[Bug]: ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled. #455

k99goran · 2023-12-31T12:31:20Z

Describe the bug

Hi,

I just updated Adetailer to the latest version, now it won't allow me to run in inpaint mode.
I made sure that the "Skip img2img" checkbox is unchecked, and I don't see any options in Settings that allow me to turn it back on.
It just prompts this error message:
ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.

How do I resolve this?

Screenshots

No response

Console logs, from start to end.

venv "E:\Programs\Automatic1111\stable-diffusion-webui-master\venv\Scripts\Python.exe"
fatal: not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
fatal: not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
Python 3.10.10 (tags/v3.10.10:aad5f6a, Feb  7 2023, 17:20:36) [MSC v.1929 64 bit (AMD64)]
Version: 1.7.0
Commit hash: <none>
ReActor preheating... Device: CUDA
Launching Web UI with arguments: --xformers --no-half
[-] ADetailer initialized. version: 23.12.0, num models: 11
ControlNet preprocessor location: E:\Programs\Automatic1111\stable-diffusion-webui-master\extensions\sd-webui-controlnet\annotator\downloads
2023-12-31 13:27:33,359 - ControlNet - INFO - ControlNet v1.1.425
2023-12-31 13:27:33,428 - ControlNet - INFO - ControlNet v1.1.425
13:27:33 - ReActor - STATUS - Running v0.6.0-a4
Loading weights [676f0d60c8] from E:\Programs\Automatic1111\stable-diffusion-webui-master\models\Stable-diffusion\SDXL turbo\dreamshaperXL_turboDpmppSDEKarras.safetensors
2023-12-31 13:27:33,901 - AnimateDiff - INFO - Injecting LCM to UI.
2023-12-31 13:27:34,173 - AnimateDiff - INFO - Hacking i2i-batch.
Running on local URL:  http://127.0.0.1:7860

[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.
2023-12-31 13:30:51,404 - ControlNet - INFO - unit_separate = False, style_align = False
2023-12-31 13:30:51,621 - ControlNet - INFO - Loading model: ipAdapterControlnet_sdxl [bc449f62]
2023-12-31 13:30:51,630 - ControlNet - INFO - Loaded state_dict from [E:\Programs\Automatic1111\stable-diffusion-webui-master\extensions\sd-webui-controlnet\models\ipAdapterControlnet_sdxl.safetensors]
2023-12-31 13:30:53,261 - ControlNet - INFO - ControlNet model ipAdapterControlnet_sdxl [bc449f62] loaded.
2023-12-31 13:30:53,437 - ControlNet - INFO - Loading preprocessor: ip-adapter_clip_sdxl_plus_vith
2023-12-31 13:30:53,437 - ControlNet - INFO - preprocessor resolution = 1280
2023-12-31 13:31:01,133 - ControlNet - INFO - ControlNet Hooked - Time = 9.735368967056274
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 4/4 [00:03<00:00,  1.03it/s]
Total progress: 100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 4/4 [00:05<00:00,  1.42s/it]
Total progress: 100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 4/4 [00:05<00:00,  1.23it/s]

List of installed extensions

No response

etreto · 2024-01-01T02:40:36Z

I was wondering if it's a bug or an intended feature. The latest commit makes it seem intended but I'm unsure why you'd want to disable in inpaint.

I've fixed it by going to
\extensions\adetailer\scripts\

Edit !detailer.py
Look for "def is_img2img_inpaint"
Change the return to False

Save and restart SD.

k99goran · 2024-01-01T08:59:53Z

Yes. I just saw it in the latest changelog. Very strange to arbitrarily limit such a great feature.

Anway, the fix worked. Thanks for the quick help!

iiiiik06 · 2024-01-02T09:11:25Z

After I tried to change it, the ADetailer was completely gone from the page.

FlorentMasseglia · 2024-01-03T11:16:56Z

Thank you Etroto!! It works.

