Because why not, by Jupiter. Post your sketches for anons to convert into 'slick AI slop.'

General guidelines:
-Stick figures will not work well; there should be at least some body to the sketch.
-Even very basic color is much more desirable than monochrome.
-No, really, for the love of god, just lightly scribble in some color or use the paint bucket tool or something, it makes a big difference.
-Information is power. If the sketch is of a named character, say who it is, from what. If it has important elements that are not readily identifiable on inspection, say what they are.
-The more complex the original image, the less likely it is to come through the process unscathed. Text especially, and other symbolic, typographic elements die in ignominy.
-Being in /aco/, the 'no furry' rule remains in effect. (Genuinely.)
-Try to send only one request at a time.

Previous thread: >>8901387

>>8915089
Tried the freckles lora for this one, too.

>>8919976
She is up to no good with that wrench!

>>8919970 (OP)
EXCELLENTE. thx.

it's Hi Hi Puffy AmiYumi naked in the jungle https://files.catbox.moe/dp92a3.jpg

>>8919970 (OP)
BORGAR

>>8920423

It's Zoey from Total Drama https://files.catbox.moe/p5xi2e.jpg

>>8920421

>>8920136
Catastrophically, it seems to be wholly unfamiliar with panpipes.

>>8920051
I did the preprocessing on this one, but before I try it in the machine, can you tell me what the thing she has is supposed to be? I take it the darker blue curved sections around it are accoutrements of the device itself?

>>8920798
It's a realy huge gun.

>>8920051
>>8920853

>>8920798
>Catastrophically, it seems to be wholly unfamiliar with panpipes.
Oh thats fine, they look really good either way

>>8920075

>>8920147

I would just ask that her face looks more feminine, but she remains a buff chick

>>8920404

>>8921061
AMAZING job. Thx!

Requesting this pic redrawn in the show's artstyle
https://files.catbox.moe/1phlok.png

Could have a version without the bathrobe also

This is the last of my incredibly shitty sketches (or at least of those I can post on this board), and yet again feel free to laugh at my awful faces
If it ain't obvious, it's Pearl and Marina from Splatoon 2

>>8920442

>>8921874
Thought I said this in a previous thread, maybe I failed to do so, but I can't copy an artstyle based on a sample image.

Looks like it's practically the same style anyway.

>>8922345
Thanks

No headpiece needed

>>8919970 (OP)
>Because why not, by Jupiter. Post your sketches for anons to convert into 'slick AI slop.'
>
>General guidelines:
>-Stick figures will not work well; there should be at least some body to the sketch.
>-Even very basic color is much more desirable than monochrome.
>-No, really, for the love of god, just lightly scribble in some color or use the paint bucket tool or something, it makes a big difference.
>-Information is power. If the sketch is of a named character, say who it is, from what. If it has important elements that are not readily identifiable on inspection, say what they are.
>-The more complex the original image, the less likely it is to come through the process unscathed. Text especially, and other symbolic, typographic elements die in ignominy.
>-Being in /aco/, the 'no furry' rule remains in effect. (Genuinely.)
>-Try to send only one request at a time.

WTF?!

I actually started this kind of thread. The general guidelines are exactly how I wrote them!!

It actually became "a thing"?

Been a while, how's everyone been?

Can I get a double request here?
Make her Mabel Pines and keep the original's artstyle(Bigdad)

>>8920736

>>8922452
This is just another AI-generated image.

>>8922530
>It actually became "a thing"?
Hah, yes, I've been mostly keeping it going. May end soon though, I'll be a trip for a good chunk of August.

>>8921054

>>8922902
True it is another image, but it can be better with your style

>>8921326

>>8922907
Regardless, I'm certainly not going to put any effort into re-working an already AI-generated piece. Indeed, there's a lot here you've (I assume you, based on the characters) posted that aren't sketches in any meaningful sense, just slightly crude fanart. One or two like that I may do anyway, but there's indeed something very wearying about looking over a dozen+ very similar pieces.

>>8922937
That dinosaur is tripping balls.

>>8921867
Rather peculiar subject matter here!

>>8922902
>Hah, yes, I've been mostly keeping it going.
bless your soul. you made my day. I cant believe I actually became 4chan culture :D

>>8922947
Do you mind sharing what settings you use?
When I run an image through img2img, if I set the denoise strength high enough to actually change the style of the picture, it basically ignores the whole thing

>>8922947
the sausage in the clevage buns would have made for better captioning but this is still a incredible transformation!

>>8921867

>>8920736

>>8922657

>>8923225
cool, cool. is this easy to tell AI how to tweak a pic like this? appreciative but just wondering how edit works. next tweak would be sausage horizontal and a bbq fork as the tool. this is still SO MUCH BETTER. thx.

>>8923079
>Do you mind sharing what settings you use?
Sure. First I use photoshop to adjust the image to one of the standard SDXL resolutions. Then in forge, I'm using the wai-nsfw-illustrious v12 checkpoint. My standard positive style prompt is

>masterpiece, best quality, (realistic:0.7), <lora:PulenKompot-Devilhs_Style:0.5> (devilhs:0.2), <lora:MoriiMee_Gothic_Niji_Style_Illustrious_r1:0.4> <lora:Disney_Animation_v5-V7:0.5> (DISNEY_ANIMATION:0.8),

Which as you can see includes 3 loras to shift the normal style away from anime and in a direction I find more appealing. The standard negative prompt is mostly just the one recommended by the checkpoint;

>bad quality, worst quality, worst detail, sketch, monochrome, censor, artist signature, watermark, patreon, (wet:0.5),

Although I did add in that slight 'wet' negative prompt at the end, since I noticed that without it, I sometimes got little droplets on faces and chins when it didn't make sense.

As far as denoise itself, it varies considerably; once I have the image loaded up and described, I try a single generation at a couple of different denoise values, typically between .4 and .7, until I find an appropriate level where it's meaningfully improving it without losing too many details. Loss of detail in the small features like the face is often inevitable, though, so I merely accept that and tackle it later with the inpainting. Once I find that denoise level, I run packs of four generations at a time to pick one of the four I'm satisfied with, and often go through two or three 'levels' of refinement like that. Then of course comes inpainting, either of individual figures (if there's a number of small ones) or of just sections of the one person in the image, face, chest, legs, etc.

Actually, I should verify - you are DESCRIBING the image, right? Putting the appropriate tags into the img2img text prompt? If you just toss it in without giving any instructions it will indeed mutate significantly.

>>8923153
Oh, it was supposed to be a sausage! Of course, that makes much more sense in retrospect. I was rather bemused why someone would have an image of cooking a steak on breasts.

>>8923434
>>8923079
Ah, yes, forgot to mention, because I'm too tolerant of people who ignore thread suggestions, I'm frequently using the sketch tool in forge img2img, with maybe 60% opacity, to add some simple coloration to black-and-white sketches before running the first actual generation. Just basic flesh tones, hair, pick a random color to paint over the clothes. It really does work tremendously better, since the system more readily 'recognizes' the proper baseline material in the image when it's colored, and one doesn't have to have denoise as high as is needed to first INTRODUCE color to a monochrome image.

>>8923458
you do good work

>>8923559

>>8923645
Very nice. Missing the unfortunate man in the background, but still very nice.

>>8923684
He was making everything harder, and didnt bring much to the scene

>>8923694
No worries, he was meant to be just background scenery anyway

>>8923694
>>8923698
Just for future reference, is it harder to make statues?

>>8923701
depends. When they are that close to one another, it might be hard to make only one a statue

>>8923434
Thanks, I think I was trying to brute force it. Sending the result back to the img2img sounds like it makes a lot more sense. The style is pretty cool too

>>8923280
Beautiful, thank you

Can you do this one now? I can't even tell if it's AI anymore but I like the marital bliss and I think it'd fit the Pines very well.

think you can make a Sphinx?

>>8921032
I realy like those smug smiles you give the girls. Great work!

>>8920052

>>8924199
She is ZOOMING!

>>8921878

>>8923853
With the aid of a lora...sort of. There's a nice kind of serene smile in the original sketch here that sadly is not readily replicable.

