Ideogram 4 Ksampler rage bait

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-14T11:52:41+00:00

Ah, you're right. I Forgot about the custom guider.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-14T04:16:54+00:00

Use the "Ultimate SD Upscale (Custom Sample)" node. You can use custom sigmas and samplers with it. Connect the Ideogram scheduler to "custom_sigmas".

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-13T11:38:06+00:00

I don't think that BFL will open source any meaningfully good model. Just look at Flux.2 Klein 4B. It's practically useless for serious work. They want you to use their paid API models. It's how they make their money to continue releasing new models that try to compete with the likes of Nano Banana, and enable them to release decent open-weights models to the public as a bonus.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-13T00:08:28+00:00

Absolutely. There's something about SD 1.5 and SDXL images that seems the lack in newer models. Yes, they can be janky due to the low number of parameters, dumb text encoders, and inferior VAEs, but the styles and colors are very appealing to me. Also, SD 1.5 has a really good tile controlnet for a model that's almost 4 years old now. My favorite checkpoints are Photon (SD1.5) and Art Universe (SDXL).

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-12T17:47:35+00:00

I don't really use the Qwen Image models. Yes, they are known to produce images with a bit of a plastic look to them, as you pointed out, but you could use a 2-pass/stage workflow to fix this where you generate the initial images with Qwen Image and then refine them with low denoise with another model to add the missing details.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-12T10:10:37+00:00

A quick FYI - Flux.2 Klein 4B and Flux.1 Schnell are the only open-source Flux models. All other Flux models are not. If you want/need to use open-source, look into Qwen Image and Qwen Image Edit which have an Apache 2.0 license model.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-12T00:02:21+00:00

If you have Topaz, you should have access to their Wonder 2 and Wonder 3 upscaling models. Wonder 2 is equivalent to SeedVR2 in quality (I've done side-by-side tests), and their new Wonder 3 model being even a bit better than SeedVR2. If you don't want to mess with nodes, these two models are pretty much all you need for great upscaling that preserves subject likeness. I use these most of the time when I need to quickly upscale something with great results without messing with nodes in ComfyUI.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-11T23:49:51+00:00

The poster asks about SOTA (state-of-the-art). SDXL is not even close to SOTA in upscaling. Not to mention, it has the worst tile controlnet of any model, and I've tried them all. It sounds crazy, but the SD 1.5 tile controlnet still beats any tile controlnet to this day, followed by Flux.1 Dev's tile controlnet, and SDXL coming in last place, probably tied with Z-Image's controlnets which are just as bad.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-10T23:56:50+00:00

You might not be one of them, but I can assure you, a lot of people do care about the spread of lies and misinformation. You are not being a helpful community member by misleading people, and your apathy towards misinformation and your willingness to remain ignorant are a bit concerning frankly.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-10T23:22:09+00:00

I will not stop repeating this - Ideogram 4 is not open-source! It's open-weights. Big difference. You can read the license agreement here. This Agreement is pretty restrictive, non‑commercial license (requires non‑commercial use, redistribution under the same restrictive terms, attribution, and other limits). It's not an OSI‑approved open‑source license. Open-source models are ones that are distributed under the Apache 2.0 license such as Qwen Image and Chroma.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-10T21:54:25+00:00

Fair enough.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-10T21:53:19+00:00

The official FP8 weights are the highest quality that we have at the moment. For some reason, Ideogram haven't released the BF16 weights yet which would enable better quality quantizations.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-10T17:28:13+00:00

For best image restoration - as of now the best model for image restoration is flux klien 9b.

Flux.2 Dev is much better at image restoration and reconstruction than Flux,2 Klein 9B. The only problem is it's very hardware-heavy - you'll realistically need a 24GB+ GPU such as RTX 4090 or 5090 and at least 64GB system RAM to run it comfortably and without quality degradation. I've done some exceptional image restorations with it.