ElevatedKitten · 2024-01-03T12:30:27Z

can we please revisit whether this is intended behavior or actually a bug? for me it doesn't really make sense to deactivate adetailer for inpainting either. by the way, not only inpainting is affected by this change, but generally everything that has to do with img2img. if you want to upscale via img2img, for example, adetailer also no longer works.

and tbh manually changing values in *.py files isn't exactly a good long term solution to fix this.

imo this issue shouldn't be marked als closed and complete

@Bing-su any thoughts on this?

k99goran · 2024-01-03T12:58:52Z

Perhaps I jumped the gun when closing this issue. Should I reopen it?

Bing-su · 2024-01-03T15:34:25Z

It's working fine for me, but how are you guys doing this? This is to prevent a bug with nested inpaints that was often reported in the past.

0: 640x448 1 face, 5.0ms
Speed: 1.0ms preprocess, 5.0ms inference, 1.5ms postprocess per image at shape (1, 3, 640, 448)
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 9/9 [00:01<00:00,  7.61it/s]
Total progress: 100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 9/9 [00:06<00:00,  1.43it/s]
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 1/1 [00:00<00:00,  5.84it/s]
Total progress:   0%|                                                                            | 0/1 [00:00<?, ?it/s]
0: 640x512 1 face, 84.7ms
Speed: 2.7ms preprocess, 84.7ms inference, 1.0ms postprocess per image at shape (1, 3, 640, 512)
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 9/9 [00:01<00:00,  7.30it/s]

0: 640x512 1 face, 6.5ms
Speed: 1.0ms preprocess, 6.5ms inference, 1.0ms postprocess per image at shape (1, 3, 640, 512)
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 9/9 [00:01<00:00,  7.59it/s]
Total progress: 100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 1/1 [00:05<00:00,  5.67s/it]
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 1/1 [00:00<00:00,  6.24it/s]
Total progress:   0%|                                                                            | 0/1 [00:00<?, ?it/s]
0: 640x512 1 face, 79.6ms
Speed: 3.5ms preprocess, 79.6ms inference, 1.0ms postprocess per image at shape (1, 3, 640, 512)
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 9/9 [00:01<00:00,  5.54it/s]

0: 640x512 1 face, 5.2ms
Speed: 2.6ms preprocess, 5.2ms inference, 2.0ms postprocess per image at shape (1, 3, 640, 512)
100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 9/9 [00:01<00:00,  7.64it/s]
Total progress: 100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 1/1 [00:06<00:00,  6.05s/it]
Total progress: 100%|████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████| 1/1 [00:06<00:00,  6.05s/it]

coderCK2 · 2024-01-05T08:39:51Z

It's working fine for me, but how are you guys doing this? This is to prevent a bug with nested inpaints that was often reported in the past.

I'm also experiencing this issue, and I'm simply going from txt2img to img2img by clicking the "Send image and generation parameters to img2img tab." button underneath the original image.

EDIT: adding this note to say that @etreto's temporary solution also worked for me.

phopeu · 2024-01-06T21:22:26Z

After I tried to change it, the ADetailer was completely gone from the page.

Had the same issue, commenting out the whole block fixed it.

Woisek · 2024-01-08T14:14:15Z

I was wondering if it's a bug or an intended feature. The latest commit makes it seem intended but I'm unsure why you'd want to disable in inpaint.

I've fixed it by going to \extensions\adetailer\scripts\

Edit !detailer.py Look for "def is_img2img_inpaint" Change the return to False

Save and restart SD.

Somehow, there is no return for true or false.

    @staticmethod
    def is_img2img_inpaint(p) -> bool:
        return hasattr(p, "image_mask") and bool(p.image_mask)

coderCK2 · 2024-01-08T19:25:11Z

Somehow, there is no return for true or false.

What do you mean exactly?
All you need to do is change this:

@staticmethod
def is_img2img_inpaint(p) -> bool:
    return hasattr(p, "image_mask") and bool(p.image_mask)

to this:

@staticmethod
def is_img2img_inpaint(p) -> bool:
    return False

Or if you want to preserve the original line in case you want to revert (for whatever reason), you can comment it and add your new line below it, like this:

@staticmethod
def is_img2img_inpaint(p) -> bool:
    # return hasattr(p, "image_mask") and bool(p.image_mask)
    return False

Woisek · 2024-01-08T20:07:08Z

Somehow, there is no return for true or false.

What do you mean exactly? All you need to do is change this:
@staticmethod
def is_img2img_inpaint(p) -> bool:
    return hasattr(p, "image_mask") and bool(p.image_mask)
to this:
@staticmethod
def is_img2img_inpaint(p) -> bool:
    return False
Or if you want to preserve the original line in case you want to revert (for whatever reason), you can comment it and add your new line below it, like this:
@staticmethod
def is_img2img_inpaint(p) -> bool:
    # return hasattr(p, "image_mask") and bool(p.image_mask)
    return False

Okay, that's something different. I thought there was a true that has to be changed to a false. I'll try that, thanks. 👍

THATDONFC · 2024-01-08T22:32:42Z

I'm also seeing this issue. I upscaled an image 2x and then sent that upscaled image to img2img to upscale again. I wanted to touch up the face using adetailer but I keep seeing this message in the console at the start of the generation:

[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.

halfblack · 2024-01-16T22:44:17Z

Will this be addressed, or manual code change gonna be necessary all the time?

ENTPRESTIGIOUS · 2024-01-18T09:04:15Z

I have the same issue on v1.7.0

ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.

EtienneDosSantos · 2024-01-18T12:58:39Z

I have the same issue on v1.7.0
ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.

As @etreto suggested, edit the section in !adetailer.py file (follow this path to find it: \stable-diffusion-webui\extensions\adetailer\scripts!adetailer.py) from

    @rich_traceback
    def process(self, p, *args_):
        if getattr(p, "_ad_disabled", False):
            return

        if self.is_img2img_inpaint(p):
            p._ad_disabled = True
            msg = "[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled."
            print(msg)
            return

        if self.is_ad_enabled(*args_):
            arg_list = self.get_args(p, *args_)
            self.check_skip_img2img(p, *args_)
            extra_params = self.extra_params(arg_list)
            p.extra_generation_params.update(extra_params)
        else:
            p._ad_disabled = True

to

    @rich_traceback
    def process(self, p, *args_):
        if getattr(p, "_ad_disabled", False):
            return

        if self.is_img2img_inpaint(p):
            p._ad_disabled = False
            msg = "[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled."
            # print(msg)
            return

        if self.is_ad_enabled(*args_):
            arg_list = self.get_args(p, *args_)
            self.check_skip_img2img(p, *args_)
            extra_params = self.extra_params(arg_list)
            p.extra_generation_params.update(extra_params)
        else:
            p._ad_disabled = False

humanoide13 · 2024-01-19T09:38:33Z

I was wondering if it's a bug or an intended feature. The latest commit makes it seem intended but I'm unsure why you'd want to disable in inpaint.

I've fixed it by going to \extensions\adetailer\scripts\

Edit !detailer.py Look for "def is_img2img_inpaint" Change the return to False

Save and restart SD.

Thanks! It worked.

malfdawg · 2024-01-22T20:45:51Z

Is this bug ever going to be addressed?! It happens on standard img2img not just inpainting tab.

EtienneDosSantos · 2024-01-22T20:53:24Z

Is this bug ever going to be addressed?! It happens on standard img2img not just inpainting tab.

Seems like it's not a bug, but a feature.

malfdawg · 2024-01-23T23:06:19Z

Is this bug ever going to be addressed?! It happens on standard img2img not just inpainting tab.

Seems like it's not a bug, but a feature.

How can it be a feature if it occurs even when there is no inpainting? It specifically says "inpainting detected adetailer disabled."

EtienneDosSantos · 2024-01-24T00:05:31Z

Is this bug ever going to be addressed?! It happens on standard img2img not just inpainting tab.

Seems like it's not a bug, but a feature.

How can it be a feature if it occurs even when there is no inpainting? It specifically says "inpainting detected adetailer disabled."

Hmm, this is strange. Just tested it and it doesn't happen in normal img2img for me.

malfdawg · 2024-01-24T14:15:15Z

I think the problem is 'inpaint is detected' if there's an image loaded into the inpaint tab, regardless of whether that tab is being used or not. I'm not 100% sure yet because I've altered the script as people above are doing to ignore it, and I'll be generating all day today, so I can't test it myself until I change the script back then restart SD.

EtienneDosSantos · 2024-01-24T14:45:26Z

Aight, you did the best thing (modifying the script).

akmesb · 2024-01-29T15:47:45Z

Edit !detailer.py Look for "def is_img2img_inpaint" Change the return to False

Changing the script just makes the message disappear. ADetailer does its job, but the result is not embedded. I get just the original.

I have the suspicion that ADetailer should not work for this way for copyright reasons, because one could manipulate any photo in a lifelike way, while all other face-swap methods (currently) still deliver poor results and are almost always recognizable as manipulation.

halfblack · 2024-01-29T16:14:46Z

Edit !detailer.py Look for "def is_img2img_inpaint" Change the return to False

Changing the script just makes the message disappear. ADetailer does its job, but the result is not embedded. I get just the original.

I have the suspicion that ADetailer should not work for this way for copyright reasons, because one could manipulate any photo in a lifelike way, while all other face-swap methods (currently) still deliver poor results and are almost always recognizable as manipulation.

Then you must've done something wrong, as for me adetailer does work after changing this line. As for the reasoning, ReActor and other tools offer much better and reliable options for face swapping, while adetailer is not only not exclusive to face adjustments, but also works on fundamentally different principle.

malfdawg · 2024-01-29T16:30:38Z

Edit !detailer.py Look for "def is_img2img_inpaint" Change the return to False

Changing the script just makes the message disappear. ADetailer does its job, but the result is not embedded. I get just the original.

I have the suspicion that ADetailer should not work for this way for copyright reasons, because one could manipulate any photo in a lifelike way, while all other face-swap methods (currently) still deliver poor results and are almost always recognizable as manipulation.

Adetailer is not a faceswap. It's just inpainting. You could do exactly what it's doing by inpainting with your own mask. Having it auto detect a face, mask, and inpaint on-the-fly, is the convenience Adetailer offers, but at the end of the day it just an inpaint, which has no 'copyright protection'.

malfdawg · 2024-01-29T21:38:19Z

I'm also seeing this issue. I upscaled an image 2x and then sent that upscaled image to img2img to upscale again. I wanted to touch up the face using adetailer but I keep seeing this message in the console at the start of the generation:

[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.

Just got the newest commit today and this is the biggest issue for me. Adetailer is disabling itself when merely upscaling in img2img. Why? I now have to run img2img again after upscaling with 'Skip img2img' checked. This takes 10x longer than just letting adetailer run during the upscale.

If this is a feature and not a bug, it's a bad one. The author should consider changing it.

MathDC99 · 2024-01-30T06:32:01Z

For me same problem, Adetailer deactivates itself even after modifying "!adetailer.py" and restarting the web.ui:
"[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled" in img2img, inpaint.

I have version 24.1.2. Wouldn't there be a more stable version? Or would reinstalling Adetailer not solve the problem?...

ArnorWing · 2024-02-05T04:19:23Z

arghh this is really annoying. All i want is adetailer to tidy up folders of images.

EtienneDosSantos · 2024-02-05T13:29:56Z

For me same problem, Adetailer deactivates itself even after modifying "!adetailer.py" and restarting the web.ui: "[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled" in img2img, inpaint.

I have version 24.1.2. Wouldn't there be a more stable version? Or would reinstalling Adetailer not solve the problem?...

I don't think that reinstalling would do anything, since the "inpainting detected, adetailer disabled" is specifically implemented into all versions post v23.11.1. I rolled back to v23.11.1 for that reason.

ArnorWing · 2024-02-05T20:49:50Z

Adetailer seems to work in I2I if Ultimate Upscale is not enabled ... BUT the generation takes a really long time, i closed the console at about 10mins on my 3090.
Someone check that as well?
-Disable I2I in Adetailer
-Use tiled VAE
-Disable Ultimate Upscale.

Mejnun333 · 2024-02-07T02:55:44Z

I have the same issue on v1.7.0
ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.

As @etreto suggested, edit the section in !adetailer.py file (follow this path to find it: \stable-diffusion-webui\extensions\adetailer\scripts!adetailer.py) from

    @rich_traceback
    def process(self, p, *args_):
        if getattr(p, "_ad_disabled", False):
            return

        if self.is_img2img_inpaint(p):
            p._ad_disabled = True
            msg = "[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled."
            print(msg)
            return

        if self.is_ad_enabled(*args_):
            arg_list = self.get_args(p, *args_)
            self.check_skip_img2img(p, *args_)
            extra_params = self.extra_params(arg_list)
            p.extra_generation_params.update(extra_params)
        else:
            p._ad_disabled = True

to

    @rich_traceback
    def process(self, p, *args_):
        if getattr(p, "_ad_disabled", False):
            return

        if self.is_img2img_inpaint(p):
            p._ad_disabled = False
            msg = "[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled."
            # print(msg)
            return

        if self.is_ad_enabled(*args_):
            arg_list = self.get_args(p, *args_)
            self.check_skip_img2img(p, *args_)
            extra_params = self.extra_params(arg_list)
            p.extra_generation_params.update(extra_params)
        else:
            p._ad_disabled = False

Thank you!

yvliew · 2024-02-07T13:35:26Z

I have the same issue on v1.7.0
ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled.

As @etreto suggested, edit the section in !adetailer.py file (follow this path to find it: \stable-diffusion-webui\extensions\adetailer\scripts!adetailer.py) from

    @rich_traceback
    def process(self, p, *args_):
        if getattr(p, "_ad_disabled", False):
            return

        if self.is_img2img_inpaint(p):
            p._ad_disabled = True
            msg = "[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled."
            print(msg)
            return

        if self.is_ad_enabled(*args_):
            arg_list = self.get_args(p, *args_)
            self.check_skip_img2img(p, *args_)
            extra_params = self.extra_params(arg_list)
            p.extra_generation_params.update(extra_params)
        else:
            p._ad_disabled = True

to

    @rich_traceback
    def process(self, p, *args_):
        if getattr(p, "_ad_disabled", False):
            return

        if self.is_img2img_inpaint(p):
            p._ad_disabled = False
            msg = "[-] ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled."
            # print(msg)
            return

        if self.is_ad_enabled(*args_):
            arg_list = self.get_args(p, *args_)
            self.check_skip_img2img(p, *args_)
            extra_params = self.extra_params(arg_list)
            p.extra_generation_params.update(extra_params)
        else:
            p._ad_disabled = False

Tried this and also return Flase, adetailer still wont work in inpainting. Any other methods? How do I roll back previous version?

EtienneDosSantos · 2024-02-07T14:58:45Z

How do I roll back previous version?

~~Assuming you want to use the version without adetailer deactivation upon inpainting implemented:~~
~~1) Download the zip file of v23.11.1~~
~~2) Extract the data from the zip file and put it in the extensions folder of your stable-diffusion-webui directory~~
~~3) Open command prompt and navigate to the folder you just pasted there in 2)~~
~~4) Create a virtual environment using the command: python -m venv adetailer_venv~~
~~5) Activate the newly created adetailer_venv with: adetailer_venv\Scripts\activate~~
~~6) Run python install.py~~
~~7) Hit deactivate after install.py has finished and close the command prompt~~
~~8) Start stable-diffusion-webui normally and adetailer should work~~

Edit: See in comment below for much easier method by @akmesb .

akmesb · 2024-02-08T00:35:58Z

How do I roll back previous version?

Assuming you want to use the version without adetailer deactivation upon inpainting implemented:

1. Download the zip file of [v23.11.1](https://github.com/Bing-su/adetailer/releases/tag/v23.11.1)

2. Extract the data from the zip file and put it in the extensions folder of your stable-diffusion-webui directory

3. Open command prompt and navigate to the folder you just pasted there in 2)

4. Create a virtual environment using the command: `python -m venv adetailer_venv`

5. Activate the newly created adetailer_venv with: `adetailer_venv\Scripts\activate`

6. Run `python install.py`

7. Hit `deactivate` after install.py has finished and close the command prompt

8. Start stable-diffusion-webui normally and adetailer should work

Why so complicated? Stable-diffusion-webui does all this completely automatically at next startup anyway.

