a female.

models are just files. they dont do anything on their own

this looks like a simple model

@scringle To be fair, I've learned a fair bit since making that post. I'm well aware. Although, technically to state 'they're just files' is a bit naive, cuz technically viruses are 'just files' but they can do a lot once inadvertently activated by the unsuspecting user.

And even model files can do harm, hence why people say not to download pickle files or w.e (I'm half asleep, don't remember the exact file type, I think, .pt?) Safetensors are safer, apparently.. well, from hackers putting unwanted code in them, though I don't know enough about them to know if that also applies to corporations putting unwanted code in them.

Call me paranoid all you want, but Facebook, google, and Apple, and I think even M$ getting in hot water over their privacy violations, that isn't something I made up, nor was it a distant past thing. Most people seem a bit soft in the head these days when it comes to blindly trusting corporations.

i was running auto1111 then forage on my 3060 ti with 8GB Vram on it

@DrizzleDrizzle Not sure if you had a point there. But, yea, my laptop had/has a 3060ti with 8gb. But now I've got a desktop with a 4060ti with 16gb. I still wish I had a lot more, cuz doing inference is one thing, training is another, also if you want to do local inference on LLMs (smaller consumer usable chatGPT type models), you need some good Vram, 8-16 can work, but, the more the better.

I also tried A1111, after I tried Easydiffusion, and after that I tried SDNext, then I went on to use ComfyUI and been using that ever since. I used all 4 within the first 6 weeks I got into AI. I didn't want to get too comfortable with an inferior software, and the level of versatility and expansion in comfy is best. Little more difficult to set up, especially if you're stubborn like me and refuse to use ComfyManager in your main setup cuz ya want some say over the software the dependencies that end up on your machine. But, if you don't care about any of that, manager makes it pretty damn easy.

@Lazman  viruses are executable files that contain binary instructions. safetensors on the other hand, only contain matrices of numbers which is only useful for your diffusion program. your computer does not recognize it as code it can run, and so it becomes impossible to run code through them.

@scringle Haven't even thought about it in some time, but I did a quick bit of research to check the validity of that claim, and yea, guess you're right. my logic did work on .pt and .ckpt, but not .safetensors due not so much to what they contain, but rather, in how they're loaded. Cuz, models actually do contain more than just the weights and biases, they also (can) contain text encoders, metadata, clip, tokenizer, vae, etc.

@Lazman correct! since none of the segments in the file are parsed by your program to actually run anything, it’s completely safe. you can download any random safetensors file from the internet and be fine

@scringle for now at least, lol.. I tell ya, if corporations innovated as well as hackers, we'd all be living in space by now.

Life I've said though, not really the hackers I worry about, it's the corps, cuz they're the ones that need to own everything..

@Lazman just use FOSS software like forge and you shouldnt have to worry

@scringle FOSS? I've heard about forge all over the place, in fact it seems to be mentioned by name more often than comfy, which is a big part of why I've avoided it(popular usually = the inevitability of corporate ownership). plus I just typically don't race to join trends like all the other lemmings.

That said, I've had some side-eyed interest in forge, but I'm also not a huge fan of having to re-learn another program, or give up the extreme modular benefits of comfyui. I used easydiffusion, then A111 then SDN, and I didn't hate SDN, but there did seem to be too much going on in the background without user permissions, so I moved to comfyui, which felt more transparent, since the only thing in your workspace is the nodes(and you control which nodes are there).

Though, I have also learned that software can be very sneaky, and there's a lot, even in linux and even with a backend open, that doesn't get shown to the user. It's a serious flaw IMHO; the user should always know what's happening on their computer (if they want to), and it shouldn't be a circus act with programs/scripts just to pull that off.

The thing that gets me about corporations, is they're like termites, you can let them into your house and it may not have any serious effect on you for some time, but eventually, your whole damn house is gonna come down on you, cuz you'll realize, it no longer belongs to you, it belongs to them, and you let em have it by doing nothing.

@Lazman comfyUI is FOSS (Free Open Source Software). You can view the source code on their public github repository, so it is impossible for them to hide anything in the program under the scrutiny of millions of eyes. It’s not owned by any corporation and legally licensed to be free and open source forever. You can download any version of the source code and keep it, even if they make bad changes to it in the future.

@scringle 

"Free Open Source Software"

Oh, right, that's becoming a thing now.. that whole free software vs free speech thing(they say 'beer' but I'd rather not add any more promotion to that toxic swill). open source should be free software. Or at worst, one time purchase like Paint Tool Sai.

But, the only reason PTS hasn't become corporatized despite having a price-tag, is that it's one guy that runs and maintains it, and he's made the conscious decision to keep his project in-house. Also, it's not open source, so no one else can tweak the code just enough to run with it.

