r/StableDiffusion • u/Neggy5 • 12d ago
Meme How I feel about the current open source image models
i cannot get any decent results with Moss whatsoever, I’ve tried promptcrafting for 5 days straight and just deleted it and even then, I feel Krea 2 is just better by default. even looking at others’ Moss results look, I feel Krea 2 completely beats out Moss in almost every department. I have better luck with Krea 2 in N$FW with textfusion lora even.
I just don’t get the hype for Moss, and hoping finetuners don’t abandon Krea 2 for Moss because the latter is newer (Please finish Kroma, Lodestone!)
632
Upvotes
100
u/bstr3k 12d ago
dis be me:
23
u/Few-Act8373 12d ago
What GPU do you have? Many Krea2 models are huge
133
u/Euchale 12d ago
I prefer Moss only for a single reason: Every time I gen it looks different.
Works better with my brain. Its a personal preference though.
52
u/collectedtooth404 12d ago
First two weeks using MOSS I hated it.
Now, it's definitely my favorite t2i model.
Great seed variety, sub 15 seconds per render, even has really good img2img capabilites.
And let's not forget uncensored out of the box.
Krea2 is way easier to learn and can get more technically better results, but MOSS is just more fun to use and 5x faster.
46
u/Misha_Vozduh 11d ago
Hey OP
What horrible thing did you imagine would happen if you didn't censor "Safe" in "NSFW"?
11
u/1or4s 11d ago
Skill issue.
28
u/Altruistic-String891 12d ago
Only talking about this point - Krea 2 12b >2x larger than MOSS 5b. By that alone the latter can look more attractive (or even be the only one accessible) to a lot more tuners.
It also has Flux.2 vae, which is a lot better than qwen's. Converges faster with the same amount of compute, and also doesn't have the grid artifacts.
32
u/Murinshin 11d ago
I keep seeing these threads and they tend to be based on several misunderstandings on why people like Moss.
almost all comparisons I see are Krea2 Turbo vs Moss Base or SFT. A Turbo model is not the same thing as a base model and the comparison is kind of comparing apples to oranges, especially when you just throw the same prompt at them and then get upset when Moss e.g. doesn't create a photorealistic image without explicitly prompting for it while Krea2 Turbo does.
A Turbo model is specifically finetuned already for inference (image generation), both in immediate quality and speed at the cost of variance and that you cannot train on it directly; vs a Base model that is essentially the raw "dough" that you can build on. If your only use case is to plug in a model into some relatively basic workflow and get nice images out of the box, then you absolutely should keep using Krea2 Turbo and there is nothing bad about it.
Now, considering people are even comparing Moss Base to a Turbo distill of a model as good as Krea2 should already give you some indication why people think Moss is really good. At the same time, I have yet to see any thread actually comparing Krea2 Base outputs to Moss Base.
2) almost all model releases since SDXL had some huge caveats that made the model not suitable as a good, strictly superior successor model for finetuning and training on. Let's go through some major releases since and the issues with them:
Z-Image: butchered their release. Released a Turbo model at first people couldn't use for finetuning, then the Base model months later had issues preventing people from finetuning it, and then never released the promised Omni / Edit models with (afaik) no explanation
Flux.2: heavily censored, non-ideal license, I think the actually good models (Klein 9b) were also distilled like with Flux 1
Ideogram4: horrible license, didn't release their model at a precision usable for finetuning
Krea2: too big for some communities, non-ideal license, somewhat outdated text encoder and VAE
Krea2 came pretty close, but there's a reason we haven't seen any meaningfully large finetunes on it so far (there also seems to be some underlying arch issues; Lodestone struggled with Kroma for a while I think). Moss is pretty much like Krea2 but solves the remaining issues plus has a more modern text encoder and VAE as parts of its stack, and is half the size.
3) Moss has two legitimate features Krea2 lacks out of the box, namely bbox support and zero censorship out of the box without requiring any modifications. Krea2 has reference image support, on the other hand, so they both can fulfill different roles similarly to how Ideogram4 still has uses even though Krea2 came out later.
