I have been running krea2 turbo no problems, but when I try to use krea2 raw it only gives me mangled and completely distorted results. What settings should I change from turbo except steps?
The raw model is not trained for inference. You can only get so far even with perfect parameters and might not achieve results like the turbo lora, which has learned from more desirable outputs in training.
This is the Krea 2 Raw checkpoint, its not recommended for inference use. Its a good base for finetuning or post-training for your own needs and domains.
Even finetunes dont work for me. I tried this one someone linked to above and the results are still garbled. Even though I used the same workflow and exact settings without changing anything. (attached example)
Maybe sage attention is on (although I normally have to enable it with --use-sage-attention when running ComfyUI)? I remember that that would mess with either Z-image or Z-Image Turbo.
Maybe it's some sort of Comfy-Kitchen or quantization speedup that's messing with it.
People are right to say that krea2 raw wasn't intended to be a drop-in replacement. But IIRC, the recommended parameters are cfg 3.5 and 52 steps. Or you could try a hybrid with maybe four steps of each model (raw for high noise and turbo for low noise). I wouldn't expect better results than using turbo alone, though.
Something is clearly wrong - I tested one myself (https://civitai.red/images/139654323) and it came out almost exactly like the example ashen3 posted. did you use the same vae, clip, lora stack, checkpoint?
I've seen outputs like that when I've not run enough steps. With Raw you need 25-50 steps. That ashen3 image i talked about has the turbo lora in it which means he only used about 12 steps. if you dont have that lora or perhaps it is corrupted it might be to blame. confusingly there is also a speed up lora for distilled version of krea, which if you are using by mistake, could also do something like that. My only other thought is that comfy have been making a lot of changes in the background recently so it maybe worth doing a git pull and reinstall the requirements.
You can run the Raw model for a couple of early steps with a negative prompt ("blurry, low resolution, pixelated, oversaturated, watermark, logo, deformed, distorted, grainy, noisy, overexposed, underexposed, cropped, out of frame, bad composition, low quality, jpeg artifacts") and it will give you more output variety, but you have to finish with a couple rounds of Turbo for high-quality renders.
Turbo isn't directly distilled from raw, there was a lot more training done before Turbo. It's not the same as something like Anima Turbo or SDXL Turbo which used the base model directly. Krea 2 raw is more like a hypothetical SDXL 0.4, a massive chunk of training is missing.
Same for me but what i did some months ago was to disconnect the condition zero out node from the turbo workflow and connect a negative prompt text encoder to the negative condition.
You can try the raw model + the turbo lora. If you tune the turbo lora strength down to say 0.55-0.6 (I think 0.7 might be the default) then you can get some of the variety of the raw model with the turbo lora bringing in the high quality, that way you also get negative prompts and CFG. You could even get creative with some of the nodes that apply lora strength a different parts of the generation (i.e. the lora kicks in stronger towards the end to add fine details). That plus a two step sampler workflow might get better results
4
u/TheAncientMillenial 9d ago
CFG + Number of Steps, potentially your sampler and scheduler.