Updated: Mar 30, 2026
styleDownload
1 variant available
890 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
210 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(11)
Mar 30, 2026
Illustrious
The model was trained with a "depth map" trigger word, but in my experiments, it wasn't really a requirement for the desired effect.

120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
970 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
7.8K0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9K
Created on Civitai
License:
Illustrious LicenseRecently, I was playing with a workflow that required passing generated images through a depth estimation model and I thought: why not generate depth maps directly?
The results have been, well, favorable. It seems to struggle with some objects that are black/white naturally, and it also tends to give it too much detail sometimes. With that said, it might be still useful.
My use for this is as follows:
To start, I generate a few images around what I want, ending up with something like this:

Which I can then bash around and edit on Photoshop to get something I like. Since it's all in grayscale, that makes it much simpler to work with. After that, I'll end with something like this:

With that, I can do another T2I run with a depth ControlNet, and that will give me a result like this:

The point is primarily to simplify the editing work, and to avoid the artifacts from my usual I2I workflow.
Hopefully that can be useful to some of you as well!

