You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Originally posted by Blinue March 10, 2024 This discussion was created from the release onnx-preview1.
I am using the onnx build for real-time antialiasing. Some models I have created only allow for static onnx builds instead of the dynamic required for magpie. These models have a better image quality with acceptable speed. Would it be possible to add support for static models in the future?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
To clarify, certain upscale architectures include dysample or other features that can't be converted to onnx without specifying a static shape. This is referenced in the wiki for converting pth to onnx with neosr: https://github.com/muslll/neosr/wiki/Model-Conversion. These models I mentioned can be converted to onnx and used in other upscaling software including Chainner, but they don't seem to work with Magpie. Magpie seems to only support onnx models that are dymanic, supporting the following: "Input and output dimensions must be [-1, 3, -1, -1], with data format NCHW.". A static model may have a different shape, for example: (1, 3, 256, 256). Other software, including Chainner, seem to upscale the image in tiles (256x256 in this case) and stitch them together to create the upscaled image. I was hoping that magpie would start supporting static onnx models like Chainner does, which would allow for more advanced upscaling arches to be supported.
Discussed in #844
Originally posted by Blinue March 10, 2024
This discussion was created from the release onnx-preview1.
I am using the onnx build for real-time antialiasing. Some models I have created only allow for static onnx builds instead of the dynamic required for magpie. These models have a better image quality with acceptable speed. Would it be possible to add support for static models in the future?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: