photoshop beacuse topaz dont work, rendering f images forever... I purchased the latest version, and it doesn’t work. People on Reddit are also complaining that it renders endlessly. The new subscription is now on a monthly payment system. The previous version works perfectly, and the payment was a one-time fee. The support team is not responding.

@@poqw433 man, I dont agree with you. Photoshop dont makes resizing. I tried many times enlarge photo with photoshop and printed it. It was fail. only with Topaz I can enlarge pictures for printing. I selling it and framing it after printer.

You can sell it as a digital download.

I don't think there's any need to upscale the images in Gigapixel AI if you've already upscaled them x4 in Midjourney. 4x Midjourney images are 5824 x 3264 px. All you would need to do then is size down the image to 3840 x 2160 px and adjust the PPI in Photoshop or any other photo editing software. The quality of the upscaled images in Midjourney is quite good in my opinion. I only use Gigapixel AI when I have a high number of images to upscale just because Gigapixel allows for batch processing and I find it quicker than Midjourney but I would say that the quality of upscales in Midjourney is actually superior to Gigapixel AI in most occasions.

​@@EyEyeArt makes sense. what I do now is I create an image in midjourney v6, when I pick the image I like I use vary regions to fix all small details and also change midjourney to v 5.2, so I get upscale x4 available, After I upscale it in midjourney x4, and I adjust the image in Photoshop to 16:9 ar, 300 dpi (3840 to 2160 resolution). As a final touch I use gigapixel to smooth the image after Photoshop adjustments. I only worry about should I sell png files or jpeg? I see a lot of people sell the arts in jpeg, but png quality is better...

Hi, the PNG is too big to the image, the file jpg is smaller​@@ВалерийСилин-й7т.

I don't use Photopea very often but I would say you could probably upscale an image by using the 'Image Size' tool from the 'Image' tab in the main top menu bar just like you would in Photoshop, although, I wouldn't trust the results. Even in Photoshop this doesn't normally produce very good outcomes.

No, absolutely. It's just that JPG files are smaller, more manageable and easier to share.

Thank you very much! I'm glad you appreciate the content!

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I will try my best to get p.2 out ASAP... also working on a bonus p.3 ;)

Hey, I understand where you're coming from and I agree to an extent, but have a look at this video if you think that scanning AI songs for copyright infringement is overkill: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fXyslX5_gb6ekLM

Thank you very much! Glad you enjoyed the content.

Thank you very much! I'm glad you found the content useful.

Thanks a million! I’m glad you appreciate the content. As regards your queries. I’ve never printed interior wallpaper so I’m not sure what the requirements for that would be. I would liaise with the printing facility to see what their requirements for printing wallpaper are. There are lots of POD companies that do wallpaper nowadays. I would reach out to them or search their websites to get an idea of the ideal resolution your images should be. I did find this resource online: www.contrado.com/bespoke-wallpaper. If you scroll down to ‘Help’ and then ‘Print Guideline’ you’ll find some information on the image resolution and file formats they suggest. You can also click on the ‘Start Design’ button, choose ‘Photo or Collage Wallpaper’, input your required wallpaper dimensions and upload your image to see if their system’s detectors consider your file of good quality. This website also gives some information on the image file type and resolution they require under the ‘Design File Info’ tab: printedmint.com/shop/wallpaper-242#attr=428. Although, this seems to be for repeated pattern wallpaper rather than a photo wallpaper that I think is what you’re after. I would still contact the printing facilities just to be sure, though. If they’re serious about their clients and the quality of their products they should provide the information you need. Gigapixel AI is, in my opinion, industry standard when it comes to upscaling images although it does require a lot of resources from your device because it runs locally on your computer, especially if you intend to carry out ‘extreme upscaling’ as you defined it, get ready for very long processing times depending on the computing power of your PC or laptop. I know you can rent out GPU units online to use locally on your computer to enhance your device’s performance but I’ve never done that myself so I wouldn’t be able to give any suggestions on that.

Yeah, I think you're right. As I mentioned in the video, the software is still in its beta version and doesn't seem to be very capable of detecting potential infringement at the moment but I thought it was worth mentioning since, in my opinion, it seems like it's got great potential.

@@EyEyeArt Definitely, and I applaud the initiative. I just hope people don't rely on it too much.

Thank you very much! I’m glad you appreciate the content. I’ve been running into the same issue lately and after finding nothing online to help understand why this is happening I think I figured it out. The problem is most likely the way the software is programmed to round off the dimensions of the image to the nearest number. If your multiplying factor is a decimal number (e.g. 2.647) and not a whole number the software will have to decide to round both height and width either up or down to nearest whole number, but it will only go one way for both values: 1451 x 2.647 = 3,840.797 px 816 X 2.647 = 2,159.952 px In this case I noticed the software will round both values down to 3840 x 2159 px. A workaround would be to size down the image (while still maintaining the aspect ratio), before upscaling in Gigapixel AI, to a value that can be multiplied by an upscaling factor that is a whole number. You can do that by dividing your desired output dimensions (e.g. 3840 px and 2160 px) by 2 or 3. In this case you would start out with images that are either 1920 x 1080 pixels and upscaling them x2 or 1280 x 720 pixels and upscaling them x3. 1920 x 2 = 3840 px 1080 x 2 = 2160 px 1280 x 3 = 3840 px 720 x 3 = 2160 px If you want to start off with the higher resolution (1920 x 1080) then you could consider upscaling x2 in Midjourney before downloading and resizing the image files. I noticed that this ‘glitch’ will also occur with other image processing software (like Photoshop) so you would probably be better off resizing the files early on in your workflows, maybe straight after downloading them from Midjourney, if that’s what you’re using to generate your images.

@@EyEyeArt Since my last comment and since watching your other videos I have become very proficient in my workflow of creating AI art. I wanted to thank you and your videos for that. I have a bit of a more complex question I would like to ask you, maybe you could make a video on it in the future. Would it be possible for us to discuss over email?

I touched on this in the video as well. If you trust these music generators' built-in moderation (although the moderation errors normally just refer to citing an artist's name in the prompt from what I understand), then, of course, this is redundant. It was just a way for me to have some peace of mind since I wanted to publish this video on KZbin. By no means, though, would these methods be definitive in detecting plagiarism, anyway. As to getting the song heard, I would say it's equally hard to get any newly composed song heard whether it's AI generated or not.

Thank you very much! I'm glad you appreciated the video.

Thank you very much! I'm glad you found some useful information in the video. I'm hoping to get part 2 out soon.

Thank you very much! I'm glad you enjoyed the video. Part 2 is scripted already. I just have to find the time to screencast, edit and publish it. Hopefully soon. 1. The artifacts, to me are sort of plastic, artificial looking parts of the image, that don't resemble actual brush strokes or a paper/canvas surface. You can see them when you zoom in on the image. It looks like the image was painted on plastic wrap rather than regular paper/canvas. If you're printing the images, the physical surface of the paper or canvas would most likely make them less noticeable, whereas on widescreen TVs, that can be seen from a close distance, these artifacts (again anything that doesn't closely resemble an actual brushstroke or paper/canvas surface) may be more noticeable. 2. Of all the trials I've carried out so far, in my opinion, Midjourney works best when trying to reproduce vintage paintings, although, AI image generators are advancing at an extremely fast pace so I would image that, if other AI image generating platforms aren't already capable of getting similar results, they will most certainly be able to very soon. Also note that certain AI models specialize (or excel) in generating only certain types of images so this may also be something you may want to consider when looking for an alternative to Midjourney.