Not sure how possible this is

>>8924255
is there a limit on the number of characters in a scene?

>>8924280
>is there a limit on the number of characters in a scene?
Not a hard limit per se, but more characters do very rapidly become unmanageable if you care about them looking any particular way. Described features will 'bleed' easily between them, when there's more they're usually smaller (so the details present in the original sketch are more easily lost as well), you usually need to do some inpainting touchup on each character so more of them means more work, if they're overlapping each other it makes inpainting harder, etc etc.

And if you want very specific characters that you need a lora to effectively represent, then it's even worse to have more than one of them in the scene.

>>8924255

>>8924317
Oh, the sketch is a bit hard to tell, but the sphinx isn't biting down hard, and the cock in cumming. File name is kinda misleading

>>8924020
ditto

>>8924231
>bikini atoll

>>8924231
sweet! thanks.

>>8924578

>>8922906
Cute.

>>8924219

Hey man, I just want a driver's license.

>>8922306

>>8925158
>Hey man, I just want a driver's license.
Rolling Stones have a song about that

>>8925158
>uk goverment be like

>>8925286

>>8925300

No, it's like I'm disturbed that a person who is very active in these general threads has a significant chance of being a minor.

I'm not trying to be an ass, but they look like they were taken with non-professional equipment like a smartphone camera and drawn by someone who is very lacking in skill. See >>8924217 >>8920051 >>8920052 for ex.s.

>>8925352
>they were taken with non-professional equipment like a smartphone camera and drawn by someone who is very lacking in skill
Why the fuck would someone with drawing skills ask for their doodles to be slopified with ai?

>>8921259

>>8921055

>>8924217

>>8924273

>>8925396
>>8924273
Wait, what the heck is that weird lump or flap on the left edge of the lower pubis? I didn't even notice that until coming back to this.

Altered to get rid of that.

>>8925370
noice

>>8925352
But anon, the rules say no kids allowed on 4chan, How could it get past the captcha?

>>8923280

>>8925372
That is one cool umbrella.

>>8925392
Hey, you got lips+teeth combo working!

>>8925370
great ty

>>8921261

>>8926192
or here thank very much

It's Olivia Dunham from Fringe https://files.catbox.moe/rrb6d1.jpg in the bathroom.

>>8925438
Thanks for the edit and delivery!

>>8924317

>>8925958
>Hey, you got lips+teeth combo working!
Not intentionally, but it seemed to work out that way! May have effectively resulted from combining the 'sharp teeth' and 'closed mouth' tags, though I don't think that was a guarantee.

>>8924756

>>8926974
great! thanks.

>>8926517

>>8924756

>>8921261

>>8925578
Head out because... why?

>>8927211
>2nd cake!
Ty very much

The culmination of those photoshops I posted in the previous thread: my harem together

From L-R; Sayo Hitsugi, Mystique, Usagi Tsukino w/Flannery, Arkham Killer Frost, Daphne Blake, Ariel, Isane Kotetsu, April O'Neil and Hakufu Sonsaku

All at beach having fun in the nude

>>8924273

>>8921055

It's Panty Anarchy from Panty & Stocking with Garterbelt cooling herself off in front of an elecrival fan

>>8927642
You didn't had to remake it but thanks anyway.

>>8919970 (OP)
Okay I was looking at the fry box and I thought it was dumb, but then I saw there were fries already outside the box. I think this could be a good idea to prevent the bottom bun of burgers from getting soggy. You could put some fries underneath the burger. Then if you get a fast food burger from the drive thru it will be fresh several minutes longer.

Is this with kim possible ok? Some drew it as a more detailed version of a real shot from an episode I can also show if something with it is ok

>>8924219
This one took a while to put together.

>>8928115
>You didn't had to remake it but thanks anyway.
That's another guy. You can tell by the styles and filenames.

>>8923827

>>8927962

>>8927187
bonus!

>>8925578
>>8927235
buried in sand for summer beach hijinx

>>8925370

>>8927962
Fixing proportions always changes too much, sadly

>>8928157

>>8928349
Hellenic steampunk? I like it!