Downside to that model is that the program isn't nearly as progressive, or multi-platform, and won't likely receive any major updates/upgrades. Upside is, it's closed off enough that the owner can keep the price low, and only one time payment, and has no shareholders to answer to, or employees bitchin that he chooses not to sell the IP for a fat cash buyout.

Anyways, I digress. My point is, the software that manages to get a price-tag and hold onto it's customer-friendly ethics, is extremely rare. That's why I say, 'free' should be a given with open source. For that matter, if it's open source, then how does one put a price-tag on it, given that someone else can just make a fork of it and hack out all the paywalls.

Maybe I'm just overthinking it though, and FOSS is just the long version of 'open source'. I'm just a little cautious of such a distinction ('free'), as it seems mostly redundant unless it has a purpose..

"It’s not owned by any corporation"

That's somethin I've been rattling around in my head recently. the concept of 'owned'. For example, Windows (home edition) is free these days, not open source, but no pricetag, and you 'own' your own PC, but so long as windows is on it, it feels more like M$ owns it due to all the sneaky adware, bloatware, spyware, and telemetry, as well as how much it's locked down for the user compared to Linux, and forces you to have their browser installed, and AV installed, and enabled(you can turn it off, but the stupid thing keeps turning itself back on, ad infinitum).

Much the same can be done with open source software. People can bitch about it, or try to tweak it if it's open source and remove such things, but when you've got a trillionaire corporation of devs working on the thing, then good luck pulling together enough people from the open source community to work on ONE program just to perpetually keep the bloated corporate crap outta it.

I figure it's only a matter of time until they either start building hardware that openly rejects open source software (and call it "security from potentially malicious programs"), and/or lobby the government to alter the open source licences, utilising the same excuse of "security".

For the record, I'm not trying to argue with you, or like 'freaking out' or anything, I'm just speaking conversely. I honestly hope things don't continue down this road leading us to a post apocalyptic corporate hellscape. But, I currently see little evidence of divergence from that path.

@Lazman you can just save the source code from any of its versions and compile it yourself, forever. not a single person can stop you, regardless of how much money they may have. it's not like in the movies where black suit man can come in and do a hostile takeover because even if you buy the developer's soul, other people such as yourself can just fork it and maintain your own version (read about the GNU GPL v3 license that ComfyUI is licensed under). open source software has been a large cultural movement since the 90s. "free" in this context does not refer to the price, but the right to freely modify and distribute it yourself however you want without anyone stopping you, including rich people. this license in particular makes it impossible to closed-source future updates due to the condition that previous code created under the license may only be used if your program's source code is available with your program.

i didn't want to be the one to say it, but you need to drop this know-it-all attitude when it's clear to anyone reading your rambles that really you don't know what you're talking about. if it really bothers you, go learn some programming so you can find and remove things like telemetry in applications that have them. this is embarrassing to read, and because it isn't about productivity this will be my last reply. have a good day

@scringle Seems you're the one that thinks you know it all, even more than I do. I'm merely speculating and the future, you seem to think that you know the future before it happens, to the extent that no one should argue with you. Now that's some next level condescension.

At least I'm basing my arguments on real world logic, and not just "it's always been dis way, it always gun be dis way!!" 'logic'.

Corporations get what they want, point blank period. Or did that point just fly right over your head when multiple corporate heads sailed right into the Whitehouse on a giant mountain of money?

But naw, you're likely one of those types that still think corporations don't have the power that they do, despite that they literally got more money now than many entire countries. And you won't believe that shit's gettin bad unless they start literally shooting citizens in the streets.

Cuz you've been taught your entire life to compare your country to evil dictatorships and third world shit-holes, instead of better countries like the UK, Denmark, Sweden, ect.

Corporations can get away with crashing planes and trains and killing hundreds of people, via lobbying practices to reduce/relax required safety regulations. Purdue Pharma got away with killing people for roughly 25 years before it was stopped, cuz they had big money and big influence.

You really think a silly little software license will stop them when push comes to shove? In your little game of rock, paper, scissors, lobbying trumps all.

Point number two, none of this shit happens overnight. That's why they haven't done it already. In order to keep people like you complacent. But a lot of shit is happening these days that, 50 years ago, would make even people like you say "WTF".

Like 3000$ a month to rent a small apartment, or weed and mushroom stores on every other corner, or the government providing drug kits to meth/crackheads that are in government subsidized housing, instead of actually attempting to rehabilitate them, or mentally handicapped(not bad enough to be in a wheelchair, but people with clear mental disabilities), being homeless because the gov is too cheap/heartless to take care of them.

Or are ya gonna deny all that too?

