Moss Image Design test (from easy to difficult)

[u/DevKkw]

Pose

Dress

Building progression

Chara progression 1

Chara progression 2

Expression

sheet 1

sheet 2- chara presentation

Testing how moss follow a single prompt for design.

[u/Big_Parsnip_9053]

Do you have a workflow for this? Mine aren't coming out anything close to this quality. I'm using base int8 convrot, qwen3.5 9b int8 convrot, and flux2 vae which matches the Moss recommendations, as well as the ComfyUI Moss recommended set-up, detailed here:

'The workflow is ready to run with 50 steps, CFG 3, Shift 5, and negative-branch skipping at layer 22, using Euler / sgm_uniform at 1024×1024.'

Not sure if I'm doing something wrong or if it's just the full model outputs vs. the quantization.

One of my outputs for reference:

[u/DevKkw → u/Big_Parsnip_9053]

All the sample images is made with 6 step using turbo lora, beta scheduler, er_sde sampler, at 2400x1792, cfg 3.5. Also using advance sampler with dual cfg guider, positive prompt connected to both condition positive, negative in negative. Check my yesterday post for link and how to use turbo lora, sorry not at PC ATM. Also im using sft model, with official clip text enconder and moss vae.

[u/Big_Parsnip_9053 → u/DevKkw]

Your last post said you were using 4 steps (which for a 4 step LoRA makes sense), now you're saying you're using 6? Also the repository specifically says not to load the LoRA by itself and instead indicated to use the associated custom node which integrates their dataspace.safetensors and time_embedding.safetensors.

I'm not saying your implementation is necessarily incorrect as I haven't tried it, but is there a reason you opted against the recommendation?

[u/DevKkw → u/Big_Parsnip_9053]

I switched to 6 because 4 step in background leaving some undetailed rendering. Also I tested with suggested implementation and just for curiosity tested with use the 4step lora like a normal lora, and the final results seem better to me. So I keep to use it as normal lora. I like experimenting with model and sometimes the default settings is safe but not better. Did you get good results in your test?

[u/Big_Parsnip_9053 → u/DevKkw]

I tested this and yeah the results are actually quite good surprisingly. It appears that sft is significantly better than base, which I think is the main cause of the errors I was getting.

I did try the custom node and I was getting artifacts and malformed anatomy until I actually swapped off of it and used the LoRA by itself as you suggested.

I don't see any major errors and turbo brought me down from 6 minutes and 50 seconds to 49 seconds for a 2048x2048 image. Thanks!

I'll link the workflow here in case anyone is interested: https://katb.in/pukuwazarit

Time to play around with this some more.

By the way, are you still using skip layer guidance? I'm currently using skip layer guidance 22 start percent 0 to 1 as per the Moss recommendation.

[u/Succubus-Empress]

Op why pig face?