| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Release id #248155 : Hiking Home for Christmas
Drama posts go here: |
|
... 128 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Zierliches Püppchen
Registered: Jan 2012
Posts: 15 |
Quoting PAL
If you all continue this quest for absolute proof, like I gave you in the last FIG demo, I will just stop doing this altogether because it limit the creatice process also to be under a rule of others... I do not care but to build upont that I will not do... It will only lead to the downfall of the whole C64 scene eventually. No one should ever have to show how they create magic—that is what a magic trick is all about.
In a gfx comp it is different... IF rules are no copies and no reference images.
Can we please end the disqussions?
Thanks ... That says it all.
Btw: working under the influence of alcohol is no stranger to me or manic workflow. |
| |
El Jefe
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 81 |
@PAL:There are no rules that force you to show how you create your magic.
The fact that people request worksteps has just to do with the audience being more critic nowadays. Reality shows that those who are capable to, dont bother at all to show how they craft something from hand and scratch.
Why would a gfx artist be bothered to share the creation process of his art when he has created the whole magic by himself? I would be proud to share details about the whole creation process, if I can show that I did everything by myself.
But again: there are no rules demanding any proof!
However, it should be allowed to question the creation process of gfx without this triggering a wave of indignation and acting as if you are being witch-hunted.
Bitbreaker's post above puts it in a nutshell for me.
The comparison to the questioning of magic tricks performed by magicians is perhaps not well chosen here, because everyone knows that “magicians” ALWAYS cheat, its their livelihood! :D |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
Why?
Again, I left the gfx group about them rules and so on because of this... I know I am a beast and the best there is... so I have nothing to defend... but what I must defend is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvxxdZpMFHg |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
 |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
It is a bit like this, invite everyone of them greatest to join in and it gets perfect... best ever live recording done... this is the scene too... lets just jam and have fun... do not be so small inside one own head that it matter too look upon what ever all other doo all the time... just embrace and feel the vibe and love... :-) PAL
https://youtu.be/SgXSomPE_FY?si=PJLp3NiJ5mVVyOx- |
| |
t0m3000
Registered: Feb 2024
Posts: 3 |
I'll be honest, I don't like AI, but if the guys hadn't sampled "Kraftwerk" back then, we probably wouldn't have an album like "The Chronic" etc. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
So, one “side” says that rules should apply only in gfx compos. All other workprocess sharing left completely to the will of the author. I haven’t yet seen demand to provide proof for everything and everywhere. In fact, I havent seen any “demand” whatsoever. Could be I’m blind.
The other “side” resolutely yells: “NO! WE WANT TO BE FREE! TO DO WHAT WE WANNA DO!” and continues: “only in gfx compos rules should apply.”
Sure looks like someone is having a little trouble with understanding. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Quote: jesus, stop this already. the website is trash and gives false positives.
And now someone will come along and say that I repeat myself. Have you experimented at all or you’re just pulling this out of your you know what? Plus, el jefe observed the same result as me. And it’s this: In my experiments the website DOES NOT give false positives. In fact NOT ONE. |
| |
Higgie
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 127 |
I think it could be useful to integrate the sightengine.com API with CSDb, Though I doubt there would be someone willing to do the work.
Maybe Raistlin could use it on c64gfx.com. It's free for up to 2000 API-calls a month (max. 500 per day). That should be sufficient for the amount of gfx-releases we currently have.
It would be a nice additional feature, I think.
And as long as sightengine doesn't produce false positives, no one should be worried about getting flagged wrongly.
People who endorse AI anyways shouldn't be worried at all, as it would be just an additional indicator. Nothing to be ashamed of.
For the rest of us, it might just give that extra bit of information that we would like to get from an artist. But this way the artist doesn't have to be involved in providing that info - to take into account the concerns expressed by Pal. No additional work required that might hinder the creative process.
What do you think? |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
<img>https://i.imgflip.com/9dr1pd.jpg</img> |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 - Next |