EtienneDosSantos · 2024-02-09T11:03:09Z

How do I roll back previous version?

Assuming you want to use the version without adetailer deactivation upon inpainting implemented:

1. Download the zip file of [v23.11.1](https://github.com/Bing-su/adetailer/releases/tag/v23.11.1)

2. Extract the data from the zip file and put it in the extensions folder of your stable-diffusion-webui directory

3. Open command prompt and navigate to the folder you just pasted there in 2)

4. Create a virtual environment using the command: `python -m venv adetailer_venv`

5. Activate the newly created adetailer_venv with: `adetailer_venv\Scripts\activate`

6. Run `python install.py`

7. Hit `deactivate` after install.py has finished and close the command prompt

8. Start stable-diffusion-webui normally and adetailer should work

Why so complicated? Stable-diffusion-webui does all this completely automatically at next startup anyway.

Oh, so you simply put the folder in the extensions directory and it will work? Super easy then!

warrockmill · 2024-02-13T00:42:14Z

Well I tried the fix and had no luck. Rolling back also did nothing in the end. This change has really made a chore of my workflow.

highnrgappalachian · 2024-02-15T15:30:36Z

Why is this a thing? Lmao.

Fixed img2img inpainting cannot be used with the message: "img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled" Based on: Bing-su#455

ENTPRESTIGIOUS · 2024-03-07T20:54:02Z

Damn, still no fix? But yeah changing those values to False didn't do anything.

ENTPRESTIGIOUS · 2024-03-07T22:03:33Z

arafatx added a commit to arafatx/adetailer that referenced this issue 2 weeks ago
@arafatx
Update !adetailer.py

It starts the ADetailer process but once it's finished, it gets discarded.

kalle07 · 2024-03-09T12:31:51Z

why ADetailer is working with SD15 in inpaint but SDXL dont ?

omartanveer · 2024-03-09T20:55:09Z

Installing the older version of Adetailer worked for me
Installation URL: https://gitee.com/JonyShan/adetailer.git

ENTPRESTIGIOUS · 2024-03-09T21:40:38Z

Installing the older version of Adetailer worked for me Installation URL: https://gitee.com/JonyShan/adetailer.git

Wait wha?

omartanveer · 2024-03-09T21:52:13Z

For me, installing the latest version resulted in this error ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled

So, i shifted to the older version. Removed the latest version and installed the older version from the extensions tab, using the URL mentioned above. Thereafter, in the installed tab, i didn't click "check for updates" and clicked "Apply and Restart UI"

ENTPRESTIGIOUS · 2024-03-09T22:09:09Z

For me, installing the latest version resulted in this error ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled

So, i shifted to the older version. Removed the latest version and installed the older version from the extensions tab, using the URL mentioned above. Thereafter, in the installed tab, i didn't click "check for updates" and clicked "Apply and Restart UI"

I thought that didn't work for someone else. Kinda sad that you have to downgrade...

omartanveer · 2024-03-09T22:12:33Z

For me, installing the latest version resulted in this error ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled
So, i shifted to the older version. Removed the latest version and installed the older version from the extensions tab, using the URL mentioned above. Thereafter, in the installed tab, i didn't click "check for updates" and clicked "Apply and Restart UI"

I thought that didn't work for someone else. Kinda sad that you have to downgrade...

Yep, but its still better than getting an error.

highnrgappalachian · 2024-03-15T23:52:34Z

@Bing-su Could you revert this change, please?

ArnorWing · 2024-03-16T03:06:45Z

Installing the older version of Adetailer worked for me Installation URL: https://gitee.com/JonyShan/adetailer.git

Wait wha?

