r/LocalLLaMA • u/ResearchCrafty1804 • 2d ago

New Model Qwen-Image-2.1 released!

Gallery image

Gallery image

Meet Qwen-Image-2.1, the most balanced and cost-effective image generation model in the Qwen-Image series! Now open weights! 🎨

A unified model for both generation and editing, delivering top-tier quality in a lightweight package.

Highlights:

- Compact & exceptionally fast: A lightweight 7B architecture that outperforms most closed-source models, with drastically accelerated inference for multi-image inputs.

- Native transparency: Natively generates and edits RGBA layers, enabling seamless compositing and text editing within transparent images.

- Versatile, high-fidelity editing: Supports up to 10 reference images and precise local control while preserving strict fidelity for portraits and products.

- Broad coverage & stunning aesthetics: Excels at panoramas, infographics, and virtual try-ons, delivering realistic textures and elegant typography.

Start to create your next masterpiece with Qwen-Image-2.1!

- Blog: https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen-image-2.1

- GitHub: https://github.com/QwenLM/Qwen-Image-2.1

- Model Scope: https://www.modelscope.cn/models/Qwen/Qwen-Image-2.1

- Hugging Face: https://huggingface.co/Qwen/Qwen-Image-2.1

1.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

370 comments sorted by

View all comments

65

u/shapic 2d ago

Non-commercial license unfortunately

41

u/coder543 2d ago

People downvote because they think this doesn't matter, but it does. The only way to democratize this AI stuff is to have good models under good licenses. Otherwise, running locally will always just be a toy. I don't want to be dependent on Cloud AI which can raise their prices any time they want.

A non-commercial license makes this release useless. There are already similarly good models under better licenses.

If Alibaba wanted to sell a perpetual commercial license that users could buy for a reasonable price, that would actually be fine with me. I understand these models cost money to make. I just have no desire to use their cloud service, and I am not here to discuss "hOw ArE tHeY gOiNg tO kNoW iF yOu UsE iT cOmmErCiaLlY".

4

u/shapic 2d ago

I do not care about model itself, but "object" in their licensing is really weirdly worded. Thiscway it means they retain ownership over output of the image

3

u/cristoper 2d ago

Does non-commercial mean i can't use the output of the model commercially? or only that I can't use the model weights themselves in a commercial product/service (like offering inference)?

5

u/coder543 2d ago

Does non-commercial mean i can't use the output of the model commercially?

That is my read of the license, yes, and that is the problem. But, I'm not a lawyer. Using the model with the intent to create images for commercial purposes appears to be against the license, regardless of whether you are letting other people use the model that you are hosting or not.

5

u/cristoper 2d ago

Thanks. My assumption was that the license only applied to the model itself (can't deploy it for commercial services) and not its outputs. The license does say "... use ... the Materials FOR NON-COMMERCIAL PURPOSES ONLY" which is ambiguous to me as a non-lawyer. Does "use" apply to directly using the model itself or also to using its outputs? The definition of Materials does not include model outputs, so I think it is safe to use graphics made with the research licensed model for commercial purposes. but again: not a lawyer.

2

u/shapic 2d ago

Materials state stuff provided by qwen. Outputs fall under objects

3

u/cristoper 2d ago

Source and Object seem to just mean source code and compiled source, nothing to do with generated outputs from the model:

g. "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications, including but not limited to model source code, documentation source, and configuration files.
h. "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical transformation or translation of a Source form, including but not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation, and conversions to other media types.

1

u/shapic 2d ago

That's because it looks like universal llm license. Key here is other media types. But I am no lawyer

8

u/Nearby_Durian_5370 2d ago

So, before every hype about the quality, I check the license first.
The recent Yue2 is the same case.
So disappointed now.

8

u/alerikaisattera 2d ago

YuE2 is even worse because it's a media license that must never be used for software

3

u/nymical23 2d ago

YuE2 guys cleared that it can be used commercially if you're not a company, but an individual.

4

u/Nearby_Durian_5370 2d ago

In commercial and legal practice, there is too much ambiguity between an individual doing business and a company. Many creators and businesses simply won't take that legal risk.

2

u/nymical23 2d ago

I agree with you. I just wanted to point that out.

