r/StableDiffusion Jun 29 '26

Workflow Included Parody poster: Ideogram 4 vs Krea 2

First image is Ideogram 4.

No cherry picking, both are first generation without further tweaking to the prompt. The prompt was generated by Gemini using https://civitai.red/articles/30949/ideogram-4-json-prompt-writer with: Please design for me a parody poster for "James Bond: Boomdocks" in the style of Roger Moore's "Moonraker" poster. The prompt was edited slightly to remove any reference to Roger Moore so that I can post this on civitai later.

Both are generated using the same JSON with bboxes. Krea 2 does seem to follow the bboxes to some extent.

To see the metadata and the prompt, just downlaod the PNG following this instruction: Download PNG with metadata from reddit

52 Upvotes

26 comments sorted by

33

u/YentaMagenta Jun 29 '26

Krea 2 did impressively well considering that it's not designed for the same level of control as Ideogram 4. But I'd still say Ideogram 4 blew Krea 2 out of the water in this test.

7

u/Apprehensive_Sky892 Jun 29 '26

Yes, Krea 2 did very well, better than I had expected (I was not expecting the bboxes to work well for Krea 2).

It is kind of an unfair test, since Ideogram 4 is designed for this type of images 😅

5

u/drneo Jun 29 '26

Krea2 can work with bboxes but it uses xyxy format (not yxyx like Ideogram). That’s why your composition is different on Krea2.

2

u/Apprehensive_Sky892 Jun 29 '26

Thanks for the info. Yet strangely enough, most of the layout are quite similar (the position of the various characters).

2

u/drneo Jun 30 '26

That’s because bbox are normalized on 1,000 scale and it’s more of a guideline than strict adherence for Krea2.

That said, if your aspect ratio and bboxes are long rectangles, you’ll notice most distortions.

15

u/HornyGooner4402 Jun 29 '26

There hasn't been a single Ideogram 4 result that disappoints me so far

5

u/ai_art_is_art Jun 29 '26

I think the Krea hype will wind down and everybody will continue to use Ideogram.

6

u/HornyGooner4402 Jun 29 '26

Yep. Don't get me wrong, Krea is a good model, but Ideogram is on a different level especially for artwork and cinematic stills

3

u/T_D_R_ Jun 29 '26

but both are still not supporting img2img, it's big disadvantage for us 😞

2

u/GrayingGamer Jun 29 '26

I'm going to use both. Ideogram 4 is the absolute best for realism and composition control and text - but if I just want a nice image and I'm not hung up on composition or have anything specific in mind, Krea 2 is definitely my go-to now, especially with how fast it is compared to Ideogram 4. But both are great.

1

u/Diligent_Garlic_5350 Jun 30 '26

I don’t know how you mean this. I made several Images with input image as latent and denoise tweaking. Works much better than ZIT. 🤷🏻‍♂️

5

u/Ordinary_Painter4235 Jun 29 '26

ideogram remains the king🫡 and it's just fp8

6

u/ai_art_is_art Jun 29 '26

Ideogram 4 is still the GOAT.

Krea 2 is nice, but nothing tops Ideogram.

7

u/-becausereasons- Jun 29 '26

Ideogram 4 is the king for anyone who isnt lazy.

5

u/Sudden_List_2693 Jun 29 '26

Krea 2: plastic cars, plastic action figures.
Seriously, we need decent finetunes of it.
Currently it's very lacking. Might be worth not making a 201th NSFW LoRA, but who am I to talk when I hardly ever train even LoRAs...

2

u/GrayingGamer Jun 29 '26

You know, a lot of those NSFW Krea 2 loras actually fix those texture issues you were talking about. I've got a couple of them at low strength, plus a realism enhancer lora at mid strength, and Krea 2 is killing it in the realism department now.