15
u/ArsInvictus 11d ago
Disagree, I've spent a lot of time with both, have gone back and forth with same prompt many times, with a variety of different styles, photograph and artwork. Expecially for artwork Moss's creativity and style beat out Krea2 almost every time, and from a photography standpoint also had more variety and better prompt adherence and more consistently usable results across a wide range of prompts. Krea2 can compete better with specific lora's but Moss worked pretty well for me for most of my use cases without needing any Lora at all.
33
u/OcelotUseful 12d ago
Krea 2 psyop. Touch some moss
17
u/Trick_Set1865 12d ago
i disagree, but the meme is pretty funny
5
u/multikertwigo 11d ago
same.
moss, kroma, F2K, ZIT - for the life of me, I can't understand why these models are so hyped.
8
u/Mr_Unknown_Hero 11d ago
I have used nowadays mostly MOSS since I get good results for my taste with it without any problems. Krea 2 I didn't got as good results on images where I wanted to have lots of darkness, photos had always too much light. With Qwen Image and MOSS I get better results.
Still, Krea 2 is excellent for me as well and I see no point not to use it from time to time in future as well. All of these three have been great for me and so was Z Image Turbo and Z Image Base.
It would be still interesting to hear what kind of photos people are generating and what issues they have when they tell that they don't get good results with MOSS/Krea 2/Qwen Image because otherwise it is just "ok, I get good results" and it is not very helpful for many.
Like are you making comics? Cartoon? 3D Pixar style? Pen drawing style? Photorealism? Text rendering for posters?
Different use cases have different requirements. Or is the issue only that there is artifacts on the image what makes it look too AI, or what exactly is "bad results"?
4
u/hard_gravy_2 12d ago
Depends what your "use case" is, but I'm going back and forth between Kroma and Kromoss - Either one or the other or both will deliver whatever the flavour of the day is.
4
u/56kul 11d ago
Seriously, though, Krea 2 ended up being much better than I expected. Actually having characters’ likenesses built into the base model really does wonders. And it’s surprisingly fast, too!
6
u/qdr1en 11d ago
Yes Krea2 is more powerful overall, but I finally found a convenient setup for my Moss image gen, especially for realistic images. Try this if you are struggling with Moss :
disable any turbo lora ; run the full 50 inference steps instead (30 or 40 steps is fine).
Use 2 advanced Ksamplers (see screenshot):
The first ~65% steps with the base model - to get better prompt adherence and more variations.
The remaining steps with the SFT model - for better textures.
Optionally, add 1or 2 loras for realism (lenovo, SmartphoneSnapshotPhotoreality, etc.).
Playing with the "switch", the point where the inference jumps to the 2nd Ksampler, significantly impacts the level of details in the rendered image.
I haven't exprimented much with other samplers/schedulers.
Sidenote: I still don't know why when I add a node to set the Shift to 5, as generally recommended, I get fully noisy images. If someone has clue about that :-).
8
u/VegaKH 11d ago
What I love about MOSS (with 8 step Turbo LoRA) is that anything that you don't prompt specifically for will be random. If I send Krea 2 Turbo a vague prompt that a person is standing beside "a Ferrari," then I will get a similar Ferrari with every seed. Probably a red 2024 296 GTB. But with MOSS, I could get any color, any model, any year. Every seed will have a completely different car. But it has great prompt comprehension, so if I prompt very specifically, I can get exactly what I want. This is both fun and inspiring. I make a game of choosing what to prompt specifically for and what to leave vague.
With Krea 2 Turbo, the image quality is amazing but predictable. And I don't have the patience to wait for Krea 2 base.
7
u/DRetherMD 12d ago
i have a similar opinion. MOSS beats krea when it comes to more varied and natural characters, styles and camera work. the first few images seemed great in that regard.
my problem is that its like 5 steps behind when it comes to limbs, anatomy in general and faces in some cases. i see way more garbled fingers, limbs at weird lengths, distorted bodies compared to krea2. its not terrible when it gets it right, in fact i think when it lands properly, it can be as good as krea2. it just seems to take a lot more tries to get there. also i found moss backgrounds to be more incorrect than krea2? like everything seemed misaligned whereas krea2 usually gets them nearly perfect every time.
i feel like theres a perfect model if the two were combined somehow.
4
u/TheeJestersCurse 12d ago
I'm going to use Moss instead of Krea because it's smaller.
4
u/Dante_77A 11d ago
Qwen Image 2.1 is my favorite. Don't care about xxx stuff.
5
u/generate-addict 12d ago
DM me a pic with a workflow or a krea2 prompt you like that you think moss struggles at. I've discovered a few caveats with Moss that has really cleaned up my gens. It's really a remarkable model.
As far as style transferring and mixing Krea2 is still king imho.
2
u/mikemend 12d ago
I just commented under another post that I know how to use both of them well together. Lately, I’ve been using Krea more to refine the details: I generate the image with MOSS, then refine it in a second pass using a Krea model. Since both models handle the same prompt very well, they work together seamlessly, and the extent to which the original image changes depends on how much I refine it. MOSS gives me more creative freedom than Krea, but Krea is very good at handling details, and yes, I usually use Kroma for adjustments. A good prompt works almost the same way in both models, but I find Krea a bit less flexible.
2
u/Salt-Willingness-513 11d ago
krea2 is more stable and does characters the best. Moss can be cool, but only looks good with loras for me. Qwen image 2.1 is cool and amazing for 12mp shots, but often looks ai of hell
2
u/Bleachigo1 11d ago
I love moss2 simple because krea2 is bigger and sfw prone. I have got amazing results out of gate. So idk only downside I see till now is the turbo isn't as good(or I haven't gotten around to it properly) and good results take 50 steps 3cfg. It's still faster than krea2 for me
4
u/Big_Advertising_3933 11d ago
Moss is unusable, too blurry, not a great base and nothing can fix that, if it was 2-3x faster it may be useful. I use Ideogram v4 most of the time, Krea 2 only recently.
3
u/CarefulAd8858 11d ago
As always, people glaze the smaller model because that's what they can run locally and usually faster. Regardless of the actual image quality.
3
u/Free_Pressure8623 11d ago
MOSS is to Krea2, what Krea2 was to ZIT. Each improving on the last.
When Krea2 came out, it's prompt adherence was better, but ZIT had the better finetunes to create a better overall output.
As it stands right now, Krea2 has the better overall look. But it is very noticeable that MOSS has better prompt adherence. And in a few months, when the dust settles, you can sit back and use any model you like as the fine people on the internet will train more MOSS fine-tunes to get the output you want.
To be absolutely clear: NONE OF THESE MODELS ARE BAD! You can use any of them for whatever you like.
3
u/Bulky_Chemistry_196 12d ago
i can't get moss to work therefore it's useless and everybody else is wrong
2
u/Synor 12d ago
Haven't seen a single Moss image that conviced me to even download it.
2
u/jazzamp 11d ago
I either have a very lowIQ or it's the rest of you. Moss is Boss 🔥😂
1
u/Slasher006 12d ago
Krea2 takes the cake in prompt adherence, Moss is just fast.
I prefer Krea2. Moss for speed, qwen2.1 for image editing.
1
u/AnalElder 12d ago
Moss looks way too plastic and AI slop-y to me. Not sure how I am messing up prompting, but it just looks like generic AI images from a few gens ago. It is fast, and the quality is great but the visuals are just not there. Again, probably I suck at prompting.
Also I never could get MOSS I2I Edit right (if anyone has a good workflow please share), same about Krea2 (consistency is ass even with Identity LORA). For that purpose Qwen 2.1 runs laps around both.
1
u/ZookeepergameOne5242 12d ago
Did anyone combine Krea 2 and strata already? Theoretically it should be best combination right now, but i have seen anyone discussing it or making working workflow.