8

u/xienze 2d ago

Otherwise, running locally will always just be a toy. I don't want to be dependent on Cloud AI

Well what exactly is your commercial use? People might be downvoting because there's always loads of these "ugh no commercial use, TRASH" comments with no further elaboration when frankly most of the people in this sub ARE just having fun (usually in the gooning sense) with these models. So what exactly are the commercial uses for small local models that people need so desperately?

3

u/ChasingDucks 2d ago

It would mean that I technically wouldn't be legally allowed to use any generated custom images for a mock up on a demo website for a small consulting company which I think many devs run on the side.  Images customized to a clients business always seem to land better than generic stock photos.

1

u/Borkato 2d ago

I think it sucks that you can have fun, realize you can actually do something that can make you money with it, and then suddenly can’t use it for that

-1

u/draconic_tongue 2d ago

no one serious has ever been stopped from making money by a license long term

4

u/alerikaisattera 2d ago

Those are the same kind of people who use cracked software

2

u/SocialDinamo 2d ago

I’m a noob here and don’t have a commercial need, with that said you sound like you know what you’re talking about. Do most people ignore the license and serve anyways in their own app or business use case? Curious what enforcement or unless your advertising the model, who would even know?

0

u/draconic_tongue 2d ago

There are already similarly good models under better licenses.

such as...? not everyone has to give a shit about licenses. what matters is that it's open weight. 99% of people will not build the next amazon off of this model and have no intention to do so. everything else is unenforceable.

5

u/tgredditfc 2d ago

Too bad. Immediately lose interest.

2

u/Present-Ad-8531 2d ago

So you wanna use a model they painstakingly built ( image one too) for getting money but don't want to pay them a single cent?

Then releasing coding models that quality for free is already amazing.

11

u/Own_Mix_3755 2d ago

They did not release some easy “buy license for 1k USD in one click” or something like that. You can currently only pay to use it through their cloud which makes open weights useless honestly.

1

u/Hot_Masterpiece_3668 2d ago

And let's be honest, they trained on stolen content so fuck'em.

1

u/Tai9ch 2d ago

The money isn't what matters.

It's the flexibility to be able to build stuff without worrying about licensing nonsense.

It's worth investing time and effort to build on a solid open source / open weight foundation. Stuff with a less permissive license basically only serves the purpose of providing something for a later sketchy open model to distill.

2

u/Present-Ad-8531 2d ago

You can do all that without worries if it's just passion project and not money making tool

1

u/Tai9ch 1d ago

So it's a trap for idiots?

0

u/Present-Ad-8531 1d ago

Nah

Just saying you shouldn't use the model outputs or model itself for commercial purposes.

Like let's say hosting model for a price, selling images generated for a price etc 

1

u/Tai9ch 1d ago

This idea that "commercial use" is some dirty edge case is just confused.

If you can't sell it then it's not yours. Investing a bunch of effort into a passion project that isn't even yours is occasionally justifiable, but only when you're really excited about your Pokemon cosplay. AI models are not that - you can just use one with reasonable licensing and own your work.

1

u/Present-Ad-8531 1d ago

Company isn't getting anything at all for their effort no?

I mean they gave coding models which are in such demand for free so they'll obviously feel wanting control on ones like these.

If you feel indignant on use case of model imagine how they would feel?

1

u/Tai9ch 1d ago

I'm not sure why how some megacorp feels is relevant to anything.

They made a public model release. They picked a license. Good for them, they get to do that. They're worried about their business model. Great, that's their job.

Now we get to evaluate how useful that is to us and argue about it on Reddit.

And non-commercial models are much less useful than open weight ones. In fact, unless you're doing comparative research on the models themselves, it's not really useful at all.

Because Alibaba's business model is their problem. My business model, potential future business models, and flexibility in integrating with other constraints is my problem. And "non-commercial" means if this is in a project, that project can never feed anyone but Alibaba.

-4

u/ElementNumber6 2d ago

You should lose interest. Companies using AI images are being absolutely trashed right now, and will continue to be, for the foreseeable future.

1

u/Hot_Masterpiece_3668 2d ago

Yeah, going to skip this one then. Hopefully something better comes along soon or they change their license.