I wouldnt use that link. Looks suspect

k52252467 · 2024-03-25T05:07:42Z

Can't this problem be fixed?
Every time I update, I have to manually change !detailer.py

Bing-su · 2024-03-27T06:41:28Z

The restriction on this issue has been relaxed since version 24.3.1.
If you are still experiencing similar issues, please open an issue as this is probably a different issue.

k99goran added the bug Something isn't working label Dec 31, 2023

k99goran closed this as completed Jan 1, 2024

k99goran reopened this Jan 3, 2024

arafatx added a commit to arafatx/adetailer that referenced this issue Feb 22, 2024

Update !adetailer.py

f87c83c

Fixed img2img inpainting cannot be used with the message: "img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled" Based on: Bing-su#455

benfy95 mentioned this issue Mar 4, 2024

ADetailer not working with inpainting #525

Closed

k52252467 mentioned this issue Mar 25, 2024

Report error when batching the img2img process #548

Closed

kalle07 mentioned this issue Mar 26, 2024

[Bug]: ADetailer: img2img inpainting SDXL since december WHY? #558

Closed

Bing-su closed this as completed Mar 27, 2024

[Bug]: ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled. #455

[Bug]: ADetailer: img2img inpainting detected. adetailer disabled. #455

Comments

k99goran commented Dec 31, 2023 • edited

Describe the bug

Screenshots

Console logs, from start to end.

List of installed extensions

etreto commented Jan 1, 2024

k99goran commented Jan 1, 2024

iiiiik06 commented Jan 2, 2024

FlorentMasseglia commented Jan 3, 2024

ElevatedKitten commented Jan 3, 2024 • edited

k99goran commented Jan 3, 2024

Bing-su commented Jan 3, 2024

coderCK2 commented Jan 5, 2024 • edited

phopeu commented Jan 6, 2024

Woisek commented Jan 8, 2024

coderCK2 commented Jan 8, 2024

Woisek commented Jan 8, 2024

THATDONFC commented Jan 8, 2024

halfblack commented Jan 16, 2024

ENTPRESTIGIOUS commented Jan 18, 2024

EtienneDosSantos commented Jan 18, 2024 • edited

humanoide13 commented Jan 19, 2024

malfdawg commented Jan 22, 2024

EtienneDosSantos commented Jan 22, 2024

malfdawg commented Jan 23, 2024

EtienneDosSantos commented Jan 24, 2024

malfdawg commented Jan 24, 2024

EtienneDosSantos commented Jan 24, 2024

akmesb commented Jan 29, 2024

halfblack commented Jan 29, 2024

malfdawg commented Jan 29, 2024

malfdawg commented Jan 29, 2024 • edited

MathDC99 commented Jan 30, 2024 • edited

ArnorWing commented Feb 5, 2024

EtienneDosSantos commented Feb 5, 2024

ArnorWing commented Feb 5, 2024

Mejnun333 commented Feb 7, 2024

yvliew commented Feb 7, 2024

EtienneDosSantos commented Feb 7, 2024 • edited

akmesb commented Feb 8, 2024

EtienneDosSantos commented Feb 9, 2024

warrockmill commented Feb 13, 2024

highnrgappalachian commented Feb 15, 2024

ENTPRESTIGIOUS commented Mar 7, 2024

ENTPRESTIGIOUS commented Mar 7, 2024

kalle07 commented Mar 9, 2024

omartanveer commented Mar 9, 2024

ENTPRESTIGIOUS commented Mar 9, 2024

omartanveer commented Mar 9, 2024

ENTPRESTIGIOUS commented Mar 9, 2024

omartanveer commented Mar 9, 2024

highnrgappalachian commented Mar 15, 2024

ArnorWing commented Mar 16, 2024

k52252467 commented Mar 25, 2024

Bing-su commented Mar 27, 2024

k99goran commented Dec 31, 2023 •

edited

ElevatedKitten commented Jan 3, 2024 •

edited

coderCK2 commented Jan 5, 2024 •

edited

EtienneDosSantos commented Jan 18, 2024 •

edited

malfdawg commented Jan 29, 2024 •

edited

MathDC99 commented Jan 30, 2024 •

edited

EtienneDosSantos commented Feb 7, 2024 •

edited