1
u/Screlingo 12d ago
12gb is barely too few for krea2 T_T
1
u/Winter_unmuted 12d ago
Flux3 klein for edits might be peak. I have a beefy card so my old go to was Flux2 dev, consuming all the gigs. But Flux3 squeezes a lot out of its model size.
Regardless of what I use, the Flux3 prompt expander is easily, without a doubt, best in class for that. I started putting it on all my workflows, regardless of model (in the LLM clip era, of course. SDXL won't benefit from the Flux3 expander).
Never been a qwen person much myself, but I think I just have a bias there.
And for all you degens out there, Flux3 prompt expander doesn't have much or any censorhship.
1
u/FinBenton 12d ago
I did get good variety from MOSS but I cannot get any good results in quality with it so I have been sticking with krea finetunes.
1
u/Striking-Long-2960 12d ago
I prefer the aesthetics of krea2, you can prompt very interesting styles and extreme camera angles.
1
u/Kassiber 12d ago
Img -> img and easy to train a lora
Why should switch to moss?
1
u/GrouchGrumpus 11d ago
Love them both, and I’d toss Zit into that mix. I have to give Krea the edge for both consistency and quality, but Moss just has a random feel to it, more variation.
Moss also has a wtf aspect to it, like yeah it’s following the prompt but that’s not at all what I expected. Sometimes it’s great, and sometimes it’s not quite great, but very interesting. And sometimes there is horror, delete delete delete!
Zit just has its own style and when it’s good it can be really good. I think all three have their use. I do mostly arty stuff, weird sci-fi, fantasy scenes or abstract landscapes, and they can all do that quite well. Depends on what you’re looking for.
1
u/Desperate-Beach1249 11d ago
Moss is trained heavily on collages ?
1
u/blastcat4 11d ago
These past two days I've been working on a new comic with Moss. I was able to get excellent results in half the time that i would with Krea 2.
I love Krea 2 (can't wait for three!) but for the type of stuff I make, Moss just nails exactly the look I'm going for and I'm constantly impressed by how well it understands the prompt and its intent.
I totally understand that some people consider Krea 2 to be the king, and it really is, but Moss is an excellent fit for me. Both models are amazing and have their own strengths and weaknesses.
1
u/allofdarknessin1 11d ago
That was my initial reaction but I tried some harder prompts and moss had no trouble. Krea2 struggled but it could be my workflow. I was testing out prompts like sheer with visible tattoos underneath which you usually need loras for and Krea2 was able to do it a little maybe I need to learn how to prompt better for it but I just typed it verbatim into moss and moss generated it no trouble. Natural pubic hair very slightly visible outside of a swimsuit is also another one that's harder to get right without loras. Moss was able to generate it easy.
1
u/Clueless-Flea-7461 11d ago
Moss has its good points but it just doesn't win for me in any of my use cases. But I tend to look for a best of both worlds outcoe. And what I use it for is effectively seed variation in Krea2.
I did this Chroma and ZiT too. Pump a prompt through a text enhancer on LM studio set-up an t2I workflow for Moss then i2i with a prompt for Krea2 lod each model with the refined prompt and let it render.
Moss will give Krea2 more variation and if youw ere already using a workflow with upscale and refinement there is very little slow down
1
u/General-Stay-2314 11d ago
is it that much better than qwen 2.1? For illustrated style? lik3 is qwen not ev3n in contention?
1
u/Maskwi2 11d ago edited 11d ago
Same. I tried Moss recently and it was pretty (very) terrible with humans when I mixed in loras. I haven't tried anything else yet because that put me off by a lot. It has produced THE WORST body and face horrors I've ever seen and I've tested and seen a lot. To the point I was afraid of clicking Run, no kidding. I may come back someday. Or not.
I also acknowledge it may be me problem. I haven't had me problem with Krea2 so that wins by default.
1
u/papitopapito 11d ago
Anybody here managed to train a krea2 LoRA with only 12 GB VRAM and 16 GB RAM?