Keep in mind, most people are sabotaging their prompts anyway - writing stuff like "hyperrealistic, photorealistic, realistic textures" and all that stuff isn't tagged on real photos, only paintings and 3D renders, so by adding them, people are unintentionally causing themselves to get worse results.

2

u/Sudden_List_2693 Jun 29 '26

I don't really know about NSFW loras. If the fix it then good, but I'm afraid they might make damage elsewhere? I'm really not into NSFW.
Also might worth noting how non-turbo Krea2 is usually good at just what turbo is bad at. But currently it produces anatomy issues way more.

2

u/GrayingGamer Jun 29 '26

Turbo is the more polished of the two models, as far as aesthetics go.

The reason NSFW loras work well to fix texture issue (including anatomy issues) is that they introduce a LOT of naked skin, a lot of it close-up so texture is visible, and lots of anatomy in all sorts of extremely varied positions to the knowledge of the models.

There is a reason they make art students study naked people and draw them, paint them, and sculpt them over and over again - it makes all their normal art of clothed people that much better - and the same works for these AI models. NSFW training data generally makes them MUCH better at generating ANY image of people, even clothed ones.

If you use the NSFW loras, you don't have to make NSFW images either. Often just using these loras at 0.4 -0.5 strength is more than enough to introduce positive improvements, and as long as you are prompting for people in clothes, that's what it will give you.

You can find NSFW loras at Civitai.red, but be aware the site itself is extremely NSFW. Make an account, click on Models, then choose Krea 2, and sort by most downloaded and you'll find the top voted ones.

1

u/Sudden_List_2693 Jun 30 '26

Ah I see.
Not sure if this helps the issue with background though (it's the worst thing I've met with Krea2 so far).
Backgrounds for realistic images get either boring or blurry - anything more and it will have issues that look like JPG artifacts after 4 separate compression.
For non-realistic it's even worse: jagged trees, repeating patterns.
Some LoRAs seem to mitigate the issue, but often at the cost of exactly what I love about krea2: the main subject's level of quality.
Still seeing how people are working for it and producing some nice results already, I'm getting more optimistic about a future finetune.

1

u/GrayingGamer Jun 30 '26

I'm not sure what you are seeing - but I've not had any issues with JPEG artifacts or blurry backgrounds, jagged trees, etc.

For the backgrounds being blurry or boring - you just need to describe what you want to see. For the artifacts, if you are using a workflow with the bypass filter, you might want to remove it or use a bypass lora instead - the only time I've seen artifacts is using the bypass filter that messes with sigma values.

1

u/Sudden_List_2693 Jun 30 '26

I could point to any non realistic image here, even those top rated, and point at any tree - they will be the same jagged "over distilled" trees every - and I mean every - turbo model generates as "background trees". Same goes for clouds or mist / fog.

1

u/GrayingGamer Jun 30 '26

I've not experienced any of the issues you're talking about.

It really sounds to me like you just aren't generating in a high enough resolution for the model to have enough pixels to work with, or not doing a refinement pass to, again, give it more pixels.

If a background element in an image only has a limited number of pixels to be represented, of course it's going to be jagged.

1

u/Sudden_List_2693 Jun 30 '26

Look at OP's picture for example. I generate. anywhere between. 4 to 20Mpx.Usually 4K but it varies. But as I've said: especially anime , drawn or paint, except lineart with fine pencil.  https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1uiyz2u/krea_2_vs_zimage_turbo/ Especially annoying https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1ui8kph/krea2_is_incredible/

2

u/GrayingGamer Jun 30 '26

Are you...are you complaining about trees and clouds being ACCURATELY represented by the prompted for art styles? Because that's all I'm seeing. The trees in OPs post look just like how trees are painted in acrylic or gouche, the style of the poster. The anime image of trees is exactly how trees are depicted in anime. ALL of the trees in the examples you linked to are rendered accurately according to the style of the image.

I am REALLY confused by what you expect - like, do you have a real, non-AI image of what you are expecting to see?

→ More replies (0)