>>43065748re: latent, if I use it, I have to switch samplers, turn the upscale amount down, and turn up the hi-res steps. it's too finicky. and then I forget denoise down in the 0.5 region and get shit like this. not worth it for the 1/10 chance it does something I actually want it too unstead of giving me unproompted nip or puss
>>43066070That was what I meant. I didn't realize it was that simple.
>>43066064>i searched for WTFBBQPlease, nobody help this person.
