Organizations: Tongji Univeristy · Tencent · Nanyang Technological University · Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · University of Hong Kong · National University of Singapore · Fuzhou University
In this paper, we introduce MegaStyle, a novel and scalable data curation pipeline that constructs an intra-style consistent, inter-style diverse and high-quality style dataset. We achieve this by leveraging the consistent text-to-image style mapping capability of current large generative models, which can generate images in the same style from a given style description. Building on this foundation, we curate a diverse and balanced prompt gallery with 170K style prompts and 400K content prompts, and generate a large-scale style dataset MegaStyle-1.4M via content-style prompt combinations. With MegaStyle-1.4M, we propose style-supervised contrastive learning to fine-tune a style encoder MegaStyle-Encoder for extracting expressive, style-specific representations, and we also train a FLUX-based style transfer model MegaStyle-FLUX. Extensive experiments demonstrate the importance of maintaining intra-style consistency, inter-style diversity and high-quality for style dataset, as well as the effectiveness of the proposed MegaStyle-1.4M. Moreover, when trained on MegaStyle-1.4M, MegaStyle-Encoder and MegaStyle-FLUX provide reliable style similarity measurement and generalizable style transfer, making a significant contribution to the style transfer community. More results are available at our project website https://jeoyal.github.io/MegaStyle/.
Figures & tables
Figure 2: Illustrations of (a) artworks by Vincent van Gogh ; (b) style images in OmniStyle-150K generated by SOTA style transfer methods [ 5 , 10 , 55 , 2 , 17 , 60 ] from a reference style image; and (c) images generated by Qwen-Image using the same style description.
Figure 3: Overview of our data curation pipeline. We first collect style and content images from open-source datasets. Next, we apply carefully designed instructions to generate style and content prompts with Qwen3-VL, together with balance sampling. Finally, we use Qwen-Image to generate style images using content-style prompt combinations. Please note that we use simplified content and style prompts for illustrative purposes only .
Figure 4: Visualizations of style reproductions. We first use Qwen3-VL to caption a style prompt from the reference style image, and then generate style reproductions on content–style combinations using Qwen-Image.
Figure 5: Distribution analysis of overall artistic styles in the style prompts. We present the proportions of the top 30 overall artistic styles.
Datasets
Intra-style Consistency
Overall Style
Fine-grained Style
Style Image Number
WikiArt
✗
27
—
80K
JourneyDB
✗
—
300K
4.4M
Style30K
✗
—
1K
30K
IMAGStyle
✓
14
15K
210K
OmniStyle-150K
✓
—
1K
150K
MegaStyle-1.4M
✓
8,355
170K
1.4M
Table 1: Comparison of style datasets. ✓/✗ indicate whether intra-style consistency is provided and — indicates that the statistic is unavailable.
Figure 6: Visualizations of style pairs in MegaStyle-1.4M, where each row shows the same style with different contents.
Figure 7: The architecture of MegaStyle-FLUX.
Figure 8: Visual comparison of top-1 matched style retrieval results between MegaStyle-Encoder, SigLIP, and CSD. The red and green borders indicate incorrect and correct matches, respectively.
mAP@k ↑
Recall@k ↑
Methods
Backbone
1
10
1
10
CLIP
ViT-L
9.29
6.46
9.29
31.56
CSD
ViT-L
45.60
37.78
45.60
79.18
MegaStyle-Encoder
ViT-L
87.26
85.98
87.26
97.61
SigLIP
SoViT
10.43
7.83
10.43
36.32
MegaStyle-Encoder
SoViT
88.46
86.77
88.46
97.66
Table 2: Comparison of MegaStyle-Encoder with other style encoders on the StyleRetrieval benchmark. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Figure 9: Qualitative comparison between MegaStyle-FLUX and SOTA style transfer methods. MegaStyle-FLUX achieves the superior performance compared to baseline methods.
Metrics
StyleCrafter
DEADiff
Attn-Distill
InstantStyle
CSGO
StyleAligned
StyleShot
MegaStyle-FLUX
Style ↑
48.59
51.34
85.59
71.41
55.02
59.80
63.42
76.16
Text ↑
21.39
23.13
20.29
20.77
23.05
21.31
21.79
23.20
Human Style ↑
3.41
3.05
13.97
18.19
7.34
7.46
15.21
31.37
Human Text ↑
8.87
11.13
6.31
10.98
16.18
4.12
13.69
28.72
Table 3: Quantitative comparison of style and text alignment with SOTA style transfer methods. Style and Text denote the cosine distance in the feature spaces of MegaStyle-Encoder and CLIP, respectively. The prefix Human indicates human preference scores. Best result is marked in bold , and the second-best result is highlighted in underline .
Figure 10: Visual results of MegaStyle-FLUX trained on different style datasets.
Figure 11: Visual results of MegaStyle-FLUX and fine-tuned StyleShot.
Metrics
JourneyDB
OmniStyle-150K
MegaStyle-1.4M
Style ↑
34.56
51.49
76.16
Text ↑
21.12
23.02
23.20
Table 4: Quantitative comparison of style datasets. Best is marked in bold .
StyleBench
FLUX-Retrieval
OmniStyle-150K
mAP@k ↑
Recall@k ↑
mAP@k ↑
Recall@k ↑
mAP@k ↑
Recall@k ↑
Methods
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
CLIP
40.00
30.85
40.00
82.50
2.42
1.55
2.42
9.68
1.68
1.35
1.68
10.39
CSD
70.00
51.65
70.00
97.50
14.16
9.91
14.16
40.08
60.86
48.24
60.86
89.71
MegaStyle-Encoder
85.00
54.15
85.00
100.00
22.70
18.38
22.70
51.87
78.89
60.18
78.89
94.07
Table 5: Comparison of MegaStyle-Encoder with other style encoders on the StyleBench, FLUX-Retrieval and OmniStyle-150K. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Metrics
StyleShot-FLUX
StyleShot-FLUX-Mega
MegaStyle-FLUX
Style ↑
57.06
67.73
76.16
Text ↑
21.86
23.27
23.20
Table 6: Quantitative comparison between MegaStyle-FLUX and fine-tuned StyleShot. Best is marked in bold .
Figure 12: Visualizations of retrieval benchmark WikiArt and our StyleRetrieval, where each row shows the same style during retrieval.
Figure 13: Visual results between MegaStyle-FLUX and Qwen-Image-Edit.
Metrics
Qwen-Image-Edit
MegaStyle-FLUX
Style ↑
43.03
76.16
Text ↑
24.24
23.20
Table 7: Quantitative comparison between MegaStyle-FLUX and Qwen-Image-Edit. Best is marked in bold .
Figure 14: Visualizations of association bias in Qwen-Image.
Figure 15: Additional visualizations of style pairs in MegaStyle-1.4M, where each row shows the same style with different contents.
Figure 16: Additional visualizations of style pairs in MegaStyle-1.4M, where each row shows the same style with different contents.
Figure 17: Additional visualizations of style pairs in MegaStyle-1.4M, where each row shows the same style with different contents.
Figure 18: Additionaly qualitative comparison between MegaStyle-FLUX and SOTA style transfer methods.
Figure 19: Additionaly qualitative comparison between MegaStyle-FLUX and SOTA style transfer methods.