Testing SDXL 0.9: Image Quality, Clipdrop and a Midjourney Comparison

In June 2023, Matthew Berman tries Stability AI’s image model, compares selected prompts with Midjourney and demonstrates Clipdrop’s lighting tool.

MBMatthew BermanSpeaker · Forward Future
Channel
Matthew Berman
Published
Jun 30, 2023
Video
9:33
Read
4 min
Slides
5
Original
English
Open on YouTube
Scroll to read and the video shrinks to the bottom-right corner. Captions follow your reading language.
Reading languageAvailable in 2 languages
You're reading the original English.
SUMMARY

In 30 seconds

Matthew Berman reviews the SDXL 0.9 preview using Stability AI examples and hands-on Clipdrop generations, then compares selected images with Midjourney. He likes the visual detail and demonstrates relighting. The free-tier figures and hardware guidance are historical; SDXL 0.9’s research license also restricted use, despite the video’s broad open-source characterization.

  1. 1Beta versus 0.9Selected example pairs show more detail in the newer model, including an alien, a wolf and a hand holding coffee.
  2. 2Editing and architectureBerman discusses image-to-image, inpainting and outpainting, plus the base and ensemble parameter counts reported by Stability AI.
  3. 3Hardware and licensingThe 2023 hardware guidance distinguishes system RAM and GPU memory. Version 0.9 had a research-only license rather than unrestricted open use.
  4. 4Historical Clipdrop planThe video shows a free plan with a watermarked 400-image daily limit; quotas and pricing may have changed.
  5. 5Prompt comparisonsBerman compares a few generated artworks, fingerprints and a lion with Midjourney examples, offering personal judgments rather than a controlled benchmark.
  6. 6Relighting demoHe moves colored lights around a generated portrait and adjusts their intensity, radius and distance.

Takeaways

  1. SDXL 0.9 produced notably different results from its earlier beta in Stability AI’s selected examples.
  2. Berman’s small, subjective prompt comparisons do not establish equal quality across models or solve image-generation errors.
  3. The 0.9 research license permitted non-commercial research under specified terms; published code and model-weight permissions should not be conflated.
  4. The video’s Clipdrop 400-images-per-day free allowance and other prices reflect June 2023, not a current offer.
  5. Clipdrop’s relighting tool lets users move colored lights and adjust intensity, radius and distance.
FULL TEXT

Read the edited text by chapter

Transcript only
01

What changed in SDXL 0.9

Berman examines Stability AI’s side-by-side examples and describes editing capabilities and model architecture. He finds the newer images more detailed.

In June 2023, I take a look at Stability AI’s SDXL 0.9 preview and compare a few of its outputs with Midjourney. I am impressed by the apparent detail and composition, though my selections and judgments are informal rather than a controlled test.

Stability AI describes 0.9 as an improvement over its April beta. The company shows the same prompts side by side: an alien scene has more detail and color in the newer example, and a wolf in Yosemite looks sharper to me, down to its fur and eyes. These are selected demonstrations, not a measurement of typical performance.

SDXL beta and 0.9 comparison
SLIDE 1 / 5SDXL beta and 0.9 comparisonStability AI’s selected alien examples use the same prompt and show different compositions and detail.
The coffee-cup hand example
SLIDE 2 / 5The coffee-cup hand exampleThe video contrasts two selected generations; a single example cannot establish general anatomical accuracy.

Another comparison shows a hand holding takeaway coffee. I point out extra fingers in the earlier result and praise the newer example. A good-looking hand in one image does not mean either SDXL or Midjourney has solved hand anatomy for all prompts.

I discuss the SDXL family’s image-to-image prompting, inpainting to replace portions of an image and outpainting to extend its boundaries. Availability depends on the particular implementation and service; not every feature is demonstrated as part of the base model itself.

Stability AI reports a 3.5-billion-parameter base model and a 6.6-billion-parameter ensemble pipeline, compared with 3.1 billion for the beta. It describes two text encoders and a base-and-refiner approach, with output up to 1024 × 1024. Parameter counts alone do not establish output quality ([Stability AI](https://stability.ai/news-updates/sdxl-09-stable-diffusion)).

02

Hardware, access and pricing

The video discusses historical hardware requirements, research access and the expected 1.0 release. It then shows the Clipdrop plans available at the time.

The 2023 guidance I read lists Windows 10 or 11 or Linux, 16 GB of system RAM and an Nvidia RTX 20-series GPU with 8 GB of VRAM. These are historical vendor recommendations, not a promise that every configuration or workflow will run identically; optimizations and model options can change memory requirements.

At the time, SDXL 0.9 was available through Clipdrop and the Stability API, with research access ahead of a planned 1.0 release. Although I call it open source, access to the 0.9 weights had specific limits: the [SDXL 0.9 Research License](https://huggingface.co/stabilityai/stable-diffusion-xl-base-0.9) grants use for non-commercial research subject to its terms. Availability of code does not automatically make those weights unrestricted.

Clipdrop displays examples across anime, realistic and stylized imagery. I consider several comparable in appearance to Midjourney. The page in the video shows a free tier with 400 watermarked SDXL images per day and a paid option; those quotas, watermarks and prices describe June 2023 and should not be assumed current.

Clipdrop’s 2023 free tier
SLIDE 3 / 5Clipdrop’s 2023 free tierThe displayed 400-image daily limit and watermark are historical plan details.
03

Comparing prompts with Midjourney

Berman tries surreal art, fingerprints and a lion. These are subjective examples rather than a systematic quality evaluation.

For an informal comparison, I take a surreal “pill head” prompt from Midjourney and try it in Clipdrop. The images differ, as expected from different models and generation conditions. I find the results artistic, but a handful of selected outputs cannot establish which model is generally better.

I next try a fingerprint prompt. The first results are black and white, so I add blue and red to better match the example I am comparing. I like the new images and show one next to the Midjourney result; changing a prompt is useful experimentation, but it also means the comparison is not a fixed-condition benchmark.

Fingerprint comparison
SLIDE 4 / 5Fingerprint comparisonThe video compares selected images after adding color to the SDXL prompt.

For a lion prompt, an initial result looks more artistic than the realism I wanted. A subsequent set gives me the detailed, realistic appearance I was looking for. Different generations can vary even when the general subject is the same.

04

Relighting and conclusion

He demonstrates adjusting virtual colored lights on a portrait. He closes with enthusiasm about the model and local generation.

Clipdrop also offers tools such as background removal, cleanup, relighting, upscaling and uncropping. I demonstrate Relight on a generated portrait: I move red, blue and green lights, change their intensity, radius and distance, and watch shadows and illumination update before downloading the image.

Relight controls
SLIDE 5 / 5Relight controlsColored lights and distance, radius and intensity settings alter the generated portrait.

I am excited by the apparent progress and the prospect of running models locally. Local generation avoids a hosted daily quota but still depends on hardware, software and applicable license terms; it is not literally without resource limits. My enthusiasm for the comparison reflects these examples, not an exhaustive evaluation.

More from this channel

12 slides34:21EN
Matthew Berman· Oct 27, 2026Matthew Berman Examines Anthropic’s IPO Filing, AI Growth and GovernanceMatthew Berman, Sam Altman · Forward FutureThe presenter reviews the S-1’s financial metrics, compute strategy and voting structure while questioning the tension between rapid AI development and safety.AnthropicAI SafetyEnterprise AI+2
0:26EN
Matthew Berman· Oct 25, 2026Sam Altman on Human Values and Problem-Solving in an AI WorldSam Altman · OpenAIIn a short interview excerpt, Altman considers the enjoyment of solving hard problems and the human role in interpreting results.Human-AI CollaborationFuture of WorkAI Strategy
2 slides0:36EN
Matthew Berman· Oct 25, 2026Kimi K3.1 and a Rubik’s Cube Solver DemonstrationMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman shows a scrambled virtual cube being solved and gives the Kimi K3.1 test a favorable assessment.EvalsCoding agentsOpen-weight models
2 slides0:21EN
Matthew Berman· Oct 24, 2026An AI-Generated Kimi Benchmark Chart Used Invented ScoresMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman asks for a graph of Kimi K3.1 Pro benchmarks, then discovers that the displayed figures are illustrative placeholders.BenchmarksEvalsGenerative media
6 slides25:50EN
Matthew Berman· Oct 24, 2026Kimi K3.1 Pro Tested: Strong 3D Demos, Uneven Results and Competitive PricingMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman tests the open-weight model on coding, 3D rendering and visual explanations, then compares benchmark results and prices.Open-weight modelsBenchmarksAI cost & performance+1
2 slides32:20EN
Matthew Berman· Oct 23, 2026Who Is Local AI For? The Costs, Trade-offs and a Hybrid FutureMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman weighs data control and independence against hardware cost, setup complexity and inference speed.Local inferenceOpen-weight modelsAI cost & performance+1