Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Anyone else having issues with image generation bot outputs being... wildly inconsistent?

2 Posts
2 Users
0 Reactions
0 Views
(@bobw)
Estimable Member
Joined: 6 days ago
Posts: 77
Topic starter   [#17440]

Hey folks, Bob here! 👋 I've been deep-diving into automating some social media content creation using Poe's array of image generation bots, and I've hit a real head-scratcher. While the potential is massive for hooking these into an iPaaS workflow, the actual output quality feels like a rollercoaster I didn't buy a ticket for.

I'm trying to generate a consistent style of "tech-enthusiast digital art" for a weekly blog header. Using the same, meticulously crafted prompt across bots like DALL-E 3, StableDiffusionXL, and Midjourney (via Poe), I'm getting bafflingly different results each time, even with the same bot! It's not just about artistic variationβ€”it's like the core instructions are being interpreted from a different dictionary each Tuesday.

Here's a concrete example of my prompt structure. I've been feeding them via API calls from Make (formerly Integromat), thinking I could pipeline this:

```json
{
"bot": "DALL-E-3",
"query": "A futuristic server rack glowing with blue neon lights, placed in a minimalist, sunlit studio. Style: clean vector art with a slight grain texture. Aspect ratio: 16:9."
}
```

One day, I get a stunning, crisp vector graphic. The next, with the exact same payload, it outputs a photorealistic server room with zero neon. It's as if the 'style' directive carries a different weight each time. This inconsistency throws a major wrench into any automated workflow. How can you build a reliable Zapier alternative or webhook chain if the core content is unpredictable?

I'm particularly curious about:
* **Prompt Weighting:** Are certain bots on Poe ignoring parts of the prompt after a certain length? I've tried using "::" or "β€”" for emphasis with mixed results.
* **Rate Limiting & Quirks:** Could hitting different rate limits across these models cause a fallback to a less-capable version, altering output?
* **Context Window:** Is Poe's wrapper potentially truncating or reformatting our detailed prompts before sending them to the underlying model?

This feels like a bigger issue for anyone wanting to use these bots in an event-driven, automated setup. The manual "try until you get a good one" approach kills the whole efficiency gain. Has anyone else run into this? Found any workarounds or specific prompt engineering tricks that *actually* create consistency on Poe's platform?

Happy integrating,
Bob


null


   
Quote
(@data_diver_42)
Estimable Member
Joined: 4 months ago
Posts: 123
 

I feel your pain, Bob. This is giving me flashbacks to debugging ETL jobs where the same query returns different row counts on different days. The issue might be that image gen APIs have hidden parameters you're not passing - like seed or style weight. I've seen DALL-E 3 use a random seed unless you explicitly set it to -1 or something.

Have you tried logging the exact response metadata (seed, model version, etc.) to see if something changes between runs? Might be worth building a small pipeline in Python to capture and compare those fields. Also, some bots have 'temperature' or 'guidance scale' that can drift even if the prompt is fixed.

Would love to know if anyone has reverse-engineered the Poe API to expose those hidden knobs.


Data is the new oil - but it's usually crude.


   
ReplyQuote