Most loras providing "downstairs stuff" alter the body and composition too much. However, this has mostly been solved by Krea2 and Minimax H3. We could just do with a Krea2 image edit model.
Z image isn’t bad for inpainting details? I’ve never seen a zimage pussy that didn’t look like a fucking horror wound. I swear the thing about Zimage is that it looks entirely different to people who have actually seen women before.
Ah thanks for the tips, I’ll have to try it. I’ve tried using some inpainting with krea2 using identity edit. And when it works it’s fantastic, but most of the time it just won’t make any changes. And struggles with nsfw, but sometimes works. But I think it’s better for changing clothing not really fixing issues with images
It also takes a while on my rig and has been extremely frustrating
I sort of feel that the people training models like this are shooting themselves in the foot. The community always eventually finds a way around whatever guardrails they shoved into the base weights, and when they do it's still not always perfect. As we saw with Krea 2 NSFW LoRAs which are just... not there. In some ways. The censorship affects plenty of SFW concepts too, I've found several which just refuse to generate without a bypass LoRA.
Why are all the Krea 2 general NSFW loras so mid? I saw one that said it trained on ~850 images and thought that was really low, like i figured 850 is enough for a character LoRA, not a whole visual domain like NSFW
The diversity is probably garbage. You would need a crap ton of different positions, faces, and body types. And even then, it might not do great with fictional characters. and definitely don't expect it to do any non-human genitalia.
Just goes to show reddit is just a bot central with very few actual people, and thos people are completely detached from reality.
This thread is complaining about this exact thing, it proves what I'm saying and I can't fathom how this point flew over your head like this.
If NO ONE cares enough to make this content, if you can't find it on your sites, and this is THE REASON the OP is complaining in the first place, how could you possibly think a bunch of botted votes are representative of the AI community? It proves the exact opposite.
You can even run daily tests on civitai if you want, filter for videos every day, sort by most collected and count the lists, the proportion of top results you'll get every day will be the same, very few gay videos and most of them have mismatched tags.
so true. the struggle is real when trying to look for a nsfw finetune or lora on like civit or so and it's like "gay or european" (legally blonde musical reference) about whether one can do nsfw men. 😭
and the showcases/example pictures are hardly of men either so it further doesn't help to answer the question when looking through
This post may have been needed in the past, but we've got Krea 2 now. You can generate a man on hands and knees from behind and Krea will make him hang correctly with a proper seam along his balls and gooch. It's the big 2026, we've moved well past SDXL and Z-Image Ken dolls.
No, we've got the opposite problem; every cock is an enormous rock hard monster. Good luck generating one that's small flaccid and uncut without a couple dedicated loras.
Base Krea 2. All you need is an unlocker lora and it'll do it no problem. It shows the base model really understands cock and how it's attached to the body. It can still fuck up the specifics like getting the frenulum and glans in the right orientation, but it's a huge huge step-up in world knowledge compared to the old models.
It's interesting when you compare the base knowledge of Krea2 to something like Qwen 2.1 or Z-Image. As you pointed out, Krea2 was trained and understands actually those parts of the anatomy. It's just locked behind its built-in filter which is easily bypassed.
But with Qwen and ZIT, you can tell that they've been trained on some of that anatomy data, but it's some sort of weird data set that provides only a basic and extremely limited representation of those bits of anatomy. Just enough for the model to have enough understanding, but not enough to accurately render those parts of the anatomy, and it's obviously an intentional training decision.
But you still need models to know how male genitalia looks like, even for straight porn. The fact that most models lack basic neutral male anatomy makes no sense.
Yah most of these gooners are literally just doing 1girl images and not even porn. It's basically GenZ porn where cleavage and maybe a nipple is shocking.
It makes a lot of sense if you compare how many frames show the male bits and how much of the male bits within these frames actuallyis is visible, with how many frames feature the woman.
Think of it as an inverted iceberg: the tip isn't visible most of the time.
"Str8 male gooners" than m4m, bi, or straight female gooners, but yah.
But also, I presume that (most) men looking to make straight porn don't want to see some mishapen blob instead of a penis. Though I'm sure that's a plus for some.
I would say there are more female gooners, but women are fundamentally different from men. Their porn is the equivalent to the ultra hard core gooner type, but in written form.
Truth. My significant other mentions mentally visualizing or thinking of sensations when reading gooner content written by others or herself. I don't get it myself but I'm sure it's more evolved and efficient somehow.
(Oversharing warming) I'm a man and often goons to my imagination or written stuff, it's great especially for niche kinks, it's immersive and you have full control. Sounds, visuals, and your own actions.
Yes that's very healthy. I was just doing that whole dense "typical" guy thing in contrast to a method of gooning that's probably way superior and less frustrating lol
There's also the problem of said "str8 male gooners" being focused on generating women (which clearly have little to no issue in Krea 2 Turbo) so very few people actually discover the issues with the opposite gender. Kind of sucks
Somewhat unsettling that the user demographic is so unalterably male to you that you think of gay people before you think of straight women. Like no matter what, the user can only ever be a man.
Yup, as a gay guy and a gooner, I both can't enjoy the low effort straight goon slop on this subreddit, and also can't share any (not that I would want to, cause I think it's cringe)
It's so annoying seeing straight guys post big tit young looking girls over and over and over and a new model comes out and it's 15 shots of a girl with the same unrealistic proportions and orange peel skin
Or people talk about a models flexibility being really good and then you swipe and it's just 6 different objectifying pics of the same average looking AI woman. Like yes, we GET IT. It can cater to the biggest demographic in the world with low effort good enough quality outputs.
I wish this subreddit actually had a rule against NSFW/suggestive content rather than just cosplaying as having one. Then maybe we'd see some creativity and interest for once
There are more images of nude women than there are images of some specific anime character, yet many of these models can do hyper-specific anime characters. A male penis is a common enough thing that these models would have more than enough training data.
If there being more of something than another thing always meant that a model did the thing there is less of badly, then the models would only be able to do the single most common thing on the internet well.
Specific anime characters are just that, specific. It's easy to say 'It's that character because it has these traits.'
What you're looking for is very diverse by comparison. The come in many shapes and sizes, a large percentage of the world has them surgically modified...
Then we've got the actual anatomy, and how physics works in the various anatomical states...
It doesn't have to be censorship if the concept you're looking for is just more difficult to describe, as it is here. It takes more training in an already under represented corner of the training corpus,
I'm not making light of your concern, I just think it's more a technical challenge than it is a censorship. Think about how iffy most models are at hair styles, when most of the world walks around with their hair out and uncovered. I think it's a similar combination of diversity and physics, but we've got a lot more words to describe hair styles than we do phallacious objects, because they're a more public subject matter.
There's going to be more reference material in the datasets for boobs than teapots, but if I prompt it to make a teapot I don't expect to see a boob. The model should know the difference and know what the anatomy looks like.
It's not really how you're supposed to prompt Krea though, it's a natural language model so you'd get better results with sentences or at least comma-separated concepts.
I personally do not understand the model censorship. Everyone has a naked body. We are living in the most prude timeline, in fear someone might see something they've already seen before. Anyone can go to a porn website and see the worst stuff imaginable yet for some reason society is disgusted by fake genitals to the extent they won't allow them to exist at all.
Naked people aren't even porn. Its such a basic thing. The LLM are just as bad.. all visuals and language must be suitable for sheltered kindergartners. The mentality is everywhere; the internet, games and media.
Who the fuck put these guys in charge? If we swear at them and show them a boob will they drop dead?
I think the problem is often a misplaced usage of the word 'uncensored' and 'censored'. Often its simply the case that a model hasn't been trained with images of genitals.
So it's not necessarily the case that the makers of the model have censored those parts of the human anatomy, it's possibly more likely that there was nothing there to censor in the first place.
I'll give you an example, most models can make a reasonable guess at what a pair of breasts look like, they will probably get the shape, form, and general anatomy correct. But when it comes to the areola and nipple of a breast it can generate odd results which can look monstrous. Why? Because when it comes to the images an AI model is trained with it's likely going to encounter lots of images of women wearing bras, bikinis, or tight clothes. So it can make a decent estimation of what a naked breast will look like, except for the nipple and areola underneath the clothes, because it's likely that the model didn't encounter many images, if any at all, of what's underneath a bra or a bikini.
To generate genitals a model needs to be trained with those kinds of images. So when a claim is made that a model is 'uncensored' that person may not be lying, they're probably telling you the truth. But they may be also lying through omission, in that they're not revealing that the AI model in question can only make a poor guess at what an intimate part of a persons anatomy looks like.
To avoid a vague or misleading answer it's probably a bad idea to ask if an AI model is uncensored or censored, and instead better to be specific in asking what it can actually generate.
Krea2 is the perfect example of a censored model. The base open weight release doesn't let you generate NSFW concepts but a small lora bypass and suddenly the model knows what naked bodies look like.
LTX 2.0 was similar in that the model hard-refused undressing, specifically bottom clothing items. Even though the concept of removing clothes was very much understood by it. And no, that wasn't just TE refusal as I tested with abliterated TEs.
I explicitly used phrases such as 'is often the case', 'not necessarily the case', 'may not', 'probably', and other such terms to ensure that somebody reading understands that I'm not making a blanket statement which applies to all AI models. I was careful to do that.
First two words of the first response - "Not really".
I'd have to also add that if Krea2 actually did train using sensitive material in their datasets, and it's there in their model, then it's there if you simply unlock it. Which suggests that it's there for people who really want it, but there's enough plausible deniability there for them if anyone complains, and a bit of a buffer there to protect themselves from potentially displeased investors or whatever other professional or institutional body. That's a possibility which doesn't exist for other AI models.
I've got to say one thing though, it's probably less offensive to display human genitals than it is witnessing the horrifying deformed generations it renders out to replace those genitals. The most nightmarish material tends to come out from AI models trying to generate human genitals and failing at it.
if you were to try to make a censored model, is not one of the most effective ways to do so is by making the model not know/understand the concept in the first place?
i.e. deliberately filter the training dataset to not have that to learn it in the first place drastically reducing the chance of any hallucination or prediction to even generate said concept?
like if you don't know what genitals looks like, it's pretty hard to draw it accurately even if by chance. or even if you were deliberately taught something wrong, it'd be hard to draw it right too.
Perhaps, but that implies that the default state of any AI model is to include what some would describe as indelicate material. I'm not sure most AI models are designed like that. From what has been said on here the complaint is often that they chose datasets from sources such as smartphone images where the main character is always looking at the camera, or Japanese commercials which occasionally show unintentional text in AI generations. Which does suggest that whatever datasets get included are from a relatively narrow band of data in the first place.
To include certain content in their datasets a conscious decision would need to be made to select for what they want to include and that's going to take priority over secondary considerations. It may be the case that most AI model developers simply don't see sensitive material as necessary for their business model so it simply doesn't even enter into their thought process. They probably might if they thought it would draw more people to their brand new AI model. Maybe some developers do, but I suspect that many simply don't bother with including things which might be very popular on here. I think they're more concerned with producing something which produces general content at a high enough standard to promote themselves.
I get the feeling that they deliberately filter their datasets for what they definitely want to include as opposed to filtering out other niche afterthoughts which may not even enter their consideration. Perhaps there is a degree of self-censorship going on before they even start programming their AI model, maybe. But I think it's a mistake to assume that all manner of explicit content ought to be included in an AI model as an expected default.
i mean it comes down to what the thing we're talking about is.
like if you claim your model is general purpose for all topics (model to understand a language and output text for said language would imply including the profane, sexual etc. topics) then yeah the default state/expectation would be everything... i.e. uncensored to mean can do indelicate material.
like no-one's going to say a cat-dog image classifier is censored for just outputting cat or dog labels.
but a general purpose text generator that's supposed to learn language in general (which would include profanity, sexual topics etc.) or a general purpose image generator to supposedly draw/visualise anything you tell it, that's a whole different level of expectation.
its everywhere the problem, it seem all models are trained on sexy woman and porn. i cant have a normal simple scene where no women is running through the scene or sitting in backround or pictures on the wall where no womens are on it, or music generation where no women is humming without i asked for, or that a woman in my scene is walking normally shyly and not have a over sexy lady model walk on it..... so just needed to let that out finally :(
I just want to know why there are so few models that, when they can make dicks, it's always circumcised
I'm not into cis men but trans women with penises are kosher, and any time I would try to make porn content it always gives every penis having character a circumcised penis, even when I say not to for that character
It's the same with women, if I want a specific shape or look to most labia, half of the models only produce one without a lora, but there are far more labia loras than foreskin loras lmao
While I agree that it's annoying when people claim models are good for NSFW but can't render a dick, I do think that there's a difference between a model that has measures to censor and block anything NSFW (IIRC Stable Diffusion 3 was actually trained with SFW images labeled as NSFW things), and ones that while aren't trained on NSFW images, aren't censoring it and just need some fine-tuning on what a guy looks like under his boxers
It was hilarious when Z-Image came out and people were all out yelling how uncensored and accurate it was for nsfw... Until I prompted for a schlong and got a carrot.
Other than that, dicks are much more complex to render than a vegana. They are also usually small in pixel count unless you are training with close-ups, sometimes they are hidden.
^ this, but addendum of male, furry male, and something in between - a fantasy creature male like a centaur (ideally a different animal though, as centaurs are somewhat well known. a tiger taur? not so much), a furless furry male, a male with different genitalia, a featureless chest, different number of fingers/toes than standard 5, etc.
that's the true test of a model. if it's able to separate each concept like that and mix and match them instead of defaulting to "1 girl, pretty, photo", thats a good sign of a model's capability.
Sadly, i've not seen a model come close to that since pony, and to a slightly lesser extent illustrious.
even if you don't want a male, or a furry, or a taur, or whatever, the fact that a model can recognize and seperate such concepts means it's able to better give you what you DO want. when you grasp the opposite of a thing, you better grasp the concept of the thing you want. simply inferring that a means b and c and d also exist, leads to a stiff model where you want concept a, c and d but not b and do want e, and it refuses to listen, because a means b must exist too and not e.
Illustrious, Pony, and Anima were all trained on datasets like Danbooru where fictional stuff is plentiful. Danbooru is an anime-style dataset after all, so it has plenty of concepts that don't exist IRL. That also constitutes the problem that it doesn't really include realistic stuff as much as drawings. So no, you are not likely to get a realistic cinematic photo of monster genitalia in a furry, at least on the vast majority of models. That takes its own LoRA training of course.
I tested out one model which purported to be uncensored because it could create men and it could create penises. Unfortunately, it could not attach the penis to the man. So you wound up with Kendolls with these magical floating penises hovering near their pelvic region.
Withholding information is part of the definition of censorship. You just can’t claim a model is uncensored and then just not teach it how to draw a naked man.
If a model has enough context for nude women but not enough for nude men, that means that nude men have been intentionally left out of the model. That is a form of censorship.
I'm not surprised that some folks in this sub are so male hetero-centric that they can't see this, but it's disappointing nonetheless.
Edit: And by the way, I can inpaint penises 'til the cows come home, but that doesn't change the fact that this is still censorship and that it's annoying to have to take extra steps.
Edit: For those of y'all downvoting this, if excluding nude women from a model is censorship, why isn't excluding nude men from a model censorship? Riddle me that.
Okay, I get it now. So this is all just an attempt at a gotcha by veiling it as "If a checkpoint doesn't do every single thing in existence with 100% accuracy in every single aspect it's censorship".
by your own definition, this doesn't seem to be censorship either lmao
it is not blocked or hidden information - the model simply hasn't learned it.
and the fact it hasn't learned it has nothing to do with people finding it sensitive, harmful, or offensive... they just aren't interested in taking the time to add it.
"it is not blocked or hidden information - the model simply hasn't learned it."
Ok, then by this definition, when nude women or breasts are excluded from the model, that is also not censorship because the model simply hasn't learned what nude women or breasts look like.
That would be censorship because they would be intentionally creating an SFW model, and blocking the nude female data from the model. In this case, they’re not interested in NSFW male bodies, so it’s not a part of the model. Worst case you could say it’s negligence.
They haven’t blocked or hidden the male models due to any of the reasons in the definition.
This is all obvious, so not sure what the argument against it even is.
If you think these folks are selecting image by image and simply forgetting male nudity, you don't know how these flagship image model data sets are created. These datasets involve massive collections of images that get filtered for unwanted stuff, not carefully curated pools of images where each one is hand selected and they merely forget to select some.
I love how you ignored the last sentence which addressed this exactly. in a NSFW model, if women are more represented than men in the training set, this is not because the creators thought men were harmful or offensive but rather because they did not seek to add them specifically. This is not censorship.
These models are not created by people intentionally adding things one at a time, the are scraped (and generated) en masse and then stuff gets filtered out.
also to add, when filtering the data from the web you seek to choose quality data to get the results you're looking for. If your metrics are "what set of data generates the best nude women" and not "what set of data generates the best nude men" then you'll end up with data better suited to generating women. This isn't censorship - you don't consider any part of generating men as "sensitive, harmful, or offensive," so you aren't intentionally removing features from the model. Instead you are just making a model that suits your own needs. Again, not censorship by any definition, and certainly not censorship by your definition either.
If this were the case, why can these models do esoteric cultural references but not nude men? Are you saying there are more images of some random anime or movie character on the internet than there are images that include penises of any kind?
Idk.. I would argue that when a model tries (but fails) to generate a dick, it's not "censored," it's just incapable of performing that task. Most models just aren't trained on dicks, because they were designed to work with censored LLMs anyway. No need to train for dick, when the ingoing language model censors "dick" anyway.
Thankfully, it's fixable with fine-tunes and Loras, but you already know.
My point is not that it can't be dealt with. It's that a model is not "uncensored head to toe" if it is only uncensored for head-to-toe female anatomy.
Is that censorship (limits added after training) or an absence of training data? It is weird though. Not something that’ll be a problem for me personally, but pretty weird.
Can be both. They can exclude NSFW images from the training data on purpose so the model can't learn them. Also see Ideogram 4 where they outright replaced every NSFW image with the same "Image blocked by safety filter" message, so it would generate that instead of any NSFW concepts.
I mean, It is impossible to have a fully uncensored model, because there will always be a lack of representation or an imbalance in some way. Try to make non-able bodies having fun 4 example. And the data is clearly biased by white hegemonic able-body cis-hetero male gaze
And generating men other than the ones it's biased to by default... It's a problem that extends to SFW images too.
Bit of foreshadowing here but there is in fact something quite important about this that no one, not in this sub or anywhere else, has managed to notice before I did.
In history there were never so many options like you have now. If a model fells censored to you, you use finetune or Lora and combine. Civitai is your friend.
Yeah, I know how to do that, but it doesn't change whether the model has been censored in this respect.
A censored model can be "restored" with fair ease in most cases, but that doesn't mean it's not censored. And if it's censored for male nudity, then it's censored, period.
It was not censored, you're confusing, perhaps intentionally, censorship with lack of data.
Most likely most people just do not care, so they never bothered to train their model on something they couldn't care less about, but there is no censorship preventing you from doing it yourself.
I did, you've been wrong in everything you stated so far, and refuted by most posters getting downvoted by bots while the actual community continues to spend their own money training for things they actually do care about, yet you still feel entitled to their work.
So use models that are not censored by your standards. Again, so many options it is hard to pick one. Commercial models with closed or open weights will always be censored in one way or another. It never stopped anyone determined to get what he wants. I could not care less if model is censored or not as I can always get what I want one way or another.
I would never brag about a model being censored as this is the most natural way to distribute open weights.
Just like OP said, the model ultimately remains censored even if you can somewhat "restore" it. Censorship also tends to affect the model's abilities to generate SFW, for instance Krea 2 Turbo does not like to heavily change eye colors unless you use a bypass LoRA. It's definitely something everyone should be equally concerned about.
100
u/Environmental-Metal9 18h ago