A pause node

[hyupuunos]

I wanted to humbly propose an unconventional idea that recently occurred to me: Would it be feasible to implement a universal node,when the workflow actually reaches this specific node，that would pause the workflow upon activation, allowing manual intervention to determine whether subsequent processes should proceed?
The inspiration behind this suggestion stems from my recurring need to make selective adjustments (such as lighting or color modifications) to images, where immediate automated continuation isn't always desirable. While this concept originated from image editing scenarios, I believe such a versatile node could potentially accommodate various unforeseen applications, ultimately helping users minimize how frequently they need to launch Photoshop for minor adjustments.
Please forgive me if this proposal seems overly ambitious. Regardless of whether this feature aligns with current development priorities, I must express my profound admiration for the brilliant plugin you've created. Its existing capabilities have already revolutionized my workflow, and for that, you have my deepest respects.Thank you for your time and consideration.

an even crazier thought: Could we pause the workflow and manually select different continuation paths?
For example, when processing an image, the paused workflow could let us choose between lighting adjustment or color correction next. However, I'm not sure if this is technically feasible - in my limited experience, I've only seen plugins that switch input sources, but none that allow switching output paths (deciding what comes next in the workflow).

[chrisgoringe]

Let's put the second idea aside for a moment...

For the first: describe for me how it would work from a user perspective. I insert the "pause" node into my workflow. When execution reaches it, what happens, how does the user respond, and what are their options?

To offer a "proceed/cancel" is technically easy enough (you can already do it with image filter!) So are you just suggesting a different UI? Or something more?

The idea sounds interesting - but I haven't got it yet!

[hyupuunos]

As you mentioned, the 'proceed/cancel' feature is already working. I realize now that I overlooked this earlier because I had set the image filter to automatically proceed to the next workflow when only one image is detected. Disabling that option indeed allows manual control for single images. Everything looks good now—thank you so much for clarifying this!

[chrisgoringe]

Thinking about your second crazier thought… maybe the “extra” fields could in some way be used… I don’t use switches at all, but I wonder if a switch could be controlled by the extra output?

…

On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 at 9:07 pm, hyupuunos ***@***.***> wrote: As you mentioned, the 'proceed/cancel' feature is already working. I realize now that I overlooked this earlier because I had set the image filter to automatically proceed to the next workflow when only one image is detected. Disabling that option indeed allows manual control for single images. Everything looks good now—thank you so much for clarifying this! — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#80 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABBLMA4ID4B7IHSPAADW63T23S3A7AVCNFSM6AAAAAB36DNHW6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43URDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHMYTEOJWGAYDANQ> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.*** .com>

[hyupuunos]

In the current version of ComfyUI's settings, there’s a 'Node Widget' option under 'Widget Control Mode,' which determines when widget values (like randomize/increment/decrement) are updated—either before the prompt is queued or after.
I haven’t tested this yet, so I’m unsure if this means that node parameters can be modified in real time and take effect immediately.
If that’s the case, perhaps this could allow us to pause a node, manually disable certain downstream branches, or simply adjust parameters mid-process. This would be incredibly useful. One of ComfyUI’s limitations compared to Photoshop is the inability to tweak parameters mid-workflow, which sometimes leads to less precise results.
For example, imagine being able to visually assess the color saturation of an image as it’s generated, then decide the exact saturation value to apply in the next step—instead of having to run a separate ‘adjust saturation’ workflow after the image is finalized.
Regarding workflow branching: let’s say we’re at a three-way junction (A/B/C). Pausing to disable paths A and B would theoretically activate path C. However, I’m not certain if disabling branches this way would take effect immediately.
There’s also a more complex idea I’m struggling to articulate clearly:
Suppose modules A, B, and C each have a signal (image) receiver as their starting point. During a pause, we could manually decide which receiver to send the image to, and the selected module would proceed. The challenge lies in ensuring that modules not receiving the signal remain inactive without throwing errors (which would terminate the entire process).

[hyupuunos]

I wonder if something like this exists: a signal transmitter (A) and a signal receiver (B), where B only proceeds further after receiving a signal from A. Otherwise, it remains silent (without throwing errors).