Feature Request: Restore "Scale Latent" option in Hires Fix

[Rogal80]

Describe the bug
Please add scale latent back into highres.fix, it was producing decent result for me , example :

Screenshots
If applicable, add screenshots to help explain your problem.
just highres

scale latent

Desktop (please complete the following information):

• OS: [e.g. Windows, Linux]
• Browser [e.g. chrome, safari]
• Commit revision [looks like this: e684845; can be seen when launching webui.bat, or obtained manually by running git rev-parse HEAD]

[midihex]

I concur, loading previous prompts that used HRfix now has dissimilar results, possibly from not having latent?

[Buckzor]

I agree, it was useful in a lot of cases.

[rrainist]

I agree, you removed now something that was very useful. I don't know how to use this new thing - the results look bad without scale latent.

[Kalekki]

You can revert back to just before the removal with
git reset --hard 40d1c6e
fdef825 to also revert the added dimension sliders

[Rogal80]

You can revert back to just before the removal with git reset --hard 40d1c6e

and then stay with this version without any new update ?

[rrainist]

Could we please get the option back instead?

[RomanescoAI]

Everything looks so much worse with the new Highres fix and the lack of Scale latent. I've tested it on a dozen of my old/ new generations with the exact prompt/ seed etc., and it is completely ruined. Please give us an option to revert back.

[XodrocSO]

Agreed, I'm getting inferior results without "Scale Latent"

[RomanescoAI]

Even after the implemented "Highres fix" in 368f4cc, the details and sharpness of the output without Scale latent is lacking. Any chance we can have the Scale latent checkbox back?

[RomanescoAI]

Another reference with regard to lacking sharpness, details, and color science without "Scale latent". Can we please have the "Scale latent" checkbox back?

[zenblender]

Just to add another voice, I also noticed better results with Scale Latent and would love to see this fun little checkbox return.

[RomanescoAI]

Just to add another voice, I also noticed better results with Scale Latent and would love to see this fun little checkbox return.

It's that kind of je ne sais quoi that just makes a good image great. I can't seem to pin down exactly what it is, but the sharpness and overall color science are definitely lacking without Scale latent. I hope @AUTOMATIC1111 considers bringing it back.

[zenblender]

Guess which one was rendered with Scale Latent on. All other settings were the same. Depending on the image, the difference can be huge.

[RomanescoAI]

@zenblender 1st one up top with Scale latent? 2nd without?

[XodrocSO]

Guess which one was rendered with Scale Latent on. All other settings were the same. Depending on the image, the difference can be huge.

I'm guessing the 2nd, I see finer details in the eye, coat and reflection. Obvious difference with the face too. The latest fix improved things for sure but still not getting the quality I got before with scale latent.

[zenblender]

@RomanescoAI maybe it's not obvious to everyone. The second one, with the more defined wrinkles in the face, and overall higher contrast, is with Scale Latent ON. What I notice, is that oftentimes the initial image (before upscaling) has great detail, and then after denoising (I use 0.5 typically) it often turns smaller details into mush. With this feature on, it was able to keep these details intact enough for upscaling that it didn't lose them, and emphasized them really well.

[RomanescoAI]

@zenblender funny I'm the one failing your test, but for sure, it might be case-dependent. I've generated over 5,000 great-looking images with Scale latent enabled in the past, but I cannot seem to replicate that finesse without it anymore.

[zenblender]

It's of course subjective @RomanescoAI and I am not sure that I always prefer the results of Scale Latent. But I can say that it does have a big effect sometimes, and think we're better off having the option.

[clockworkwhale]

If you're getting overly mushy/smooth details, one cause may be having a bad img2img upscaler selected in your settings. RealESRGAN is particularly egregious for this. If you select a more detail-preserving upscaler model, like SwinIR or one of the good custom esrgan models like Remacri, you may find the problem reduced somewhat.

I too support the return of the scale latent option though, it was nice to have the option of skipping the upscaler model step and instead having the upscaling entirely performed by SD.

[RomanescoAI]

If you're getting overly mushy/smooth details, one cause may be having a bad img2img upscaler selected in your settings. RealESRGAN is particularly egregious for this. If you select a more detail-preserving upscaler model, like SwinIR or one of the good custom esrgan models like Remacri, you may find the problem reduced somewhat.

I too support the return of the scale latent option though, it was nice to have the option of skipping the upscaler model step and instead having the upscaling entirely performed by SD.

I'm not using and have not used an upscaler, as these are all vanilla generations. Glad to hear more support in favor of the `Scale latent' return.

[clockworkwhale]

I'm not using and have not used an upscaler, as these are all vanilla generations. Glad to hear more support in favor of the `Scale latent' return.

You are in fact using an upscaler now, though you may not have realized it. It's an automatic part of the hires fix process with scale latent gone.

[RomanescoAI]

I'm not using and have not used an upscaler, as these are all vanilla generations. Glad to hear more support in favor of the `Scale latent' return.

You are in fact using an upscaler now, though you may not have realized it. It's part of the hires fix process with scale latent gone.

Thanks for clarifying that. I still wish 'Scale Latent' was back, to the way it was working originally.

[VampirkoOrus]

First is with scale latent, second with another upscaler. Please bring it back

[Somasonic]

I've also noticed fine details from the original getting lost and also a graininess that wasn't there with scale latent on (at least for the images I'm generating).

[trihardseven]

which version was this removed so I can revert it for now?

[XodrocSO]

Guess which one was rendered with Scale Latent on. All other settings were the same. Depending on the image, the difference can be huge.

@zenblender
BTW, have to say you live up to your name. Curious what the prompt was for that, or if there's any you'd be willing to share that really expose differences with scale latent like that.

[rrainist]

which version was this removed so I can revert it for now?

#2523 (comment) you’ll find the commit here

[rrainist]

For “scale latent” references, all of these I’ve been doing for the past week have all been “scale latent” on - https://twitter.com/rainisto/status/1580285490925735936?s=46&t=IxJ61DsmTWgBlzwj5kMF9A

It’s very good for this “realistic” look. Don’t really know how to replicate this look without it…

[giteeeeee]

Scale latent have been giving me results with much more details. Please bring it back :(

[giteeeeee]

gs. RealESRGAN is particularly egregious for this. If you select a more detail-preserving upscaler model, like SwinIR or one of the good custom esrgan models like Remacri, you may find the problem reduced somewhat.

I too support the return of the

Is it then possible to even make "scale latent" a part of the img-img upscaling process?

Just curious, thanks for clarifying the issue though.

[NO-ob]

Bumping this i'm getting way worse results than before pulling

[tiraua]

f7ca63937ac83d32483285c3af09afaa356d6276

[NO-ob]

nice thanks voldy

[zenblender]

Thanks for bringing this back! It's now a checkbox in the Settings tab.