InvokeAI icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
InvokeAI copied to clipboard

[enhancement]: [Controlnet] - IpAdapter Face - Multiple images input

Open suonnon opened this issue 10 months ago • 4 comments

Is there an existing issue for this?

  • [X] I have searched the existing issues

Contact Details

No response

What should this feature add?

Multiple images input would help the IpAdapter Face controlnet detect and generate the face more precisely. This is available in A1111. I hope Invoke would compile this feature into controlnet section soon!

Alternatives

No response

Additional Content

No response

suonnon avatar Mar 29 '24 03:03 suonnon

@RyanJDick @hipsterusername Isn't this the same as adding multiple IP Adapters with the face model in the linear UI?

psychedelicious avatar Mar 29 '24 04:03 psychedelicious

@RyanJDick @hipsterusername Isn't this the same as adding multiple IP Adapters with the face model in the linear UI?

Does multi IP-Adapters (one input image for earch Ip-Adapter) work the same as one IP-Adapter (with multi input image).?I'm not a dev person, so I don't know. But in A1111, multi images input with one Ip-Adapter works really well.

suonnon avatar Mar 30 '24 08:03 suonnon

Just wanted to add that the IP Adapter node in ComfyUI got updated with new features like setting embeds combine methods that would be only possible in invokeAI with multi-input support in IP Adapter. IPv2-1

StellarBeing25 avatar Apr 01 '24 08:04 StellarBeing25

InvokeAI already supports:

  1. Multiple IP-Adapters (in both Linear UI and Workflows).
  2. Multiple images to an IP-Adapter (Workflows only).

These two features are not equivalent.

@suonnon It sounds like you may already be able to achieve what you want by using "multiple images to an IP-Adapter" in the Workflows UI. Let me know if that is sufficient, or if there is still something missing.

@StellarBeing25 We do not currently support different combine_embeds options - we always use concat when multiple images are passed to an IP-Adapter. Is there a particular workflow that you are trying to implement with this feature? If yes, it's probably worth creating a new Github issue to track that separately.

RyanJDick avatar Apr 02 '24 16:04 RyanJDick