>>54060 I find that up-scaling qwen with flux and then inpainting diapers or whatever with all the old flux loras works really well.

>>54067 Where can I do inpainting? Not OP, just curious about it. It's the only AI image thing that I've yet to mess around with. Like what do you mean "with all the old flux loras"?

>>54083 I inpaint with comfyui. You basically paint over an area that you want to change and prompt what you want it to change it to. Google it. As for Loras, back when civitai still allowed diaper content there were a handful of loras that you could prompt to generate real diapers. The problem is they only worked with the flux lora and base flux doesn't look nearly as good as qwen. In painting lets you add diapers to pretty much any image assuming you have the loras to do it or you are ok with the crappy diapers that the current models generate. I'm not sure if the loras are still floating around or not, google might be able to find them, idk

>>54060 /r/ing women turning into babies

For me, it's Whisk. The fact that I can do this in about 5 seconds, seemingly unlimited, for free, and with no PC or download required, is amazing. First image is the original found online, the rest of them are edits of the subject based on prompts. Throw these into an img2vid like Kling or Hailuo and we are living in unprecedented diaper porn times.

>>54144 I've been able to get Whisk to make diapers but only occasionally. At times it just starts giving me instant "Oops! Something went wrong!" notifications. So I'm really unsure what triggers it to consider an image nsfw and block it.

>>54145 One of the main reasons it never worked for me at first is because I was trying to prompt the diaper without also prompting the shirt / top, and it's probably rejecting based a topless output. As soon as I started saying "wearing a shirt and disposable diaper" instead of just "wearing a disposable diaper", success rate improved drastically. I learned more too. Here is how I get it to work. I'll be talking mainly about using a source image / subject(s). Source Image === - Image cannot be too famous, the person can be, but not the particular image. For instance, Sweeney American Eagle photos were auto-rejected. Same with Ortega, I had to find a picture that worked where you can see it was her, but one that AI did not recognize they were famous (still experimenting) - Headshots or torso up images work way better. This is because if there is other clothing where the diaper is supposed to go, Whisk will have a hard time replacing it, though not impossible as seen in my post above - You can use multiple subjects, I've tried up to 3. Prompting === From what I've tried, it's all about putting the right combination of parts in a particular order. Changing them around, removing / adding, and trying different words can affect the output quite a bit. Here are the parts of my prompts that I've tried that work well: full body close view, shot, photo, image, picture, showing subject, subjects, two subjects, three subjects wearing [describe the top / shirt] and wearing [describe the diaper], [describe the activity], [describe the background / setting] I describe the diaper in the following ways. wearing a disposable diaper wearing a big bulky diaper wearing a big thick bulky diaper wearing a thick diaper wearing a disposable nappy wearing a swollen diaper The first image was the result of this prompt and the first source photo: "full body side shot subject posing hand behind head wearing cropped jean shirt and big bulky diaper during a photoshoot, looking at viewer, package of Pampers diapers on a stool behind her, gray backdrop" Again, it's all about adding words, removing words, changing the order of words, trying different descriptions, and seeing what gives you a result. Nothing overtly sexual of course, be creative. It's so fast, you should be able to try a lot of combinations in a short amount of time. Your subjects will appear in the order you uploaded them, and even this can change the output and even its composition. Removing someone's bottoms and replacing it with a diaper can work based on if you used view, shot, photo, image, picture, or none that I listed above. As long as you describe a top (shirt) and a diaper, and not just the diaper, you should be good.

aren't you worried about getting caught for CP? every like 20 images it would generate an actual child. And since you can't sign up for google without a phone number, I couldn't figure out a way to do it truly anonymously.

>>54186 >I couldn't figure out a way to do it truly anonymously It's called running local

>>54189 Newfag here, how do you run local? I really like >>54167 's results. I wouldn't mind doing it from a website but anonymously is always better. I'd use a burner account anyway.

>>54144 >>54167 Patched? I literally could not get anything diaper related.

>>54167 oooooooooooooooooo

>>54186 I haven't ever gotten a single image of a child, not sure what you're prompting for that. Also, gmail doesn't require a phone #, and use VPN if you want. >>54190 You can download ComfyUI or ForgeUI. From here, you download models and start generating images. Keep in mind, you need a decent PC and good graphics card (12GB or higher VRAM). I like the Flux model, and I even made 3 diaper loras for it, will share the link to them in next post. Plenty of tutorials on YouTube, but yeah, local generation is great and completely uncensored. Whisk, while censored, is excellent for my tastes and is just way easier and faster to use, and the quality is often better than local, but it can't do everything. Again, it depends on what you're trying to do, your tastes and your creativity. >>54191 I don't think so, attached images are from just before I made this post. Check my notes >>54167

>>54193 I couldent resist