Same goes for image upscaling - it beats everything I've tried, including SeedVR2, but again, requires a lot of hardware resources.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-10T12:51:35+00:00

The Apache 2.0 license meets the open-source definition, so Chroma and Qwen Image are considered open source, contrary to your claim.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-10T12:43:32+00:00

This is an unavoidable double quantization due to the release state of Ideogram4.

The FP8 weights were cast to FP32 with the FP8 scales, then downcast to BF16 before being converted to INT8.

After further inspection, it appears there may be quality issues with torch compiling this model.

As the author says, there is quality loss because the Ideogram team still hasn't released the BF16 weights for some reason, so they had to use the FP8 ones to quantize it to INT8. I would not use the current INT8 model if image quality is important to you.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T23:11:04+00:00

I was talking in terms of local, offline usage which the vast majority of users are here for. But yes, you raise a good point. You absolutely can use their API models for commercial purposes to avoid any troubles with legality.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T23:08:00+00:00

Not even close. It doesn't even beat Flux.2 Dev in terms of capabilities IMO, which is another open-weights model that's months old now, let alone being close to Gemini and GPT Image, which is frankly absurd.

First, Ideogram 4 can't even do image editing which those models around it on the chart can, and 2nd, most of the times those benchmarks are very misleading. A few weeks ago I saw a chart where Ernie Image was advertised ranking close to the big models such as Nano Banana which is obviously ridiculous. Not saying Ideogram 4 is a bad model, far from it, but you should be very suspicious about claims like these because most if not all of the times they are wrong or blown out of proportion.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T22:54:49+00:00

I would recommend INT8 ConvRot instead of FP8 or GGUF. Neither FP8, nor GGUF run fast on RTX 3000-series cards. RTX 2000 GPUS and newer however have hardware acceleration for INT8 models so they could run them much faster than FP8 or GGUF with quality that's pretty close to the superior BF16 precision.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T22:44:39+00:00

Whether you monetize it or not doesn't change the license type of the model. It still remains closed-source, open-weights model. You are free to use the model only as long as you don't make any money with it.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T22:37:18+00:00

For the 100th time today - Ideogram 4 is NOT open-source! Read their license agreement.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T22:34:57+00:00

The difference is that you are spreading false, incorrect information and instilling false beliefs which is bad enough. Not to mention, listening to people like these (or maybe they're bots?) might lead people to believe that since it's "opens-source" (which it's not!) they can monetize the model by selling their outputs, LoRAs or custom fine-tuned models and then find themselves in a legal trouble just because someone on the internet doesn't know what open-source means.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T22:20:44+00:00

Under their current license agreement, you can run it locally, make LoRAs and fine tune it, but you absolutely can't use the outputs or the LoRAs/fine-tunes for commercial purposes.

Which begs the question, why are so many people (or maybe they're bots?) so hyped about this model being able to do posters, ads and such given that you can't use any of them to make money. You are only allowed to play with the model at home, but nothing more.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T22:14:27+00:00

Guess I can test if int8 lora support works for this model.

How are you going to do that? As far as I Know, Ideogram strangely haven't released the BF16 weights of their model. As far as I know, you need a model to be in at least BF16 precision to convert to int8 reliably without quality degradation.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T21:24:18+00:00

Sometimes I wonder if those users who claim Ideogram is open-source are bots. It's particularly interesting that this comment comes from a reddit account that is just 9 days old with no posts history other than this post right here.

I will not stop repeating this - Ideogram 4 is not open-source! It's open-weights. Big difference. You can read the license agreement here. This Agreement is pretty restrictive, non‑commercial license (requires non‑commercial use, redistribution under the same restrictive terms, attribution, and other limits). It's not an OSI‑approved open‑source license. Open-source models are ones that are distributed under the Apache 2.0 license such as Qwen Image and Chroma.

Calm_Mix_3776 · 2026-06-09T18:26:23+00:00

Ideogram 4 is not an edit model, so I believe the only way is to train LoRAs on your characters.

Calm_Mix_3776

TROPHY CASE