>>48575966checked. Oh no!
>>48577577That's a lot of noodle weight.
>>48579173godspeed. Are they manually scored as an A-B test (do you like this one or that one?) or by points? If the latter, that sounds even more painful.
>>48579346I would be interested to see catboxed versions of the see-through dress gens without the naughty bits in the negatives.
>>48577752>>48578092Can you pass me the open pose png? It's slightly different from the reclining pose I had used. I want to test it out.
Otherwise, it might just be that the model, your prompt, and your generation settings could be better.
Your negatives could be improved.
I would use an upscaler other than Latent (try Latent AA, or Latent bicubic or Latent nearest-exact).
30 hi-res steps looks a bit overkill. 12 works for me. More steps can lead to better results but there's a cost-benefit in terms of the time it takes.
Try a DPM++ sampler. Like DPM++ 2M Karras or DPM++ SDE.
Try upping your CFG. For a long time now I've been comfortable with 10. It seems to behave better at anatomy and hands than a CFG like 6.
https://files.catbox.moe/e1suae.png 