I hate to revive something so old and so....assinine, but.....

Lazman Truly shameful display. take off your tinfoil hat and stay off the computer without an adult.

scringle Thank you for the taking the time to feed the lolcow.

LatteLeopard 3 whole sentences. Clearly you're a real thinker. You should be the one leading us all..

Brainless dullard..

Why must the intellectually LAZY always be the most condescending.. Do some unbiased research. Try looking up the many FACTS listed in my previous message.

Otherwise, stick to gargling your bosses nutsack, or whatever it is you do in your free time, that clearly isn't research and critical thinking..

Lazman. alright, your on big boy.

Claim 1: "Open source should be free software. Or at worst, one-time purchase like Paint Tool SAI."

You’re confusing “open source” with “no-cost software”, and then confusing that with “shareware.”

Open source means you can read, modify, and redistribute the source code. That’s it.

It doesn’t mean free-of-charge, and it doesn’t prohibit monetization.

The Free Software Foundation (FSF) uses “free” as in freedom, not beer — and the Open Source Initiative backs that up with a clear license definition (FSF, OSI).

You’re arguing for something that already exists — you just didn’t understand the terms.

relatable links:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
https://opensource.org/osd

Claim 2: "If it’s open source, how can you charge for it? Someone can just fork it and remove the paywall."

You absolutely can charge for open source. Red Hat built a billion-dollar business on it. You’re paying for:

Support

Security patches

Enterprise compliance

Reputation

Yes, someone can fork it — that’s the point. But maintaining a fork is a massive undertaking. Ask the AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux teams how easy it is to rebuild Red Hat from source every week. (GNU, Red Hat, AlmaLinux, Rocky)

The ability to fork doesn't stop monetization. It stops monopolization.

relatable links:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html

Claim 3: "PTS is closed-source and that’s a good thing. It’s stable, cheap, and no one can ruin it."

So your ideal software is frozen in time, single-platform, and completely dependent on one guy in Japan never quitting?

Meanwhile, Krita is open-source, multiplatform, donation-funded, and continuously updated by dozens of artists and devs. It’s free — and better in almost every way (Krita).

Choosing stagnation over evolution because “at least it’s not corporatized” is like choosing a flip phone in 2025 because Apple annoys you.

You’re mistaking abandonware for “ethical.”

Claim 4: "Windows is free now. But it’s locked down, bloated, and full of spyware."

No, Windows isn’t free — it’s just pre-installed or nagware if unlicensed. And yeah, Windows does suck for privacy. Which is why open source matters more than ever.

You can’t audit Windows. You can’t control the updates. You can’t stop the telemetry. But on Linux, you can do all of that.

The irony? You blame open source for problems caused entirely by closed-source software. (EFF, ZDNet)

Verdict: Nuked. You’re yelling at the firefighter for the fire started by Microsoft.

Claim 5: "Corporations will eventually outlaw open source. Watch."

That’s a tinfoil-hat fantasy.

The US government funds open source development (Code.gov, DoD OSS Memo).

The entire internet runs on Linux, Apache, PostgreSQL, and nginx.

Big Tech is built on open source: Microsoft, Google, Meta — they all contribute and depend on it (Linux Foundation, GitHub Octoverse).

If corporations wanted open source gone, they’d be nuking their own infrastructure.

There’s no death plot — open source is the bedrock of modern computing.

Claim 6: “Licenses don’t matter. Corporations can do whatever they want.”

Wrong. Open source licenses are legally enforceable. Ask VMware how that worked out when they tried to violate the GPL (Hellwig v. VMware).

Or the BusyBox lawsuits, where violations led to court settlements (Software Freedom Conservancy).

Open source doesn’t pretend to beat corruption — but it creates tools of resistance, legal and technical. It’s a shield, not a silver bullet.

Saying “licenses don’t matter” is like saying locks don’t matter because thieves exist.

Claim 7: "Everything’s going to shit: rent, meth, Purdue Pharma, weed shops, etc..."

How did we get from software licenses to drug kits and housing policy?

This is a classic Gish Gallop — drown people in loosely connected tragedies so you never have to stay on topic. It’s a debate tactic, not an argument.

And none of it changes the fact that you don’t understand FOSS, licensing, or economics.

Dumping social collapse into a software thread doesn’t make you deep. It makes you unfocused.

💀 Final Verdict

You talk like a rebel coder from a cyberpunk movie, but your argument is just Reddit libertarian cosplay with no grasp of the systems you're criticizing.

You praise abandoned, closed-source software while dismissing the actual solutions that give users control. You claim to fear corporate power, yet you reject the one structure (open source) that decentralizes it.

Next time, skip the doomscroll and read a license.