>>39635055I'd hardly call 512x768 HD though. also I realize I'm not talking about wallpapers anymore.
the added detail worked out pretty nicely:
https://litter.catbox.moe/811vu5.pngexcept for the one where I got the ghost of AI-hands-mas past to show up, kek:
https://litter.catbox.moe/las5sp.png>>39635087I'm not sure how or why 0.7 is sticking out as somehow much better than values both higher AND lower than it, wtf was going on here?
>>39635182oh. her arm was melting in the source. denoise isn't just upscaling here then, kek, it's still drawing anew!
>>39635251it looks very nice***
*** zoomed to fit at 1280 height
it looks kind of bad at 100% zoom
it looks terrible... - I guess it's useful for super-sampling? go that big and then go back down until it's not nearly as blurry/smooth anymore.
BUT I am very thankful for this knowledge. now I know I can still hi-res fix up to "the limit" which seems to be 1.5-2x the "ideal dimensions"
so 1536x1024/1024x1536 and then use low denoise strength to get all the way up to e.g. 1920x1200 or something. I imagine it'd still look less melty/smooth/waifu2x than going straight to the extras tab.
>>39635303Bon Appetit
thank you all for explaining to grug. and sharing your knowledge.
