Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make StableDiffusionProcessingImg2Img.mask_blur a property, make more inline with PIL GaussianBlur #12470

Conversation

catboxanon
Copy link
Collaborator

@catboxanon catboxanon commented Aug 11, 2023

I don't exactly know why GitHub allows me to do this, but I'm opening this PR on @Splendide-Imaginarius's behalf now since it's a pretty intrusive issue.

This fixes an issue where the mask_blur property isn't set in img2img, which has caused problems for Ultimate Upscale and ControlNet, both for a few months now. It was a regression introduced by #10295.
Coyote-A/ultimate-upscale-for-automatic1111#111
Mikubill/sd-webui-controlnet#1888
Mikubill/sd-webui-controlnet#1907

Also makes the sigma values match closer to the old behavior of using PIL's GaussianBlur to reduce seams.

Checklist:

Fixes breakage when mask_blur is set after construction.

See Coyote-A/ultimate-upscale-for-automatic1111#111 (comment)

Thanks to Алексей Трофимов and eunnone for reporting the issue.
This more closely matches the old behavior of PIL's Gaussian blur, and
fixes breakage when tiling.

See Coyote-A/ultimate-upscale-for-automatic1111#111 (comment)

Thanks to Алексей Трофимов and eunnone for reporting the issue.
@Splendide-Imaginarius
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, thanks for opening this PR on my behalf. I was intending to submit myself but hadn't finished writing up a detailed explanation of where the bug was (with example images etc) to make review easier. But yes, this branch fixes the issue for me, and seems to fix it for other people too.

@Splendide-Imaginarius
Copy link
Contributor

(And yes, it's pretty common on GitHub to submit PR's based on other people's branches. I've done it before, for basically the same reason you did -- being unsure whether the person who owned the branch was going to submit it themself.)

@AUTOMATIC1111 AUTOMATIC1111 merged commit ae6b309 into AUTOMATIC1111:dev Aug 11, 2023
3 checks passed
@w-e-w w-e-w mentioned this pull request Aug 24, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants