1314 lines
64 KiB
Markdown
1314 lines
64 KiB
Markdown
# Krea2 Prompt Guide
|
|
|
|
This document records prompt rules discovered from actual SxCP generator
|
|
outputs tested in Krea2. It is not a generic prompt cookbook. Add a rule only
|
|
when an A/B image comparison shows that the wording improves or breaks Krea2
|
|
behavior.
|
|
|
|
## Core Rule
|
|
|
|
Krea2 responds best when the prompt gives one clear visual hierarchy:
|
|
|
|
1. subject/cast descriptor,
|
|
2. action or pose,
|
|
3. clothing state,
|
|
4. location,
|
|
5. camera/layout,
|
|
6. expression,
|
|
7. composition/crop,
|
|
8. style.
|
|
|
|
Avoid letting two sections describe incompatible camera or framing intents.
|
|
|
|
## Prompt Output Contract
|
|
|
|
- `sxcp_eval_out` must contain only the prompt being tested.
|
|
- Analysis, scoring, and generator notes belong in chat or `sxcp_eval_log`.
|
|
- Keep one experiment variable per cycle when possible.
|
|
- Lock sampler seed, character, location, and camera when testing wording changes.
|
|
- Treat the MCP seed as transport metadata. Preserve it for prompt-only A/B tests
|
|
and do not write it into the visible prompt text.
|
|
|
|
## Positive-Only Conditioning
|
|
|
|
Never put negative-conditioning phrases inside the positive Krea2 prompt. A
|
|
positive prompt should describe only the visual elements that should appear.
|
|
Do not write phrases such as `no shaft`, `no hands`, `without clothing`, or
|
|
`avoid X` into `sxcp_eval_out`; for distilled Krea2, those phrases can reinforce
|
|
or hallucinate the unwanted object.
|
|
|
|
This SxCP loop has no active negative-output contract. A same-positive,
|
|
same-seed probe on seed `424242` compared empty negative conditioning against
|
|
strong negative text targeting visible prompt attributes, and the rendered
|
|
images stayed visually unchanged. For this workflow, keep Krea2 pose fixes in
|
|
positive wording only.
|
|
|
|
## Seed-Controlled A/B Tests
|
|
|
|
Use one fixed sampler seed when deciding whether prompt wording helped Krea2.
|
|
If the SxCP generator/control seed differs from the sampler seed, record it as
|
|
`generator_seed` in the eval log. A single image can justify a prompt-only retry
|
|
when the mismatch is obvious, but a generator rule needs either repeated
|
|
evidence or a generated prompt that is structurally wrong before rendering.
|
|
|
|
When a workflow batches soft/hard prompts through an index switch, sidecar text
|
|
files may not be the exact prompt used for each rendered image. If the sidecar
|
|
and image disagree, inspect the PNG workflow metadata and the final text encode
|
|
input before patching the generator.
|
|
|
|
When reviewing an eval payload, log:
|
|
|
|
- emitted sampler seed,
|
|
- generator/control seed when it differs,
|
|
- original generated prompt,
|
|
- edited prompt,
|
|
- image failure or improvement,
|
|
- whether the change should stay prompt-only or become a generator patch.
|
|
|
|
## Evidence Promotion Threshold
|
|
|
|
Do not promote a single-character, single-location prompt hack into a durable
|
|
guide rule. A prompt-only fix can be recorded as accepted when it cleanly
|
|
improves the fixed-seed image, but a general wording rule needs either repeated
|
|
evidence across distinct subjects/locations or a source prompt that is
|
|
structurally wrong before rendering.
|
|
|
|
Scene repair words must match the selected location. Do not use a bedroom,
|
|
bedding, couch, shower, car, or other scene anchor to solve a foreground problem
|
|
inside an office/coworking setup unless that anchor is already present in the
|
|
selected scene. If the model needs a foreground filler to avoid hallucinating
|
|
extra anatomy, choose an anchor from the actual location or keep the result as
|
|
an inconclusive prompt-only retry.
|
|
|
|
## Camera And Composition
|
|
|
|
### Orbit / Multiangle Camera
|
|
|
|
When Krea2 receives an orbit or multiangle camera, avoid selfie-specific wording
|
|
unless the intended camera is actually a handheld or mirror selfie.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `lifestyle portrait frame`
|
|
- `creator portrait frame`
|
|
- `outfit-check pose`
|
|
- `wide environmental coworking camera layout`
|
|
- `camera placed several meters away`
|
|
- `full seated body from head to knees`
|
|
- `room depth surrounding the subject`
|
|
|
|
Conflicting wording:
|
|
|
|
- `selfie frame`
|
|
- `phone selfie`
|
|
- `holding the phone`
|
|
- `creator-shot phone photo`
|
|
- `handheld camera realism`
|
|
|
|
Observed result: selfie words pulled a back-right elevated wide shot into an
|
|
arm-length selfie. Removing selfie terms made the image follow the rear-quarter
|
|
view much better.
|
|
|
|
### Wide Shots
|
|
|
|
Krea2 tends to keep attractive subjects large in frame. To get a real wide or
|
|
environmental frame, be explicit about distance and visible environment.
|
|
|
|
Useful phrasing:
|
|
|
|
- `camera placed several meters away across the desk aisle`
|
|
- `full seated body from head to knees remains visible`
|
|
- `nearby desk edge, laptop corner, repeated desk rows, and tall-window depth clearly readable`
|
|
- `wide environmental room framing`
|
|
|
|
Avoid relying on `wide shot` alone.
|
|
|
|
## Location Layout
|
|
|
|
Location-aware camera text works when it describes the room around the subject
|
|
without stealing the foreground from the subject.
|
|
|
|
For coworking lounge:
|
|
|
|
- Keep `warm desks`, `laptop tables`, `glass partition seams`, `repeated desk rows`,
|
|
`plants`, and `tall windows`.
|
|
- Mention foreground anchors only when the camera should actually see them.
|
|
- In POV, keep location anchors beside or behind the bodies, not in the lower
|
|
foreground.
|
|
|
|
## Clothing Continuity
|
|
|
|
When a softcore outfit is reused in a later branch, name what happens to actual
|
|
outfit pieces instead of using generic fabric language.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `denim shorts are pulled aside or removed below the hips`
|
|
- `button-down shirt tied at the waist and fitted bralette remain visible from the same outfit`
|
|
|
|
Avoid generic fallback wording:
|
|
|
|
- `fabric slipping off`
|
|
- `partly exposed`
|
|
- `outfit pushed aside where needed`
|
|
|
|
Use generic wording only when no source outfit exists.
|
|
|
|
## Climax / Ejaculation Wording
|
|
|
|
Krea2 needs the visible fluid action stated directly in climax routes. Keep
|
|
`semen` in the action sentence when the generator intends an ejaculation or
|
|
post-ejaculation image.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `the man ejaculates semen across her body`
|
|
- `visible semen lands across her body`
|
|
- `ejaculates semen across her lower back, ass, and thighs`
|
|
|
|
Avoid relying only on softer aftermath wording:
|
|
|
|
- `visible ejaculation`
|
|
- `visible orgasm aftermath`
|
|
- `cum on hands and body`
|
|
|
|
Seed `42052` exposed this as a structural formatter issue: the route selected a
|
|
standing/kneeling climax pose, but the Krea prompt dropped `semen` and kept only
|
|
generic aftermath language. The generator now preserves direct `ejaculates
|
|
semen` wording for this path before the prompt reaches Krea2.
|
|
|
|
### Ready / Post-Ejaculation Open-Thigh Display
|
|
|
|
The ready atlas folder is not a neutral setup pose. Treat it as a still
|
|
post-ejaculation open-thigh display where the fluid-covered exposed opening is
|
|
the first visual priority and the active lower-foreground action is secondary.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `POV post-ejaculation open-thigh display`
|
|
- `the wet aftermath detail is the exact center`
|
|
- `thick semen and clear fluid cover the exposed pussy and inner thighs`
|
|
- `her body stays still after ejaculation`
|
|
- `her face and torso remain visible behind the open-thigh frame`
|
|
- `office chair seat and chair arms frame the lower foreground`
|
|
- `desk edges, laptop tables, glass partitions, plants, and tall-window depth`
|
|
|
|
Failure modes:
|
|
|
|
- generic `ready` or setup-before-sex wording
|
|
- active penetration or thrusting becoming the main read
|
|
- fluid detail present but secondary to a lower-foreground body cue
|
|
- bedroom/bedding anchors inserted into coworking scenes
|
|
- closed thighs or cropped torso hiding the atlas open-thigh display
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: CodexMCPTest source subject `52` with sampler seed
|
|
`1123581321` produced first ready/aftermath evidence. The generic baseline kept
|
|
the coworking scene and open-thigh pose, but collapsed into active
|
|
lower-foreground penetration with fluid secondary. The accepted candidate made
|
|
the wet aftermath detail the primary visual event while preserving the
|
|
office-chair/coworking setting. Under the category-exit rule this is mirrored
|
|
into the generator as a provisional improvement over baseline, while the catalog
|
|
route remains candidate pending broader repetition.
|
|
|
|
### Spread / Open-Thigh Presentation
|
|
|
|
The spread atlas folder is a direct camera-facing presentation pose. The key
|
|
read is the leg geometry first: raised knees or wide thighs form a V-frame
|
|
toward the viewer, hands hold the knees or thighs, and the face and torso remain
|
|
visible behind the open-thigh frame.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `knees raised and held wide`
|
|
- `thighs form a broad V-frame around the centered exposed vulva`
|
|
- `hands hold her knees and upper thighs`
|
|
- `face and torso remain visible behind the open-thigh frame`
|
|
- `office chair seat and chair arms frame the lower foreground`
|
|
- `desk edges, laptop tables, glass partitions, plants, and tall-window depth`
|
|
|
|
Failure modes:
|
|
|
|
- low seated spread with legs open but no raised-knee V-frame
|
|
- missing hands, or hands not anchoring the knees/thighs
|
|
- outfit remaining closed over the center of the pose
|
|
- partner/contact wording competing with the camera-facing presentation
|
|
- scene repair words that turn the coworking office into a bedroom setup
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: CodexMCPTest source subjects `50` and `47` with sampler seed
|
|
`3141592653` showed the atlas hierarchy improved over generic spread wording on
|
|
two visible subjects. Source `50` already produced a coherent low seated spread,
|
|
but the candidate added hands on raised knees and a stronger V-frame. Source
|
|
`47` failed baseline exposure because the shorts stayed closed; the candidate
|
|
opened the center and added raised knees and hand anchors. The generator now
|
|
carries this as a provisional improvement over baseline, while the catalog route
|
|
remains candidate pending a wider V-frame repeat on another seed.
|
|
|
|
## POV Outercourse
|
|
|
|
### Ballsucking / Testicle Sucking
|
|
|
|
The atlas examples are low first-person pelvis views. The visible partner should
|
|
read as bent forward between the viewer's open thighs, with the chest low over
|
|
the viewer's pelvis and the face placed below the shaft at testicle height.
|
|
Starting from the viewer or using only generic kneeling language can make the
|
|
head float too high.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `the woman bends forward and kneels very low between the viewer's open thighs`
|
|
- `chest low over the viewer's pelvis`
|
|
- `face is below the viewer's penis at testicle height`
|
|
- `head below the shaft base, chin near the viewer's pelvis`
|
|
- `mouth lower than the shaft base and aligned to the underside/scrotum`
|
|
- `balls fill the exact center foreground as the largest contact object`
|
|
- `lips and tongue press to the scrotum and balls`
|
|
- `shaft is cropped to the side as a landmark, away from her lips`
|
|
- `composition priority is balls first, scrotum contact second, woman's low face third`
|
|
|
|
Partial side-low axis:
|
|
|
|
- `low side-pelvis POV`
|
|
- `face is the closest visible partner part`
|
|
- `cheek against the viewer's inner thigh`
|
|
- `scrotum and testicles centered against her tongue and lips`
|
|
- `balls fill the lower center foreground at her mouth`
|
|
- `viewer abdomen and inner thighs close around her face`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- `head tucked under the penis shaft` without testicle-height wording
|
|
- generic `kneels in front of him`
|
|
- making the viewer the main subject before the visible woman is established
|
|
- mid-height head placement
|
|
- making the raised shaft the centered visual target above her mouth
|
|
- repeating shaft/hand-on-shaft wording before the scrotum/testicle contact is
|
|
visually established
|
|
- `hanging` or `pressed from above` wording when it creates suspended-object
|
|
artifacts
|
|
- `two testicles against tongue` if it turns into wrong rounded anatomy or a
|
|
different body layout
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: sampler seed `238365845574312` showed that low-head wording
|
|
improves body placement, but Krea2 can still collapse into generic shaft-focused
|
|
oral contact when the raised shaft stays centered above the mouth. The accepted
|
|
prompt made the scrotum/balls the largest exact-center object and moved the
|
|
shaft to a cropped side landmark. Keep this as a prompt-guide rule, but do not
|
|
promote the catalog route to proven until the rule repeats on another controlled
|
|
seed.
|
|
|
|
Expansion weak case: sampler seed `1212121212` repeated across two women did
|
|
not validate the side-cropped scrotum rule. The candidates made the balls and
|
|
scrotum larger, but the head stayed too high and the mouth still targeted the
|
|
shaft/glans. Literal wording like `sucking the testicles with her mouth` helped
|
|
one result move the shaft off-axis, but it still used tongue-to-base contact
|
|
with the head too high. Next tests should avoid label-like
|
|
`testicle-sucking position` wording and make head height the primary axis:
|
|
head below the shaft base, chin near the viewer pelvis, mouth lower than the
|
|
balls/scrotum contact point.
|
|
|
|
Threshold search update: sampler seed `1212121212` then received about fifty
|
|
positive-only prompt probes on one subject plus six repeats on a second subject.
|
|
The under-base, chin-near-pelvis, hand-held-side, and direct
|
|
`balls in mouth` wording families mostly collapsed back to generic shaft/glans
|
|
oral contact. The repeatable partial axis was the side-low family:
|
|
`low side-pelvis POV`, `cheek against the viewer's inner thigh`, and
|
|
`scrotum/testicles centered against her tongue and lips`. Turns `149`, `162`,
|
|
`167`, and `170` show that this can move the contact toward the balls/scrotum,
|
|
and tongue-on-testicles is an accepted improvement over the baseline shaft/glans
|
|
collapse. Mirror this side-low partial axis into the generator provisionally,
|
|
but keep the route queued for broader seed/source expansion because it still
|
|
does not reliably produce lips fully wrapped around the testicles.
|
|
|
|
Generated-route validation: turn `172` showed that the first generator patch
|
|
could keep tongue/testicle contact low but still let the woman's torso dominate
|
|
the composition. Adding `face is the closest visible partner part` produced
|
|
turn `173`, where the face stayed low beside the viewer's thigh and the
|
|
tongue/testicle contact remained centered. Keep the face-priority cue in the
|
|
generator wording and continue testing because body/rear prominence can still
|
|
steal the pose.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed side-camera weak case: sampler seed `5757575757` repeated the
|
|
generated side-low route and three contact-priority variants across two women.
|
|
Turns `217`-`224` looked strong as side-camera oral views: the face stayed low
|
|
between the viewer abdomen/thigh foreground, coworking depth held, and the
|
|
cheek/inner-thigh relationship stayed readable. They did not improve exact
|
|
ballsucking contact because the mouth and tongue still targeted the shaft/glans.
|
|
Record this as useful side-view oral wording, not proof that text alone controls
|
|
the testicle-contact object. Bookmark:
|
|
`docs/krea2-visual-bookmarks/ballsucking-side-camera-turn221-side-low-oral-weakcase.png`.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed partial update: sampler seed `6262626262` retested the route across
|
|
two visible women with twelve positive-only probes. The generated-route
|
|
controls on turns `250` and `256` preserved the low coworking side-pelvis view
|
|
but still drifted toward shaft/glans oral contact. The best repeatable branch
|
|
was turns `252` and `258`:
|
|
|
|
- `scrotum is the mouth surface`
|
|
- `testicles resting across her open lips`
|
|
- `tongue cups them from below`
|
|
- `head lies sideways on the viewer's inner thigh`
|
|
- `chin close to the viewer pelvis`
|
|
|
|
This is still a partial, not a proven full mouth-wrapped testicle-sucking
|
|
result. It is better than the generated-route controls because the contact
|
|
moves toward the scrotum/testicles while retaining the atlas side-low
|
|
cheek/thigh relationship. Turns `253` and `259` showed a useful secondary
|
|
tongue-cradle underside branch, but it reads more centered/frontal than the
|
|
side-low atlas family. Patch the provisional generator route to the open-lips
|
|
scrotum-surface hierarchy and keep the route queued for more seeds.
|
|
|
|
Generated-route validation: turns `262` and `263` rendered the patched route
|
|
wording directly after the generator edit. Both validation renders kept the low
|
|
side face/thigh relationship and moved the tongue/lip contact to the underside
|
|
scrotum/testicle area with less shaft-tip dominance than the generated-route
|
|
controls on turns `250` and `256`. Keep this as a provisional improvement, not
|
|
a proven route, because the result remains tongue/lips-on-testicles rather than
|
|
fully mouth-wrapped testicle sucking.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed target-object repeat: sampler seed `9797979797` retested the current
|
|
open-lips route and four target-object branches across two visible women. The
|
|
generated-route control could succeed on turn `286`, but the blonde control on
|
|
turn `291` still drifted toward shaft/base contact. The best repeatable branch
|
|
was `scrotum_skin_to_lips` on turns `288` and `293`:
|
|
|
|
- `scrotal skin is the nearest mouth surface`
|
|
- `both testicles rest against her tongue from below`
|
|
- `cheek and jaw compressed into the thigh`
|
|
- `chin tucked close to the pelvis`
|
|
|
|
Treat this as a narrow target-object refinement, not a full solution. It
|
|
improves the partial hierarchy over the weak control while preserving side-low
|
|
cheek/thigh geometry, but it still reads as tongue/lips-on-testicles rather
|
|
than fully mouth-wrapped testicle sucking. The `balls_first_center_object`
|
|
branch is unsafe as default because turn `290` overfit into a multi-subject or
|
|
body-layout artifact.
|
|
|
|
Generated-route validation: sampler seed `9898989898` rendered the patched
|
|
scrotal-skin route directly across two visible women. turns `296` and `297`
|
|
both preserved side-low cheek/thigh geometry, kept the face low between viewer
|
|
abdomen and inner-thigh cues, and placed scrotum/testicles at the tongue/lip
|
|
contact surface. This validates the route patch as a target-object improvement,
|
|
but it remains partial because the result is still tongue/lips-on-testicles,
|
|
not fully mouth-wrapped testicle sucking.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed weak case: sampler seed `5959595959` retested the current generated
|
|
route and three stronger mouth-contact axes across three visible women. The
|
|
generated controls on turns `307`, `311`, and `315` kept useful low-pelvis
|
|
framing but still drifted toward shaft/glans contact. The `lip-oval` branch on
|
|
turns `308`, `312`, and `316` made the scene more upright and shaft-centered.
|
|
The `sideways mouth pocket` branch on turns `309`, `313`, and `317` preserved
|
|
the best cheek/thigh side-low geometry, but the mouth still targeted the shaft
|
|
or base rather than wrapping the testicles. The `chin-pelvis upward seal`
|
|
branch on turns `310`, `314`, and `318` became a frontal shaft-focused oral
|
|
read. Do not patch the generator from these branches; record this as another
|
|
target-object weak case and continue exploring stronger control or a different
|
|
positive wording axis.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed occlusion weak case: sampler seed `6060606060` tested a different
|
|
target-control strategy after the mouth-shape words failed. The generated
|
|
controls on turns `319`, `323`, and `327` were still the best partials,
|
|
preserving side-low geometry and some visible scrotum/testicle contact. The
|
|
`scrotum foreground occlusion` branch on turns `320`, `324`, and `328` became
|
|
upright shaft-centered oral instead of making the scrotum cover the mouth. The
|
|
`under-scrotum tongue shelf` branch on turns `321`, `325`, and `329` kept some
|
|
low-pelvis framing but still targeted the shaft/glans. The `hand-guided scrotum`
|
|
branch on turns `322`, `326`, and `330` made hands and shaft ownership
|
|
dominate. Do not patch these axes into the generator; future attempts should
|
|
change the target-object strategy or use stronger control rather than adding
|
|
more occlusion or hand-support synonyms.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed mouth-axis mixed case: sampler seed `6161616161` tested five new
|
|
positive-only axes across three visible women after the occlusion/hand-support
|
|
batch failed. The generated-route controls on turns `331` and `337` gave the
|
|
best repeated partials: low pelvis framing, face close to the inner thigh, and
|
|
tongue/testicle contact. The third generated control on turn `343` still
|
|
collapsed onto shaft contact, so the route remains candidate.
|
|
|
|
Failed or non-repeatable axes:
|
|
|
|
- `exact mouth-sucking`: literal `sucking the testicles with her mouth` wording
|
|
still became shaft/glans-focused on the clearest inspected branch.
|
|
- `single-testicle`: putting a single testicle between the lips did not make the
|
|
model hold the testicle as the mouth target.
|
|
- `hanging balls below shaft`: separating the target below the lifted shaft
|
|
mostly preserved shaft/glans oral.
|
|
- `side mouth wrap`: turn `335` produced a useful side-oriented partial, but
|
|
turns `341` and `347` collapsed back to shaft contact.
|
|
- `chin-pelvis lower-mouth target`: turn `348` produced a useful frontal
|
|
target-object partial with the mouth lower and testicles visible at the
|
|
tongue/lip surface, but the branch is not repeatable enough for generator
|
|
wording.
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: keep the current provisional generated route as the best repeated
|
|
partial for now. Do not patch exact-mouth, single-testicle, hanging-balls,
|
|
side-mouth-wrap, or chin-pelvis lower-mouth wording into the generator from
|
|
this batch. The full mouth-wrapped target still needs broader expansion or
|
|
stronger control.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed pelvis-valley weak case: sampler seed `7171717171` tested
|
|
body-plane and camera-height wording after mouth-shape and target-object words
|
|
kept failing. The useful atlas comparison was that refs such as `101` place the
|
|
viewer flatter and lower, with the partner tucked into the pelvis valley
|
|
between the thigh roots.
|
|
|
|
The `flat pelvis-valley` branch repeated the strongest spatial improvement on
|
|
turns `350`, `356`, and `362`:
|
|
|
|
- viewer reads flatter and more supine;
|
|
- inner thighs become side walls around her face;
|
|
- her face is tucked lower inside the thigh-wall pelvis valley;
|
|
- coworking depth remains location-compatible.
|
|
|
|
However, this was a body-plane correction, not a target-object correction. All
|
|
three repeated flat-pelvis results still made the mouth target the shaft, so do
|
|
not patch `flat pelvis-valley` into the ballsucking generator route as-is. Treat
|
|
it as a useful orientation hint for stronger control or for a separate
|
|
flat-pelvis oral branch.
|
|
|
|
Other branches from this batch were weaker:
|
|
|
|
- `thigh tunnel` and pubic-hair mouth-line wording mostly repeated the same
|
|
shaft-centered target.
|
|
- `low-cushion chin anchor` drifted into wrong open-thigh/presentation geometry.
|
|
- `pelvis-edge target-first` also drifted toward open-thigh/presentation layout
|
|
or target ambiguity.
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: body-plane wording can fix the atlas orientation while making the
|
|
target object worse. Score these separately. For this route, the current
|
|
side-low scrotal-skin generated wording remains the better ballsucking partial.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed flat-target hybrid weak case: sampler seed `7272727272` combined the
|
|
best prior body-plane wording with the best prior target-object wording across
|
|
three women. The tested branches were `flat-valley scrotal-skin target`,
|
|
`valley-floor open lips`, `upper-frame shaft lower-scrotum`,
|
|
`cropped upper-shaft valley-mouth`, and `side-low flat-valley hybrid`.
|
|
|
|
The hybrid did not beat the current generated route. The
|
|
`flat-valley scrotal-skin target` branch repeated the flatter body-plane read
|
|
on turns `368`, `374`, and `380`, but all three stayed shaft-centered. The
|
|
`side-low flat-valley hybrid` branch kept some useful side-low look hints on
|
|
turns `372`, `378`, and `384`, but the target contact remained ambiguous or
|
|
shaft-centered. The upper-frame and cropped-shaft branches also reinforced the
|
|
wrong target.
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: stop the ballsucking text-only prompt loop here for now. Keep the
|
|
current side-low scrotal-skin partial as the provisional generator route, keep
|
|
the pose queued as candidate/weak, and treat the full target as likely needing
|
|
stronger control rather than more positive-prompt synonyms.
|
|
|
|
### Footjob
|
|
|
|
The atlas examples are frontal first-person views. The viewer reclines with
|
|
thighs framing the lower foreground, the woman sits opposite with her body and
|
|
face behind her feet, and the feet are the main contact object around the
|
|
upright shaft.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `tight frontal POV footjob close-up`
|
|
- `large overlapping soles dominate the lower center foreground`
|
|
- `upright shaft compressed between the two soles`
|
|
- `a narrow vertical strip of shaft and glans rises between her pressed soles`
|
|
- `inner arches and toe pads press inward against the shaft`
|
|
- `toes curled around both edges of the shaft`
|
|
- `her face, torso, and open thighs remain visible behind her large foreground feet`
|
|
|
|
Alternate branch:
|
|
|
|
- `one bare foot crosses horizontally in front of the shaft`
|
|
- `sole presses sideways into the glans and upper shaft`
|
|
- `other foot braces from the opposite side near the base`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- generic `uses her feet on the viewer's penis` without overlap/contact pressure
|
|
- `soles on either side` if it leaves the shaft standing free
|
|
- feet too small or too low at the base of the shaft
|
|
- hands or mouth competing with the feet as the active contact
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: sampler seed `238365845574312` showed that generic footjob
|
|
wording can produce the correct frontal POV layout, but the feet may sit beside
|
|
the shaft rather than visibly compressing it. The accepted prompt used large
|
|
overlapping soles and a shaft trapped between the two soles, with only a narrow
|
|
visible strip between the feet. Keep this as a prompt-guide rule, but do not
|
|
promote the catalog route to proven until it repeats on another controlled seed.
|
|
|
|
Expansion finding: sampler seed `3434343434` repeated across two women showed
|
|
the baseline was already a valid frontal POV footjob, but `large two-sole clamp`
|
|
wording improved foot scale and contact compression on turns `176` and `180`.
|
|
The cross-foot side-press wording produced atlas-ref-`86` style alternates on
|
|
turns `177` and `181`, but it is a separate branch and weaker as the default.
|
|
Mirror the two-sole clamp wording into the generator provisionally and keep
|
|
cross-foot wording as an alternate guide branch.
|
|
|
|
Generated-route correction: turn `183` showed that `two large soles dominate`
|
|
is not enough by itself; the route can turn into feet presented to the viewer
|
|
and hide the actual contact. Turns `184`, `185`, and `186` restored the target
|
|
when the prompt said the soles `clamp the upright shaft between them` and `the
|
|
glans rises between the compressed feet`. Turn `188` validated the patched
|
|
generated route with the same cue: large soles stayed dominant while the shaft
|
|
and contact remained readable. Keep that visibility cue in generator wording
|
|
and treat cross-foot side-press as a separate alternate branch.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed route tightening: sampler seed `6868686868` repeated the generated
|
|
route and three contact variants across two women. Turns `225` and `229` showed
|
|
that the generated route can still hide the shaft/contact behind large soles.
|
|
Turns `227` and `231` repeated the stronger default: `large overlapping soles`
|
|
with `a narrow visible strip of shaft and glans` rising between the compressed
|
|
feet. Turn `226` supported the same center-gap visibility axis; turns `228` and
|
|
`232` kept cross-foot side-press useful as a separate alternate. Turn `233`
|
|
validated the patched generated route with overlapping soles, the centered
|
|
shaft/glans strip, viewer body cues, and coworking depth intact. The generator
|
|
route now uses the overlapping-sole/narrow-strip wording.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed promotion: sampler seed `7373737373` repeated the patched generated
|
|
route across two visible women. Turns `264` and `267` used the exact
|
|
overlapping-sole/narrow-strip generated route and preserved large foreground
|
|
sole dominance, visible centered shaft/glans strip, toe/arch pressure, face and
|
|
torso behind the feet, and coworking depth. Turns `265` and `268` repeated the
|
|
tight center-gap visible-glans branch as supporting evidence. Turns `266` and
|
|
`269` remained valid cross-foot side-press alternates, but they are not the
|
|
default because they give up the two-sole enclosure. Treat the default frontal
|
|
footjob route as proven; keep cross-foot side-press as an alternate guide
|
|
branch.
|
|
|
|
### Fingering / Manual Stimulation
|
|
|
|
The atlas examples are close first-person manual-contact views. The visible
|
|
partner reclines with open thighs toward the camera, one foreground hand enters
|
|
from the lower frame, and the hand is the main contact object. Generic
|
|
male-participant POV wording can make Krea2 insert lower-foreground anatomy that
|
|
competes with the hand.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `single foreground hand is the largest lower-frame object`
|
|
- `wrist entering from bottom center`
|
|
- `two fingers placed at her vulva and clit as the clear contact point`
|
|
- `open thighs forming a V around one camera-side hand`
|
|
- `manual contact first, open-thigh geometry second, woman face and torso third`
|
|
- `office-chair support and coworking depth fourth`
|
|
|
|
For coworking or office scenes, keep the foreground and depth anchors from the
|
|
selected location:
|
|
|
|
- `black office chair seat and chair arms frame the lower foreground`
|
|
- `near desk edge`
|
|
- `laptop table corners`
|
|
- `glass partition seams`
|
|
- `repeated desk rows`
|
|
- `plants and tall-window depth`
|
|
|
|
Failure modes:
|
|
|
|
- generic `viewer fingers her` wording without hand scale or ownership
|
|
- male-participant POV language that makes the lower foreground the main subject
|
|
- bedding or soft-surface anchors inside an office/coworking scene
|
|
- multiple foreground body cues competing with the active hand
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: sampler seed `238365845574312` repeated across
|
|
CodexMCPTest source subjects `46` and `47`. In both baselines, generic
|
|
fingering/manual-contact wording collapsed into shaft-forward lower-foreground
|
|
anatomy. The accepted prompt kept the coworking scene intact and changed only
|
|
the hierarchy: one large foreground hand, open thighs, woman face/torso, then
|
|
office-chair/coworking depth. Keep this as a prompt-guide rule, but do not
|
|
promote the catalog route to proven until it repeats on another seed or location
|
|
family.
|
|
|
|
Matrix update: CodexMCPTest source subject `50` with sampler seed `987654321`
|
|
repeated the same pattern. The generic baseline kept the coworking setting but
|
|
collapsed into shaft/body-dominant lower-foreground anatomy; the hand-first
|
|
candidate preserved the coworking office setting and produced readable active
|
|
fingers. This strengthens the prompt-guide rule and adds the required second
|
|
sampler seed. The manual/fingering generator now carries this hierarchy as a
|
|
provisional improvement over baseline, while the catalog route remains
|
|
`candidate` until broader evidence proves it.
|
|
|
|
Weak-case update: CodexMCPTest source subject `52` with sampler seed
|
|
`1357913579` shows the current rule is still too early for generator mirroring.
|
|
The generic baseline failed in the same lower-foreground way, and a camera-side
|
|
hand-first candidate still kept the wrong lower-foreground anatomy dominant. A
|
|
second candidate succeeded only after making the active hand explicitly the
|
|
woman's own right hand and using the office chair cushion/arms as the positive
|
|
lower-frame structure. Keep this as a prompt note, not a generator rule for the
|
|
participant-hand POV route, because the successful candidate changed hand
|
|
ownership semantics.
|
|
|
|
Experimental generator-mirror probe: generator seed `4303` with sampler seed
|
|
`238365845574312` showed that a generated-route prompt using the hand-first
|
|
hierarchy can preserve the office/coworking setting and remove the shaft-forward
|
|
foreground artifact from generic baselines. This is not enough to justify a
|
|
production generator patch. Collect a broader seed, subject, and location matrix
|
|
before changing route code for this case.
|
|
|
|
### Wand Toy Contact
|
|
|
|
The atlas examples are close first-person toy-contact views. The visible
|
|
partner reclines or sits back with open thighs toward the camera, face and torso
|
|
behind the leg frame, and one foreground hand holds a wand-style massager with
|
|
the rounded head at the central contact point.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `single continuous teal wand-style massager is the largest lower-frame object`
|
|
- `rounded bulb head presses flat to her vulva and clit as the central contact point`
|
|
- `smooth handle angles in from the bottom right inside the viewer's visible hand`
|
|
- `open thighs and knees form a V around the foreground wand`
|
|
- `wand head contact first, open-thigh geometry second, visible hand and handle third`
|
|
- `woman face and torso fourth, coworking depth fifth`
|
|
|
|
For coworking or office scenes, reuse the location anchors instead of adding
|
|
bedroom surface cues:
|
|
|
|
- `office chair seat and chair arms frame the lower foreground`
|
|
- `desk edges`
|
|
- `laptop tables`
|
|
- `glass partitions`
|
|
- `plants and tall-window depth`
|
|
|
|
Failure modes:
|
|
|
|
- generic `handheld wand vibrator is used near her` without device continuity
|
|
- Krea2 splitting the cue into a contact toy plus a second wand-like foreground object
|
|
- toy floating without a visible hand or handle
|
|
- the woman holding the toy when the intended view is a foreground viewer hand
|
|
- mouth, foot, penetration, or manual-contact wording competing with the wand
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: CodexMCPTest source subject `48` with sampler seed
|
|
`246813579` produced first wand evidence. The generic baseline preserved the
|
|
coworking setting and found a toy-contact pose, but split the prompt into two
|
|
wand-like objects. The accepted candidate made one continuous teal wand device
|
|
the primary lower-frame object, with a readable handle grip and bulb-head
|
|
contact. Treat this as first prompt-guide evidence only; repeat it on another
|
|
source or seed before changing generator defaults.
|
|
|
|
Expansion finding: sampler seed `8642086420` repeated the teal lower-right
|
|
single-device axis across two visible women on turns `190` and `194`, improving
|
|
over generic baselines `189` and `193`. The black close-bulb wording drifted
|
|
toward face/mouth contact, while the upper-left pale wand is useful as an
|
|
atlas-`107` alternate but weaker as a default. Turn `197` validated the patched
|
|
generated route from generator row seed `46`: one continuous teal wand, visible
|
|
viewer hand, central bulb contact, and coworking office-chair depth all
|
|
survived. Mirror this axis into the generator provisionally and keep the route
|
|
queued for another source/seed expansion.
|
|
|
|
Proven-route repeat: sampler seed `7979797979` repeated the generated teal
|
|
lower-right route across two women on turns `234` and `238`. Device continuity,
|
|
visible viewer hand/handle, central bulb-head contact, open-thigh chair
|
|
geometry, visible subject, and coworking depth all survived. Contact-first teal
|
|
variants on `235` and `239` also worked. The white upper-left branch repeated
|
|
on `236` and `240` as a valid alternate for atlas refs with diagonal handle
|
|
entry. The large-bulb branch on `237` and `241` is rejected as the default
|
|
because it can hide exact contact and overtake the lower frame. The catalog
|
|
route is now proven with the teal lower-right single-continuous-device default.
|
|
|
|
### Boobjob / Titjob
|
|
|
|
The atlas examples are frontal and upright: the visible partner faces the viewer,
|
|
kneels between the viewer's thighs, and compresses the shaft between the breasts.
|
|
Forward-bent wording can still place the body correctly, but it weakens the
|
|
breast contact.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `POV boobjob position`
|
|
- `woman kneels upright between his legs facing him`
|
|
- `penis rises vertically in the lower foreground`
|
|
- `squeezed between her pressed-together breasts`
|
|
- `woman's own fingers and nails cup her breasts from the outside`
|
|
- `glans emerging above the cleavage directly below her mouth`
|
|
|
|
Avoid vague or conflicting wording:
|
|
|
|
- `torso bent forward over his pelvis`
|
|
- `both hands push her breasts` without naming whose hands
|
|
- `only foreground hands` when the intended hands are the woman's hands
|
|
|
|
### Handjob
|
|
|
|
The atlas examples are direct and simple: the woman faces the viewer between his
|
|
thighs, her hand is the visible contact point, and her face or torso stays behind
|
|
the shaft. In fixed-seed tests, naming `one hand` plus a generic POV camera line
|
|
could make the lower hand read as the viewer's hand. Naming the woman's hands
|
|
made the action clearer.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `POV handjob position`
|
|
- `woman kneels between his legs facing him`
|
|
- `the woman's right hand wraps around the viewer's penis`
|
|
- `her left hand steadies the base`
|
|
- `viewer thighs and pelvis frame the lower edges`
|
|
- `without his hands covering the action`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- generic `one hand grips` when hand ownership matters
|
|
- allowing `foreground hands` to compete with the woman's active hand
|
|
|
|
## POV
|
|
|
|
In POV prompts, the visible subject should still be established first. The POV
|
|
participant is the camera viewpoint, not a normal visible cast member.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- visible subject descriptor first,
|
|
- then POV action,
|
|
- then foreground hands/body/clothing cues.
|
|
|
|
For POV clothing, describe only visible body/clothing fragments:
|
|
|
|
- `foreground hands, hips, thighs, or lowered waistband`
|
|
- `foreground hands, forearms, sleeves, or torso edge`
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
- full third-person `Man A wears...` phrasing for the POV participant,
|
|
- making `the viewer` the first subject before the visible character is
|
|
established.
|
|
|
|
For POV climax wording, the fluid target must follow the pose before expression
|
|
tokens. Rear-entry, doggy, bent-over, face-down, and on-all-fours poses should
|
|
target the ass, thighs, and lower back even if the expression detail mentions
|
|
face, lips, mouth, or tongue.
|
|
|
|
Evidence:
|
|
|
|
- Dataset seed `52` generated an internally contradictory prompt: on-all-fours
|
|
rear-view positioning paired with a face/chest ejaculation target.
|
|
- Corrected seed `52` and follow-up seed `5202` both rendered the rear-view
|
|
target consistently when the wording used `across her ass, thighs, and lower
|
|
back` and kept the clothing state tied to the lower garment.
|
|
|
|
### Blowjob Top View / Overhead Vertical Shaft
|
|
|
|
The atlas examples are steep overhead first-person oral views. The useful
|
|
structure is not generic kneeling oral and not just a vertical shaft; it is a
|
|
nadir-angle standing male POV where the nearby floor plane dominates and the
|
|
woman is directly below the viewer between his feet.
|
|
|
|
Works better:
|
|
|
|
- `nadir-angle standing male POV top-view oral position`
|
|
- `viewer looks almost straight down from his torso toward the floor`
|
|
- `nearby carpet/floor plane dominates the image`
|
|
- `viewer abdomen, shorts, thighs, and feet frame the lower foreground`
|
|
- `shaft appears as a short centered vertical column from the foreground`
|
|
- `one woman kneels directly below the viewer between his feet`
|
|
- `hair crown, forehead, shoulders, hands, and knees are visible from above`
|
|
- `desk legs, chair wheels, carpet texture, and floor seams as top-down office anchors`
|
|
- `mouth seals around the centered shaft`
|
|
- `one hand wraps the base`
|
|
- `face, shoulders, and compact foreshortened torso remain readable beneath the shaft`
|
|
|
|
Failure modes:
|
|
|
|
- generic kneeling oral that drifts into side-profile framing
|
|
- off-center shaft/mouth alignment
|
|
- hand present but not supporting the vertical centerline
|
|
- a close face crop that loses the viewer-underbody lower edge
|
|
- `plumb-line` or `map` wording that literalizes into drawn graphics
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: CodexMCPTest source subjects `46` and `47` with sampler
|
|
seed `4242424242` showed that generic blowjob/oral wording can already produce
|
|
a usable top-down image, but the atlas hierarchy tightened the shaft-to-mouth
|
|
axis. Source `46` gained clearer hand-at-base structure; source `47` moved from
|
|
a side-profile/off-center read into a centered vertical top-down read. The
|
|
generator now carries this as a provisional improvement over baseline, while
|
|
the catalog route remains candidate pending another seed.
|
|
|
|
Correction probes: a later same-seed source-`46` probe showed that vertical
|
|
center-shaft wording and generic steep-overhead wording can still feel too
|
|
frontal or horizontal. A short axis loop found the stronger terms: `nadir-angle`
|
|
or `bird's-eye` paired with `standing male POV`, `floor plane dominates`, nearby
|
|
top-down office anchors, `one woman directly below between his feet`, and
|
|
`short centered vertical column`. The `plumb-line` and `map` terms produced
|
|
good geometry but literal drawn artifacts, so they should stay out of generator
|
|
wording.
|
|
|
|
### Blowjob Side Profile / Side-Phone Weak Case
|
|
|
|
Seed `5656565656` showed that current side-profile oral wording is good at a
|
|
related composition, but that composition is not valid POV evidence for
|
|
`pov_blowjob_side_profile_oral`. It reads like a side-phone or external
|
|
side-camera shot taken from beside the man rather than a true first-person
|
|
viewpoint from his eyes or body line.
|
|
|
|
Useful for a future non-POV route:
|
|
|
|
- `side-phone oral composition`
|
|
- `external side-camera oral view`
|
|
- `woman kneels or leans beside the man's pelvis`
|
|
- `side-facing mouth and cheek profile remain readable`
|
|
- `office/coworking depth remains visible beside and behind the bodies`
|
|
|
|
Visual bookmark: turn `202`
|
|
[`blowjob-side-camera-turn202-awesome-side-phone.png`](krea2-visual-bookmarks/blowjob-side-camera-turn202-awesome-side-phone.png)
|
|
is a strong side-camera / side-phone composition for a future non-POV route. It
|
|
should not be counted as POV evidence, but it is a good look target for the
|
|
side-camera family. The original output filename is also preserved as
|
|
[`blowjob-side-camera-img_5a776aafda8f4a80ab12d995e4ce8020.png`](krea2-visual-bookmarks/blowjob-side-camera-img_5a776aafda8f4a80ab12d995e4ce8020.png).
|
|
|
|
Do not count as POV evidence:
|
|
|
|
- attractive side-camera framing where the camera is beside the man
|
|
- the viewer's body appearing as a photographed subject rather than the camera
|
|
owner
|
|
- side profile that loses the first-person lower-body viewpoint
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed weak case: CodexMCPTest source subjects `46` and `47` with sampler
|
|
seed `5656565656` produced four attractive side-phone / external side-camera
|
|
renders. The stricter candidate improved profile readability in some ways but
|
|
did not make the result more POV. Keep this wording for a later non-POV
|
|
side-camera route; do not patch the POV generator from it.
|
|
|
|
Single-source improvement: the same seed on source `46` improved when the prompt
|
|
made the foreground owner explicit as the adult male viewer:
|
|
|
|
- `visible adult male chest, navel, abdomen hair, pelvis, and thighs form the
|
|
central foreground surface`
|
|
- `woman lies on her side beside his left hip`
|
|
- `her torso lateral along the left edge of the frame`
|
|
- `side-facing mouth seals around the shaft near the center of the male abdomen`
|
|
- `one of her hands wraps the base directly below her lips`
|
|
|
|
This produced an atlas-like first-person body-line view with the male abdomen
|
|
and navel as the central foreground and the woman entering laterally from the
|
|
side. Treat it as accepted single-source evidence, not a generator rule.
|
|
|
|
Fragility warning: source `47` on the same sampler seed rejected a related
|
|
`body-axis` candidate because Krea2 transferred the body-axis cue to the
|
|
woman's torso/body, producing a seated or straddling non-POV composition. Future
|
|
side-profile oral tests should name the foreground owner repeatedly as the
|
|
adult male viewer and verify that the woman's body stays lateral instead of
|
|
becoming the central body surface.
|
|
|
|
Matrix update: sampler seed `9753197531` repeated the corrected side-profile
|
|
body-line axis across two visible women. Generic baselines on turns `198` and
|
|
`202` remained attractive side-phone or external side-camera reads. Pure
|
|
`male_body_axis` wording on turns `199` and `203` was fragile because it could
|
|
make the male read as the photographed subject. The repeatable winner was the
|
|
`lateral_edge_entry` axis on turns `200` and `204`: the male viewer's abdomen,
|
|
navel, pelvis, and near thigh create a broad horizontal foreground body
|
|
surface; the woman enters laterally from the left edge beside his hip; cheek
|
|
and jaw stay in profile; mouth contact sits at the male abdomen line; and one
|
|
hand stays around the base under her lips. Mirror this lateral-edge body-line
|
|
hierarchy into the side-lying oral generator route provisionally, while keeping
|
|
the variant queued for broader seed/source expansion.
|
|
|
|
Generated-route validation: turn `206` proved that the patched generated route
|
|
can preserve the male abdomen body-line, lateral side-profile entry, and
|
|
coworking depth, but it let the mouth/tongue float above the shaft while the
|
|
hand became the contact anchor. Adding `lips touching the shaft at the male
|
|
abdomen line` and `mouth-to-shaft contact is the nearest facial detail`
|
|
produced turn `207`, which preserved the body-line composition and moved the
|
|
oral contact onto the shaft. Keep those contact-priority terms in the generator
|
|
wording, and keep the route provisional because the result is still closer to
|
|
mouth/tongue contact than fully mouth-wrapped side-profile oral.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed weak case: sampler seed `8484848484` retested the side-profile
|
|
body-line route across two visible women. Generated-route turns `270` and
|
|
`273` preserved some useful male body-line foreground and mouth contact, but
|
|
still read partly as external side-camera compositions. Abdomen-line contact
|
|
lock turns `271` and `274` made Krea2 transfer the body-line cue onto the
|
|
woman's torso/body, so the woman became the photographed foreground subject.
|
|
Lateral-edge mouth-first turns `272` and `275` improved attractive side-camera
|
|
mouth contact, but the male appeared as a photographed subject at the frame
|
|
edge. Treat this as a weak-case record: do not promote the route and do not
|
|
patch from these branches. Future probes need stronger viewpoint ownership
|
|
without making either participant a photographed side-camera subject.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed lower-right torso repeat: sampler seed `9595959595` retested the
|
|
current generated route against body-owner wording across two visible women.
|
|
The current route controls, turns `276` and `280`, preserved contact, but the
|
|
blonde control still exposed the male as a photographed side subject. The
|
|
`lower_right_torso_anchor` branch repeated on turns `279` and `283`: `adult male viewer's own torso starts at the lower edge`,
|
|
runs into the lower-right foreground, and navel, abdomen hair, pelvis, and
|
|
near thigh mark the camera owner's body. This improved viewpoint ownership
|
|
while keeping lateral side-profile mouth contact. Mirror this lower-right
|
|
torso anchor into the side-lying oral generator provisionally, keep the route
|
|
queued, and continue rejecting the attractive side-camera branch as non-POV
|
|
evidence.
|
|
|
|
Generated-route validation: sampler seed `9696969696` rendered the patched
|
|
side-profile route directly across the same two visible women. Turns `284` and
|
|
`285`; turns `284` and `285` both kept the lower-right own-body foreground, navel/abdomen hair/pelvis
|
|
and near thigh as camera-owner landmarks, side-profile mouth contact at the
|
|
abdomen line, and coworking depth. This validates the provisional route patch
|
|
against the previous photographed-male-face side-camera failure, but it is not
|
|
enough to promote the pose; keep expanding across source images and seeds.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed promotion: sampler seed `5858585858` retested the patched generated
|
|
route across three visible women, with two conservative wording branches beside
|
|
each control. Generated-route controls on turns `298`, `301`, and `304`
|
|
repeated the same usable structure: the male abdomen/navel/pelvis/near thigh
|
|
remain the lower-right camera-owner body plane, the woman enters laterally in
|
|
side profile, mouth contact stays at the abdomen line, and the coworking depth
|
|
remains behind the bodies. The lower-edge owner branch on turns `299`, `302`,
|
|
and `305` strengthened body ownership but did not beat the default cleanly.
|
|
The `side-camera-style self-body crop` branch on turns `300`, `303`, and `306`
|
|
looked strongest aesthetically, but it sits closer to the non-POV side-camera
|
|
family. Promote the current generated side-profile POV hierarchy to proven and
|
|
keep the side-camera-style wording as a future look branch rather than the
|
|
default POV route.
|
|
|
|
### Blowjob Laying Frontal / Wide V-Frame
|
|
|
|
For prone frontal oral, generic `woman lies belly-down between his open thighs`
|
|
wording can already produce usable centered oral contact. The fixed-seed
|
|
improvement is the atlas hierarchy around the viewer's thigh frame and the
|
|
woman's low body line.
|
|
|
|
Useful wording:
|
|
|
|
- `open thighs form a wide symmetrical V-frame from the lower corners toward
|
|
the center`
|
|
- `pelvis and lower abdomen at the near edge`
|
|
- `woman lies belly-down in the gap between his thighs`
|
|
- `torso stretched low and horizontal`
|
|
- `hips and legs trailing away behind her along the center line`
|
|
- `hands wrap the base`
|
|
- `centered mouth-to-shaft contact`
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: CodexMCPTest source subjects `46` and `50` with sampler
|
|
seed `6767676767` improved over already-usable baselines. The baseline prompts
|
|
preserved coworking continuity, hands, and centered mouth contact, but tended
|
|
to read as raised-hips or all-fours rather than prone belly-down. The candidate
|
|
kept the subject/outfit/office scene and strengthened the wide V-frame and
|
|
low-horizontal torso hierarchy. Source `46` still kept some high-hip posture,
|
|
so this is a provisional generator improvement, not a proven rule.
|
|
|
|
### Blowjob Sitting Upright / Low Mouth Contact
|
|
|
|
For upright sitting oral, generic `mouth aligned to the centered shaft` wording
|
|
can preserve the seated office layout but leave the face too high, making mouth
|
|
contact implied rather than visible. The useful fixed-seed change is to make the
|
|
mouth-contact point the central hierarchy while preserving the seated torso.
|
|
|
|
Useful wording:
|
|
|
|
- `viewer reclines with open thighs forming the lower V-frame`
|
|
- `lower abdomen anchoring the near edge`
|
|
- `woman sits low between his open thighs`
|
|
- `torso upright behind the action`
|
|
- `face lowered close to the exact center contact point`
|
|
- `vertical shaft rises from the exact lower center`
|
|
- `open mouth covers the tip at the centerline`
|
|
- `both hands stay low at the base directly below her mouth`
|
|
|
|
Fixed-seed finding: CodexMCPTest source subjects `46` and `50` with sampler
|
|
seed `7878787878` improved when the candidate replaced high-face alignment with
|
|
low-mouth seated hierarchy. Both baselines preserved coworking continuity and
|
|
the viewer-thigh frame but kept the woman's face too high and hands beside the
|
|
base. A first source-`46` candidate that over-weighted vertical shoulders made
|
|
the mouth drift farther away. The accepted wording lowered the face to the
|
|
centered tip and made hands-at-base structure readable on both sources. Source
|
|
`50` had some outfit looseness/drift, so this is a provisional generator
|
|
improvement, not a proven rule.
|
|
|
|
### Missionary Open-Leg / Seated-Lounge Drift
|
|
|
|
The first open-leg missionary A/B did not justify a generator patch. It showed
|
|
that office-lounge support words can preserve coworking continuity but also
|
|
push the result toward a seated or angled cushion route. That route can still be
|
|
a valid missionary angle; it is just not the flatter elevated-support atlas
|
|
subcase.
|
|
|
|
Useful partial cues from seed `8989898989`:
|
|
|
|
- `viewer between her legs from the lower foreground`
|
|
- `hands hold the undersides of her thighs`
|
|
- `open thighs form a broad V-frame around the centered contact line`
|
|
- `lower abdomen and hands anchor the lower foreground`
|
|
- `face and torso visible behind the open thighs`
|
|
|
|
Weak points:
|
|
|
|
- `low office-lounge sofa surface` and visible sofa backs made both source
|
|
subjects read like an angled lounge-seat missionary route
|
|
- the candidate improved source `50` thigh framing and hand placement, but did
|
|
not materially improve source `47` over its already-strong baseline
|
|
- neither candidate fully matched the flatter elevated-support references
|
|
|
|
Follow-up prompt-axis probes on the same sampler seed showed a useful but still
|
|
unproven direction. Pose-first prompts with `flat floor mat`, `thin floor
|
|
cushion`, `wide V-shaped tunnel`, `diagonal thigh rails`, `viewer hands grip
|
|
the thighs from below`, and `coworking carpet, floor seams, desk legs, and
|
|
chair wheels stay low around the cushion` improved the flat-back and open-thigh
|
|
geometry. However, those pose-first probes omitted the original subject/look
|
|
block, so they only count as geometry-axis discovery. Subject-look-first
|
|
follow-ups preserved the woman look better, especially with the `V-shaped
|
|
tunnel` wording, but still stayed in the angled cushion family. Do not treat
|
|
that as invalid missionary; treat it as the wrong subcase when the target is the
|
|
flat elevated-support atlas view.
|
|
|
|
A subject-first follow-up batch on turns `77`-`80` confirmed the same weak
|
|
case. Keeping the original woman/look block first preserved identity and face
|
|
adherence across all four candidates, but stronger phrases like `camera mounted
|
|
just above the male pelvis`, `head, shoulders, spine, hips, and hair all
|
|
resting on the same low horizontal plane`, `wide thigh gate`, `overhead
|
|
first-person missionary`, and `thin cushion placed directly on a coworking
|
|
carpet` still did not beat turn `76`. The best candidate, turn `80`, kept
|
|
coworking depth, viewer hands, and the V-frame readable, but still looked
|
|
seated/upright on a cushion rather than the flat elevated-support atlas
|
|
subcase.
|
|
|
|
The successful split came from atlas refs where the viewer is not reclined with
|
|
thighs projecting forward. Turns `81`-`84` tested elevated supports and viewer
|
|
edge placement. The accepted axis is:
|
|
|
|
- `flat elevated support` or `rounded white lounge platform`
|
|
- `standing or braced man at the foot edge`
|
|
- `feet and vertical shins visible below the support edge`
|
|
- `legs drop down along the side edges below the support`
|
|
- `woman lies flat across the tabletop/platform`
|
|
- `hands holding her calves or outer thighs at the edge`
|
|
|
|
Turn `84` was the best subject-first candidate: the woman stayed flat on one
|
|
rounded platform plane, office depth remained coherent, viewer hands held the
|
|
outer thighs, and the lower edge read as a support edge instead of a reclined
|
|
viewer-thigh foreground. Turn `81` was useful secondary evidence with a white
|
|
table/support and feet below the edge. Turn `82` is a weak branch: `kneeling
|
|
tightly at the foot edge` hallucinated an extra male body behind her, so do not
|
|
make kneeling-edge wording the primary cue. Patch only the raised-edge or
|
|
edge-supported route with this elevated-support wording; keep generic
|
|
missionary available for valid angled missionary views.
|
|
|
|
### Missionary Folded / Contact-First Knee Block
|
|
|
|
Folded/high-leg missionary can be reached with subject-first wording, but Krea2
|
|
will often let the knees and feet become the whole image. The first fixed-seed
|
|
batch on seed `8989898989` showed that `compact knee block`, `vertical thigh
|
|
columns`, `ankles and feet close to the camera`, and `hands holding calves`
|
|
produce folded geometry, but the visible shaft/contact can disappear.
|
|
|
|
The accepted follow-up axis from turn `89` is contact-first:
|
|
|
|
- `viewer lower abdomen anchors the bottom edge`
|
|
- `large centered shaft rising from the lower center`
|
|
- `shaft/contact enters the exposed vulva below the folded knees`
|
|
- `both knees folded tightly toward her chest into one compact knee block`
|
|
- `viewer hands hold her calves`
|
|
- `face, breasts, and torso remain visible behind the raised knees`
|
|
|
|
Turn `89` was the strongest combined result: it preserved the same subject/look
|
|
and coworking platform, recovered a visible lower-center shaft/contact, and
|
|
kept the knees folded high as a compact block. Turn `92` was useful secondary
|
|
evidence for pelvis/shaft anchoring, but the fold was looser. Prefer the
|
|
turn-`89` hierarchy over abstract `penetration line` wording. Mirror it only
|
|
into the folded-missionary route as a provisional patch; keep generic
|
|
missionary and elevated-edge missionary separate.
|
|
|
|
### Cowgirl Frontal / Wide Thigh Bridge
|
|
|
|
Frontal cowgirl is not currently a structural generator failure. On seed
|
|
`8989898989`, the generic subject-first baseline already produced a valid
|
|
woman-on-top POV: the viewer was underneath, the woman faced him, torso stayed
|
|
upright, coworking depth remained coherent, and lower-center contact was
|
|
readable.
|
|
|
|
The useful atlas refinement is the wide-thigh silhouette. For refs like
|
|
`5.cowgirl/100_cowgirl.png` and `5.cowgirl/101_cowgirl.png`, prefer:
|
|
|
|
- `viewer reclines underneath her`
|
|
- `viewer lower abdomen and pelvis at the bottom edge`
|
|
- `wide horizontal thigh bridge from left edge to right edge`
|
|
- `knees planted outside the viewer's hips`
|
|
- `torso upright above the centered contact point`
|
|
- `centered shaft contact below her belly`
|
|
- `viewer hands gripping the sides of her thighs`
|
|
|
|
Turn `95` was the strongest same-seed candidate because it made the thighs span
|
|
the lower frame while preserving contact, subject/look, and coworking context.
|
|
Turn `96` was useful secondary evidence for hands-on-hips/contact-centered
|
|
wording, but it did not improve the wide straddling silhouette as much.
|
|
|
|
Matrix update: sampler seed `2828282828` repeated the wide-thigh bridge
|
|
hierarchy across two visible women. Turns `208` and `212` were already valid
|
|
generic frontal cowgirl baselines with coherent coworking depth and centered
|
|
contact. Turns `209` and `213` improved the atlas silhouette by making the
|
|
thighs span left edge to right edge while preserving the viewer-underneath
|
|
body cues, upright torso, centered contact, and coworking setting. Turn `209`
|
|
was strongest because the viewer hands gripped both outer thighs; turn `213`
|
|
repeated the wide bridge with cleaner face/torso readability but weaker hand
|
|
visibility. Mirror the wide-thigh bridge hierarchy into the normal cowgirl
|
|
generator route provisionally. This is still a candidate route because the
|
|
baseline is already valid and another seed/source expansion should repeat the
|
|
refinement before promotion.
|
|
|
|
Generated-route validation: turn `216` used the patched normal cowgirl route
|
|
and preserved the full hierarchy: viewer lower abdomen and pelvis at the bottom
|
|
edge, hands gripping the outer thighs, wide thigh bridge across the foreground,
|
|
upright torso, centered contact below her belly, and coworking depth. Keep this
|
|
route patch provisional because it refines an already-valid baseline rather
|
|
than fixing a structural route failure.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-seed promotion: sampler seed `9191919191` repeated the patched normal
|
|
cowgirl route across turns `242`-`249` and two visible women. Turns `242` and
|
|
`246` used the generated-route wording directly and stayed valid: viewer-low
|
|
body ownership, lower abdomen/pelvis at the bottom edge, centered contact below
|
|
her belly, upright torso, coworking depth, and visible hand/thigh support.
|
|
Turns `242`, `243`, `244`, and `248` were the clearest atlas-like repeats for
|
|
the wide horizontal thigh sweep. Turn `247` was still valid cowgirl, but one
|
|
side did not span edge-to-edge as strongly. Treat the normal frontal cowgirl
|
|
wide-thigh bridge route as proven. Keep cowgirl-alt, reverse-cowgirl, and
|
|
reverse-cowgirl-alt separate because their atlas orientation is different.
|
|
|
|
### Cowgirl Alt / Flat Supine Low Angle
|
|
|
|
Cowgirl-alt should not be scored only by squat depth or contact clarity. The
|
|
atlas refs repeatedly show the man/viewer flat on his back while the woman is
|
|
mounted over him, and the room background proves the camera is low: ceiling,
|
|
upper walls, overhead lights, or high window/partition lines sit behind her
|
|
upper body.
|
|
|
|
Same-seed turns `97`-`100` showed the weak case. Low-squat wording produced
|
|
coherent woman-on-top images, and turn `99` improved supported-under-thigh
|
|
shape, but the background still read too much like a platform or high camera.
|
|
Do not accept that as cowgirl-alt just because contact and bent knees are
|
|
readable.
|
|
|
|
The accepted turn `104` hierarchy is:
|
|
|
|
- `viewer lies flat on his back underneath her`
|
|
- `lens sits low at the viewer's abdomen looking upward from his pelvis`
|
|
- `viewer abdomen and chest lie flat at the bottom edge`
|
|
- `woman mounted over him facing him`
|
|
- `knees bent wide and close to the camera`
|
|
- `ceiling lights, upper walls, or high glass partition lines behind her`
|
|
- `centered contact below her belly`
|
|
|
|
Patch only the cowgirl-alt route with this flat-supine/low-angle wording.
|
|
Normal frontal cowgirl can remain a higher, cleaner woman-on-top straddle when
|
|
the background still reads like a platform or elevated support.
|
|
|
|
### Reverse Cowgirl / Close Back-Hip Dominant
|
|
|
|
Generic reverse-cowgirl wording is not enough for Krea2. On seed `8989898989`,
|
|
turn `105` included `facing away`, viewer-underneath contact, and coworking
|
|
depth, but the woman still rendered as frontal cowgirl. The route needs the
|
|
back-facing straddle hierarchy before generic contact language.
|
|
|
|
For normal reverse cowgirl refs like `cowgirl_reverse/101_cowgirl_reverse.png`,
|
|
`cowgirl_reverse/106_cowgirl_reverse.png`, and
|
|
`cowgirl_reverse/1_cowgirl_reverse.png`, prefer:
|
|
|
|
- `woman sits on the viewer's pelvis facing away`
|
|
- `back, hips, and ass are the nearest largest shapes to the camera`
|
|
- `viewer thighs frame the lower corners`
|
|
- `centered contact sits directly between her thighs below her ass`
|
|
- `her thighs spread to either side of the viewer's hips`
|
|
- `partial over-shoulder glance` only after the back-facing straddle is locked
|
|
|
|
Turn `106` was the strongest same-seed candidate because it turned the frontal
|
|
baseline into a close back/hip-dominant straddle while preserving subject/look,
|
|
office depth, viewer-underneath legs, and centered contact. Turn `107` was a
|
|
valid secondary viewer-leg-frame variant, but a little farther back and more
|
|
upright. Turn `108` is useful secondary evidence for refs with an over-shoulder
|
|
glance.
|
|
|
|
Patch only the normal reverse-cowgirl route with this close back/hip hierarchy.
|
|
Keep reverse-cowgirl-alt separate: the alt atlas family is more upright and
|
|
seated, with the vertical back/shoulders and viewer hands or thighs forming a
|
|
cleaner seated straddle frame.
|
|
|
|
### Reverse Cowgirl Alt / Upright Seated Back-Facing
|
|
|
|
Reverse-cowgirl-alt is the upright seated branch, not just another close crop
|
|
of normal reverse cowgirl. The atlas refs such as
|
|
`cowgirl_reversere_alt/100_cowgirl_reversere_alt.png`,
|
|
`cowgirl_reversere_alt/101_cowgirl_reversere_alt.png`, and
|
|
`cowgirl_reversere_alt/102_cowgirl_reversere_alt.png` keep the woman's back and
|
|
shoulders vertical and readable above the hips, with the viewer's thighs and
|
|
often hands forming the lower seated straddle frame.
|
|
|
|
On seed `8989898989`, turn `109` showed that a subject-first upright baseline
|
|
already hits the route. Turn `110` was the strongest atlas-alt wording because
|
|
it added viewer hands on both hips while preserving the vertical back, centered
|
|
ass-over-pelvis placement, viewer thigh V-frame, centered contact, and coworking
|
|
depth.
|
|
|
|
Prefer:
|
|
|
|
- `POV upright reverse cowgirl back-facing penetration position`
|
|
- `woman sits upright facing away in a back-facing straddle`
|
|
- `back stays vertical and readable above her hips`
|
|
- `viewer hands hold both sides of her hips`
|
|
- `viewer thighs frame the lower corners`
|
|
- `centered contact remains visible below her ass`
|
|
- `office desks, glass partitions, plants, or tall-window light behind her upright back`
|
|
|
|
Use over-shoulder glance wording only as a secondary refinement. Turn `112` was
|
|
a strong over-shoulder variant, but the core route should first preserve the
|
|
upright seated back-facing silhouette.
|
|
|
|
### POV Doggy / Rear-Entry
|
|
|
|
For doggy-style POV, visible viewer thighs, lower torso, or pelvis can be
|
|
correct. Real POV references often show them. The useful target is not removing
|
|
the viewer body, but making the body cues read as a standing or crouched
|
|
first-person viewpoint instead of a vague seated pose.
|
|
|
|
To push the reference closer to a standing or crouched man looking down, use a
|
|
top-down rear-entry structure:
|
|
|
|
- `top-down standing POV doggy position from behind`
|
|
- `camera looks down over the viewer's extended hands onto the woman's raised hips`
|
|
- `woman is on all fours with chest low, forearms folded, cheek turned sideways`
|
|
- `rear-entry penetration visible between raised hips`
|
|
- `face and mouth remain far ahead, clearly separated from the penis`
|
|
|
|
Do not use visible shoes or lower legs as the standing cue. Seed `65` showed
|
|
that adding shoes/lower legs made Krea2 drift into oral contact and lose the
|
|
rear-entry geometry.
|
|
|
|
Do not over-prompt `viewer torso and thighs outside frame`; seeds `65` and
|
|
`6602` showed Krea2 still draws lower-body POV cues, and real references support
|
|
that. Prefer framing them as plausible foreground body cues rather than trying
|
|
to suppress them.
|
|
|
|
## Stronger-Control / Low-Priority Cases
|
|
|
|
Some atlas routes are useful to catalog but are not good prompt-only tuning
|
|
targets yet. Keep these out of the normal fixed-seed prompt queue until easier
|
|
pose families are covered.
|
|
|
|
### Sixty-Nine / Close Reversed POV
|
|
|
|
`pov_sixty_nine_close_reversed_oral` is currently the hardest and low-priority
|
|
atlas route. It should be treated as a pose/control image or image-guided route
|
|
first, not a normal prompt-only fixed-seed candidate.
|
|
|
|
The repeated atlas geometry is close and specific: the visible partner is
|
|
reversed over the viewer, hips closest to the camera, head and torso receding
|
|
away into the upper frame, and the viewer face or mouth anchoring the lower
|
|
foreground. Text-only prompting can collapse this into generic oral contact or
|
|
lose the reversed-over-viewer body arrangement.
|
|
|
|
## Style
|
|
|
|
Style should describe rendering, not camera mechanics.
|
|
|
|
Use style presets to choose between:
|
|
|
|
- natural photo,
|
|
- creator/social-media photo,
|
|
- documentary/direct-flash photo,
|
|
- cinematic realism,
|
|
- illustration/comic.
|
|
|
|
If a controlled camera is active, avoid style suffixes that imply a conflicting
|
|
camera such as `phone photo` or `handheld selfie`.
|
|
|
|
## Guide Update Format
|
|
|
|
When adding a new rule, include:
|
|
|
|
- observed prompt,
|
|
- observed image failure,
|
|
- edited prompt wording,
|
|
- image improvement or regression,
|
|
- generator path if known,
|
|
- final rule.
|