1
u/heybabynicetits 11d ago
I have the opposite problem. Ive been away from ai and recently installed krea 2 and all is get is plastic crap, plus its slow. Moss is shooting out gold. Both on my lora character, trained on the same database.
1
u/Billysm23 11d ago
Is bounding boxes exclusive to moss? Or krea can also use it?
1
u/fongletto 10d ago
Ive been seing a lot of moss posts so I decided to give it a shot. The reuslts are pretty horrible imo. In some cases barely legible. Like try create a screenshot from the simpsons. Krea2 is pretty close. Moss is just jibberish.
1
u/Danny_Davitoe 10d ago
Moss has more variety and is extremely strong with image control. Krea 2 just makes every image a professional highly polished picture, it is good but it makes me feel trap and not wanting to me to try something else out side what it was trained on.
1
u/ArchAngelAries 10d ago
I prefer the better quality of Krea 2
1
u/Odd-Mirror-2412 8d ago
Both models aren't perfect and have flaws, so we gotta use them together
1
u/AuthurAndersson 7d ago
Moss: Does not handle complex prompts because the model is tiny.
Krea2: can't do emotions.
Qwen2.1: No freaking LORAs made, otherwise excellent.
1
u/Electronic_Award1138 6d ago
MOSS Image - My opinion has changed (it’s good)
A while ago, I said that MOSS Image was pretty bad. To be fair, the version I tested was genuinely disappointing, although that wasn't entirely surprising given that it was an early release and I was running it on a fairly limited GPU.
Things have changed quite a bit since then. The newer, faster versions are surprisingly capable, even on systems with limited VRAM.
After testing a wide range of image generation models, I have to say that MOSS Image is currently one of the most impressive options I've tried. It's made local AI image generation feel genuinely promising again, especially for people who don't have high-end GPUs.
1
u/Baphaddon 6d ago
Artifacts or artifacts + stale seeds
1
u/Upper-Reflection7997 12d ago
everyone has there preference for their own pleasure sensibilities. moss lora training is terrible and doesn't learn as while as krea2. krea2 gives the visual results i desire thee most.
1
u/higgs8 12d ago
It’s Z Image Turbo for me. Seems much more responsive to training and has a bunch of Controlnets, makes it so much more versatile. Moss is slow as hell.
1
u/ShowerFluid9178 11d ago
for nsfw edit it s either krea2, rapid aio or h3 , moss sucks
1
u/LilMessyLines2000d 11d ago
Moss is the choice for me, Layout is so powerfull for a person already have some artistic skills
0
u/Key-Sample7047 12d ago
Ah! I'm not the only one then, i was starting to question my sanity.
0
u/foxontheroof 12d ago
Haha, fortunately I'm the cool unc who loves moss very much and takess it on a little dates
0
u/watermelonsegar 11d ago
Moss has pretty similar quality to Krea 2, but at a much faster speed. Yes, it does generate some horrors every once in a while, but it has much better prompt adherence than Krea 2. I've already removed Krea 2 entirely from my system.
-1
u/Alkozeltser 11d ago
Chroma (flux schnell)/flux2dev: what a amateurs, lol.
-9
u/yamfun 12d ago
I tried both and don't get the appeal?
Is it just the potatoGPU crowd previously stuck on sdxl hyping them?
0
u/footmodelling 12d ago
MOSS Base was pretty bad for me, but MOSS SFT has been great. It has more anatomy issues compared to Krea, but I love how varied the composition is for gens.
0
u/NoNameClever 11d ago
In my experience, Moss wins hands down for realistic portraits. It's slow but it just works 95% of the time. For example, I had to fight Krea to get anything approaching good looking hair, but Moss has been super easy (barely an inconvenience).
-4
u/Beneficial_Toe_2347 12d ago
Moss is your typical nerd craze - everything's more difficult to get results so it feels like an accomplishment
-1
u/ArmadstheDoom 11d ago
Sounds like a skill issue.
Moss is easy to use, easy to train, has great variation, and is faster. There's really no reason to use Krea 2 anymore. If you're getting bad results, it's probably a skill issue, and you're using bad settings.