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
I think maybe there is a bug in the timeline editor. In that it the frame segment length doesn't seem to line up with the video output.
The timing seems off. I didn't notice before i tried set multi-images at those exact segment frame counts where each segment starts
A little bit "off" visually it to be expected, the model will take its freedoms and transition into next image time sometimes, other times a scene cut etc. But the dialogue should match up quite well and it does with the regular node.
I suspect it equalize even if it shouldn't, but not 100% sure.
With one caveat, i didn't have lots of coffee, and might be tired eyes, and i gone all blind in the spaghetti nodes ;-)
But maybe if there is a bug, you might already know where in the code to check if thats true or not ;-)
Ups sorry, i closed the topic not seeing your reply hehe ;-)
Yes, i also tried to verify, using the simplest possible workflow to rule out any errors from my end...
And worked fine..
and your example workflow also works fine. So I made some error some where when making the timeline wf.
Will fix ;-)
Some known pitfalls in current code: Empty prompts will crash, and if you use actual | in the prompt, it will further split it leading to mismatches.
Yes but thats probably all acceptable. I doubt many or any will use | inside the prompt.. hopefully. Or not prompt at all
Think I figured out the error my end. Something about the NAG node made things not work accurately. Removing the NAG fixed it.
Maybe just a node routing error, or something.. wrong negative or model route. Will see if i can make the nag work or leave it out.
Some known pitfalls in current code: Empty prompts will crash, and if you use actual | in the prompt, it will further split it leading to mismatches.
Yes but thats probably all acceptable. I doubt many or any will use | inside the prompt.. hopefully. Or not prompt at all
Think I figured out the error my end. Something about the NAG node made things not work accurately. Removing the NAG fixed it. Maybe just a node routing error, or something.. wrong negative or model route. Will see if i can make the nag work or leave it out.
Not enough coffee is to blame ;-)
Ah yeah this can't work with NAG currently, they both patch over crossattention, the last node in the chain wins. It probably could be made to work, would get somewhat complicated though...
Activity
RuneGjerde commentedon Apr 27, 2026
ltx23_00008-audio.mp4
Hmm works with the example workflow, so i'll dig a little deeper, maybe i made an error somewhere
kijai commentedon Apr 27, 2026
I did confirm with the example that it matches the result identically with the old one when it's equalized. But bugs are of course possible.
RuneGjerde commentedon Apr 27, 2026
Ups sorry, i closed the topic not seeing your reply hehe ;-)
Yes, i also tried to verify, using the simplest possible workflow to rule out any errors from my end...
And worked fine..
and your example workflow also works fine. So I made some error some where when making the timeline wf.
Will fix ;-)
kijai commentedon Apr 27, 2026
Some known pitfalls in current code: Empty prompts will crash, and if you use actual
|in the prompt, it will further split it leading to mismatches.RuneGjerde commentedon Apr 27, 2026
Yes but thats probably all acceptable. I doubt many or any will use | inside the prompt.. hopefully. Or not prompt at all
Think I figured out the error my end. Something about the NAG node made things not work accurately. Removing the NAG fixed it.
Maybe just a node routing error, or something.. wrong negative or model route. Will see if i can make the nag work or leave it out.
Not enough coffee is to blame ;-)
kijai commentedon Apr 27, 2026
Ah yeah this can't work with NAG currently, they both patch over crossattention, the last node in the chain wins. It probably could be made to work, would get somewhat complicated though...
RuneGjerde commentedon Apr 27, 2026
Yes makes sense, I was hesitant to add the nag in the first place. And forgot all about it later on.
Its was the source of the "weirdness" ;-)
Will remove it ;-)