| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Release id #248155 : Hiking Home for Christmas
Drama posts go here: |
|
| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 2589 |
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 8 December 2024
I have the same problem as with all your pictures: "workstages" are not authentic.
"For me" (and other artists) it's a reference photo/AI collage that was pixelated as a base.
Drawing initial sketches afterwards is not a "big deal".
Everything is "done" right away, nothing changes along the way.
The essence of pixel art is the same as in traditional drawing: make it your own, don't copy.
Watch The Sarge timelapses. This is the real drawing process. You can see how the composition is made, it's constantly changing. You don't see a final contour "done" right away.
A timelapse video made from scratch is always authentic.
https://youtu.be/yH7GdfY2iWQ?si=Uj1vOwiMiGuEgogZ
But of course I could be wrong.
Submitted by Critikill (CK) [PM] on 8 December 2024
@copass like mentioned before thousands of times: art is free and everyone can do what he likes - please respect it.
I spent hours and days making pixel art and of course I use different Refs for inspiration, but I have Ideas in mind first, which I draw, compose and arrange my own in many different ways. Everyone can make what he wants. And to draw with pencils, converting, and repixeling isn't better pixelart - also when I have to stare at cat number 375 without storytelling or an impact behind the picture.
So please leave me alone with these stupid timelapses.
No second visual artform in the world needs such stupid proof.
Submitted by 4gentE [PM] on 8 December 2024
Quote:
also when I have to stare at cat number 375 without storytelling or an impact behind the picture
In what universe was this called for?
Submitted by Raistlin [PM] on 8 December 2024
Critikill is exactly right to be annoyed here. What’s going on with the Timelapse policing? Are we actively trying to chase sceners away from C64 with this? Who does this benefit?
We have the “handmade” icon now so if people worry too much, restrict your “10” votes for those with that icon then?
Also, anyone asking to see workstages or to see better workstages.. should you really be doing that when your own releases don’t include workstages? Seems… hypocritical?
Submitted by 4gentE [PM] on 8 December 2024
Quote:
cat number 375 without storytelling or an impact
But see this quote up here is not “being annoyed by timelapse policing”. This is art critique. Perhaps even a tiny bit of personal lashing out against those who voluntarily provide timelapse. But, if we’re gonna do art critique, I can give you my own honest and argumented critique on this here piece of art if you want.
Submitted by astaroth [PM] on 8 December 2024
@copAss
With respect, but sometimes that is not possible. When I'm working on an image, I don't work on it for a whole day, but often spread out over several days, or even several weeks in the case of fallen heroes. Then I work on an image as it suits me, sometimes 10 minutes at a time, sometimes one, up to two or three hours, sometimes just 5 minutes in between during my lunch break or something. I often even forget to take a snapshot when I've been concentrating on it for two or more hours. And I often try out a lot before I'm satisfied with the result for a small detail. If individual workstages are no longer enough and a whole video is always required, then I'm out in future presenting stuff here. At the end of the day, I do it primarily for the group and myself anyway, because I enjoy it, not to please others and so that people can speculate about it.
Submitted by 4gentE [PM] on 8 December 2024
I’m not that fond of the whole “workstages” concept. Never have been. It feels kinda weird. There, I said it.
However.
To me, the workstages speak. They tell me the story of the creation process. That story in turn tells me more about the piece and how I should view it and appreciate it. They provide me with additional context so to speak. Whether we’re talking about a detailed timelapse spanning from the first pencil strokes to the final pixel touches, or just a few lazy pics.
Now, when I look at for example workstages for The Old Guardian , this is the story they tell me: one pic of completely unknown origin appears already converted and fully pixeled over. Second pic of unknown origin appears also already converted and fully pixeled over. The two are then collaged into the final pic. I’m not saying that this is the exact case. I’m saying this is the story these workstages tell. And I’m certainly not saying there’s anything “wrong” with this process. As someone mentioned, everyone can make what and how they want. There are many many artistic processes. No need to be stressed out about it. I see no “haters” here.
P.S. Of course, I’m speaking about standalone gfx that get entered into a compo, not about out of compo releases or gfx for demos.
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 8 December 2024
@Critikill
with this "image" you won the function 2022 graphic competition.
https://demozoo.org/graphics/313073/
original image: https://www.christopherlovell.com/product-page/plague-dr
i know this image and i saw right away where you changed it. pixelation is not a big deal compared to creating the original image.
so this is not narrow-mindedness, it's just disrespect from you towards other creators. who spend long hours creating an image from "nothing". Not to mention that they practice for years, learn anatomy, improve themselves, etc.
and you submit an image that is cut out of ready-made images and pixelated. because this is your "art" and everyone should respect it!:D
but it should be "art", only then you have to write that you create this way and what source you worked from.
then everyone will decide how they will evaluate the picture.
but in competitions this is a disqualification...
you should respect the artists and the audience by not fooling them...
but i respect your art, on a certain level...
User Comment
Submitted by Critikill (CK) [PM] on 8 December 2024
@Copass if you would know the whole story about the pic, then you would know, that I asked Christopher back in the days and got his "ok" for making a pixeled Version. So what exactly is your problem here?
He also had a mega drive back in the days and liked "pixel art" ;-)
Also I made my Version without the central chain und the brush and made a little
different meaning out of it. (Corona times ...)
But before you continue to spread bad vibes here,
you should use the time to create something creative maybe.
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 8 December 2024
@Critikill: it doesn't matter if he liked it, contributed to it, etc.
"fan art". if you can call a pixel perfect copy that, you've redrawn some things.
I can win without having to explain myself...
because of people like you who have a "anything goes in art" attitude, I can't take these graphic competitions seriously...
what's worse is that I'm not the only one who feels this way.
I just "doodle". but I've never been accused of copying...maybe it helps, to see the whole process in timelapse!:D
because there's no such thing as a perfect match between the first sketch and the final image!:D
so I'm not stupid, I know why you don't make a timelapse from the beginning...because it doesn't exist!;)
was that creative enough?!:D
Submitted by Critikill (CK) [PM] on 8 December 2024
@copass it does matter, if Chris liked it and he gave me his "go" like I have sent you the Email from him via pm. But you didn't answer.
So don't please play the stupid childish cop - that's just annoying. But no wonder your nickname says all.
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 9 December 2024
@critikill
once again: from the point of view of the competition, it DOESN'T MATTER what the original author said!
this is cheating everywhere, because it's not yours.
you cheated, you got caught, now you're explaining yourself...
if you think this is just a problem for a few narrow-minded "boomers", then you're very wrong.
the party organizers "feel" this too, that it marks the event negatively.
the idea of a "pre-jury" of experts has already been put forward to make graphic design competitions fair.
so maybe you should change your nickname to CopyKill! :D
have a nice day! :D
Submitted by hedning [PM] on 9 December 2024
CopAss: And you didn't copy anything somewhere without saying? A certain samurai panda in Mega Greetz comes to mind. Just to put some more gasoline on the fire. :)
Submitted by Critikill (CK) [PM] on 9 December 2024
@Hedning :-D
why not letting him be a copyass :-D
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 9 December 2024
@hedning: demo compo, not graphic compo.
it a tradition that demo includes the party's name,logo and characteristic graphic details.
"panda visual with permission of pasy/rebels"
https://demozoo.org/productions/330009/info/21358/
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 9 December 2024
@CopyKill: pathetic
Submitted by Scrap [PM] on 9 December 2024
Oh boy... How I hate these discussions popping up again and again. This should all be about fun and the hobby we all share. But instead grown up people argue about ridiculous banalities...
Submitted by Shine [PM] on 9 December 2024
"This should all be about fun and the hobby we all share."
T H I S ! ! !
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 9 December 2024
@Scrap: let's say you draw a picture from scratch, working on it a lot. you submit it to a graphics competition.
then it turns out that the person who won the competition cheated!
will it still be "fun"?!
I highly doubt it...
that's why this topic comes up again and again, because it's not good!
30 fucking seconds to generate such a picture with AI.
https://ibb.co/94Q3Mmb
another fucking 30 seconds to convert it to C64
https://ibb.co/f1Cdkn3
the fact that you dither on it for several hours afterwards doesn't matter.
because the picture itself is already ready, you're just making it "prettier".
you only see "how beautiful it is".
you're blind and don't see how difficult it is to create this from scratch.
challenge: draw this picture in 1 hour with a pencil.
even if you succeed, it will still be just a copy. because you didn't invent it.
creating something new is incredibly difficult and time-consuming.
Submitted by Zierliches Püppchen [PM] on 9 December 2024
People will learn that you can't turn the wheel back. I enjoy the picture, the way it is implemented is great, nice light play, great color composition. First they complained about the work on the PC, then it was the use of Photoshop, now new technologies are emerging that help implement ideas. In the past, references from nature were taken, the 50th image of the partner in a frontal view, references to great masterpieces. I want to see breathtaking images that inspire with their execution. The sensitivities and morale are a different theater of war.
Just the 6,7 boomer boys trying to make the world a little better living and sailing in their tiny boat to discover the past thinking "everything used to be better" :-P
But exactly this is the reason I won't dive deeper in the c64 Scene.
To many loud and narrow-minded people. Demoscene for me is about fun.
cheers |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2244 |
Drama deer and rage rabbit...
I am surprised that a year after Wired AI Ninja Compo 2023 AI-GFX-whining still seems to be a thing...
*threatens to do another crappy compo if you whine on*
Seriously, don't you think people are smart enough to see the difference between zero and maximum effort? Just because EVERYthing seems to be voted (<- yuck, bloody shame we still do it at all) 10 nowadays by a dozen of peoplpe, this doesn't mean, the other 1,700 users are dumb, they just don't give a damn. So I don't see why we have to lead the same debate forever and ever...
BTW I think this picture is above average, actually quite alright, neither a blast (though rabbits are the new dragons) nor effortlessly wired shit. |
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 508 |
I am observing those discussions for quite a long time. Some argue, that pixelling is all about fun. I'd say, if we are plain honest with ourselves, it is just half of the truth. Creation might be fun and there's also a goal behind creation, mainly presenting the result, earning praise and good votes or even winning a competition. I would love to ask, how much fun would it be, if you pixel those art just for your own, without ever showing it to someone else?
That said, how good are we at loosing and receiving feedback or critics? Can we accept it and reflect on ourself, or will we just start denying it and by that starting to defend ourselves? So in fact people hide a lack at certain skills, instead of being simply honest. This hiding leads to drama, to excuses, to cheating with worksteps, to insults and defending. That is, why i love a good portion of transparency on the creation process. With accepting that skills aren't well developed yet, one enters the chance of growth, with hiding that fact, one will stick to the old routine and never change, but keeping up the drama.
So becoming good, means to accept own failure first, which applies for all cetegories, not only gfx. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 369 |
My personal opinion is that I really enjoy working with colors and shapes. I've been doing it again since 2012 and actually just wanted to upload my old logos from 1989-1993. Then I got caught up in the fascination of designing logos again. In 2012 I "worked" with Paint Magic and CCS64, which was really annoying. Then in 2013 Pixcen from CRT and PETSCII from MARQ came along.
And yes... since then I've been fascinated by the C64 again.
This whole AI discussion is a bit pointless in my view. There will always be people who do without it altogether and there will always be other people who use it for their own purposes.
The reasons may be very different...
Personally, I just want to have fun with my hobby and if I were to "cheat" I would be lying to myself. Since I'm not wired like that and I abhor any kind of cheating (even in games, etc.), I certainly won't take away the joy of my hobby. But I firmly believe that everyone can handle it however they want. The only thing I would like is a little transparency, but that is not required.
(Google Translate, because my English ... .. .) |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4732 |
It's one thing to make gfx for fun, which is of course what this is all about, but when competing with others in compos one should follow the rules in that compo, or else the compo is meaningless. Normally you expect original motifs and pixel work in gfx compos. In demos people will do wtf they want, as it's the total experience that counts there, be is with covers of known tunes or cool stuff from The Matrix or The Carebears. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 369 |
@ Hedning:
I guess it will be very hard for the compo orgas to check, if AI was used or not...
And i guess also, that "Cheater" don't even care about rules. |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 954 |
Quoting BitbreakerI am observing those discussions for quite a long time. Some argue, that pixelling is all about fun. I'd say, if we are plain honest with ourselves, it is just half of the truth. Creation might be fun and there's also a goal behind creation, mainly presenting the result, earning praise and good votes or even winning a competition. I would love to ask, how much fun would it be, if you pixel those art just for your own, without ever showing it to someone else?
That said, how good are we at loosing and receiving feedback or critics? Can we accept it and reflect on ourself, or will we just start denying it and by that starting to defend ourselves? So in fact people hide a lack at certain skills, instead of being simply honest. This hiding leads to drama, to excuses, to cheating with worksteps, to insults and defending. That is, why i love a good portion of transparency on the creation process. With accepting that skills aren't well developed yet, one enters the chance of growth, with hiding that fact, one will stick to the old routine and never change, but keeping up the drama.
So becoming good, means to accept own failure first, which applies for all cetegories, not only gfx.
Imo, the paradox here is, if we don't share our creations, nobody cares about the process, only ourselves. |
| |
Dano
Registered: Jul 2004
Posts: 234 |
Honestly i give a proper fuck from where the motive or the work originates.
For me what counts is if the result is pleasing.
Why is it that much of a problem if people use the tools we got nowadays and take shortcuts where possible?
Where to draw the line of what is cheating? Already if a tool of sorts takes over the dithering and color reduction?
To me it can already be art and works if one writes a proper prompt for an AI of choice.
Is it cheating when i use ChatGPT a sparring partner when coding?
To me it's lame when somebody pulls off a straight conversion of an image without really putting effort into it.
But is it lame to composite assets into a new composition? I've seen works on the internet which are really cool, esspecially what the source material was.
We are in a time where tools can aid our work in many different ways. Even more and more sophisticated than putting a grid paper over a picture.
Seriously guys, be happy when people create something you find appealing in one way or another.
How good something is various from one to another. Don't blame people for being clever and achieve something in less time another person would. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 369 |
About "Cheating":
Only I decide for myself what "cheating" means in my graphics. For everyone else, "cheating" may mean something different. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Honesty. Please be honest. It costs you nothing. Yet it grants you freedom. It helps you breathe deeper. Use whatever you like using. Just be honest about the process. What’s to lose?
In this aspect, for example Jetboy and Carrion are my absolute heroes. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
good that time passed by, and we are using xassemblers and other pc tools. i would say without those helpful little helpers 80% of the current parts of the top demos would not exist. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 369 |
Do new/modern tools justify the "simple" conversion of images, with negligible effort? (Esp. in Graphics Compos) |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: Do new/modern tools justify the "simple" conversion of images, with negligible effort? (Esp. in Graphics Compos)
i will recognize such work and build my opinion. on a party, i would vote like it deserves in my opinion ;)
let the people use ai. i dont care much. so, yes, let them use ai \O/
i would never thou speak out which persons i think use AI or any other helpful tools. unlike some of you guys are trying to blame others in public even without proofs.
if its realy important to you guys, then teach the masses how they can recognize AI converts. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 369 |
I doubt there will be any kind of "AI-Protection" for C64 land.
And tbh: I don't really care, if people use it. The box of pandora is opened and that's all (end of story). ;)
It's a reference like anything else ... .. . |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
the only solution is for experts to analyze the entries for the graphic design competition.
in practically 5 minutes, you can find out if it's your own work.
the problem with the phases is that it doesn't matter which part is enough.
if you put a fake sketch at the beginning, the average person will believe it. that's why you need more phases during the process when the scene is being made.
the timelapse, in which you draw from scratch, eliminates all doubt. even the first 1-2 hours would be enough.
that's why it's interesting that none of them upload a timelapse... |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
"User Comment
Submitted by Raistlin [PM] on 11 December 2024
“Raistlin, how would you feel if lame demomaker demos got voted to top spots by your fellow sceners? Because it’s all good fun and they don’t care. Would you go on coding with same gusto?”
Sure. I mean, maybe not demomaker.. but, for me, many demos charting and winning compos are lame - code wise at least. It’s been that way for a while now. Demos are no longer about the best code - it seems we’ve gone the way of the PC demoscene so that stories and animation ideas win over technical wizardry. It’s sad and annoying… but we press on and we’ll be back at future demo compos for sure.
Don’t get me wrong, I understand the argument here re: AI or wired art .. but to attack every posted image.. and to not give evidence of copying etc.. I dunno, it’s a bit weak.
Compo orgas can ask for workstages or whatever proof they want. Maybe there can be some live-drawing compos as well?
Facet’s pics are stunning. I’ve only seen 1 piece of evidence of a copy, the car pic, and that’s the same evidence that El Jefe showed me a long time back. If there’s more, it would be interesting to see. But even with that car pic, although the shapes match, a ton of work was done on coloring - copying that I’ve seen of others, including those who’ve weighed in on the no-copy thing and shown the 5-fingers logo, has had much less extra work done. If those fighting the no-copy cause are also copying, isn’t it a bit hypocritical..?
User Comment
Submitted by CopAss [PM] on 11 December 2024
@Raistlin: "post-processed converted image" vs "drawing from scratch"
the final image never matches the sketch, as the content and composition are constantly evolving along the way. it is refined.
fools gold - joe: https://ibb.co/yVgXcPj
slobber - the sarge: https://youtu.be/hOPguluQUDA
escaping an dinner - copass: https://youtu.be/fLU7HeTB7c0
end boss - critikill: https://ibb.co/TH282r2
green man - facet: https://ibb.co/58MdKhy
do you see the difference?
joe,sarge and I have reworked either the whole image or just parts of it several times.
with facet,critikill the contour is there perfectly and they don't touch it once.
they don't touch the sketch because they copy from a finished image.
you can't see how the image was created, just "puff" and there's a finished contour and all you see is dithering! wtf?!:D
Anyone who has ever drawn knows what I'm talking about." |
| |
El Jefe
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 81 |
Quote: I am observing those discussions for quite a long time. Some argue, that pixelling is all about fun. I'd say, if we are plain honest with ourselves, it is just half of the truth. Creation might be fun and there's also a goal behind creation, mainly presenting the result, earning praise and good votes or even winning a competition. I would love to ask, how much fun would it be, if you pixel those art just for your own, without ever showing it to someone else?
That said, how good are we at loosing and receiving feedback or critics? Can we accept it and reflect on ourself, or will we just start denying it and by that starting to defend ourselves? So in fact people hide a lack at certain skills, instead of being simply honest. This hiding leads to drama, to excuses, to cheating with worksteps, to insults and defending. That is, why i love a good portion of transparency on the creation process. With accepting that skills aren't well developed yet, one enters the chance of growth, with hiding that fact, one will stick to the old routine and never change, but keeping up the drama.
So becoming good, means to accept own failure first, which applies for all cetegories, not only gfx.
This!
Very precisely observed and to the point! |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Quote:i would never thou speak out which persons i think use AI or any other helpful tools. unlike some of you guys are trying to blame others in public even without proofs.
if its realy important to you guys, then teach the masses how they can recognize AI converts.
@Peacemaker:
These are very good points. Very good. Or rather, its one very good point, and one useful suggestion.
Usually it's not easy or productive to try and teach consumers of popular art/craft how to evaluate it. Especially in a setting like the demoscene. It gets branded as being snotty and not "democratic". Since there are less gfx artists than consumers of their work, the logic was: it would be easier to plead with gfx artists not to steal or cheat, than to "teach" consumers of their work how to spot a fake. And it would solve the problem thoroughly once and for all. At least, that's how I understood that gfx guidelines paper. Was this a viable strategy still remains to be seen. |
| |
Dr. TerrorZ
Registered: Oct 2013
Posts: 17 |
There are of course more purposes for C64 images than showing how "good at drawing" the person is.
But I don't get why a person wants to pretend they are "good at drawing" by using other means. Tell something about how you made your pictures, it shouldn't be a huge problem? I don't mind references. But why hide the process, why hide the credit? |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Dr. TerrorZ:
Exactly. Many people possess crazy Photoshop skills. Or mindblowing 3D modelling/texturing/lighting/rendering skills. Skills that some of the artists crafty with pencil and paper (or joystick) can only dream of. Yet, I get the feeling some of these guys (ok girls too) want to hide their true talents and present themselves as having good drawing skills. For whatever reason. Some have "prompt engineering" skills. FFS show off, brag, don't pretend to be someone else. Why they do it is beyond me too. |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
Quote: There are of course more purposes for C64 images than showing how "good at drawing" the person is.
But I don't get why a person wants to pretend they are "good at drawing" by using other means. Tell something about how you made your pictures, it shouldn't be a huge problem? I don't mind references. But why hide the process, why hide the credit?
They must have "good" reasons for hiding the creating process.
Those who are honest won't make a problem out of it.
"okay I'll make a timelapse if you're curious about it!"
but the way he yells about every picture that he copied it, AI, etc.
admit that he can't draw and then we'll evaluate his works that way.
but then he won't win competitions in graphics, but will go into the freestyle, wild category. |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1101 |
Quoting CopAssThey must have "good" reasons for hiding the creating process.
Those who are honest won't make a problem out of it.
It probably has to do with the accusations w/o proof you post in many threads, the swear words and general awful behavior.
And then you expect everybody to dance to your tune. LOL
The words I quoted from you are a perfect example, you basically claim that everybody who does not answer to your demands is dishonest. But you forget nobody has any obligation to answer to you.
The way you and a very small amount of others keep screaming, keep misbehaving and keep destroying every thread about graphics is very off-putting and very far from general scene ethics.
You need to learn how to bring your ideas without blame and attacks and without virtue signalling. You'll be much more effective this way. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
I also second Gröpaz' assertion that nobody is required to disclose their process and perfectly justified to ignore such demands. |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2244 |
Quoting Bitbreaker... With accepting that skills aren't well developed yet, one enters the chance of growth, with hiding that fact, one will stick to the old routine and never change, but keeping up the drama.
So becoming good, means to accept own failure first, which applies for all cetegories, not only gfx.
For some reason the drama is mostly about gfx lately.
I can't recall any recent debate about coding. Some decade(s) ago, people frowned about cross development in general, today this doesn't seem to play much of a role, the debate is reduced to matter of taste.
About cracking: Is it bad if someone uses a disassembler or VICE Mon? I don't think so.
Sure, we have debates about music time and again (is multi-speed allowed, are samples lame, THCM tool, stolen GT .INSes etc.), but less frequent and controversial.
So BTT, the gfxians seem to be the most AI-worried people at the moment.
What bitbreaker and others said about transparency of process being recommendable, definetely makes sense, especially the part about secret-mongering always fuels the fire; some Pharisees permanently wield their torches and pitchforks and just wait to jump at someone with fishy or incomplete workstages. These folx more often than not have a point, however, I'd appreciate a somewhat more laid back attitude, after all it's Advent season, so leaving the church in the village or biting your fingers is an alternative to generating AI/wired drama again and again.... |
| |
Scrap
Registered: Jan 2021
Posts: 20 |
Totally agree with TheRyk. And it is absolutely ok to discuss things like this and I understand everyone’s concerns. But nobody needs to make some kind of witch-hunt out of this. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Quote:For some reason the drama is mostly about gfx lately. I can't recall any recent debate about coding.
Mindlessly jerking around with "AI" prompt-to-image tools, then converting the result, then collaging the chunks like you were half blind, then shifting a few (or a few hundred) pixels manually earns you top positions at some gfx compos these days. For rave reviews and ratings here, often you don't even have to shift any pixels manually. There are people that have no clue that this happens, there are people who just don't care. And there are people that are disappointed by this state of things at this mature age of the scene. So, drama.
Now, when "AI" starts churning out lame, ugly, half-assed demos that you'll immediately recognize for the crap they are, and when that demos start getting top spots in compos and rave reviews here, then the code drama will happen.
Although I saw certain someone getting kinda dramatic over the use of the word "demomaker". ;-)
But, let's talk about animations vs. realtime. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: I also second Gröpaz' assertion that nobody is required to disclose their process and perfectly justified to ignore such demands.
This! |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: Quoting CopAssThey must have "good" reasons for hiding the creating process.
Those who are honest won't make a problem out of it.
It probably has to do with the accusations w/o proof you post in many threads, the swear words and general awful behavior.
And then you expect everybody to dance to your tune. LOL
The words I quoted from you are a perfect example, you basically claim that everybody who does not answer to your demands is dishonest. But you forget nobody has any obligation to answer to you.
The way you and a very small amount of others keep screaming, keep misbehaving and keep destroying every thread about graphics is very off-putting and very far from general scene ethics.
You need to learn how to bring your ideas without blame and attacks and without virtue signalling. You'll be much more effective this way.
And this! |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2244 |
Quoting 4gentE...
Although I saw certain someone getting kinda dramatic over the use of the word "demomaker". ;-)
...
Don't you worry, Sherlock Zero will track them all down!
BTT :) |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1101 |
Quoting TheRykAbout cracking: Is it bad if someone uses a disassembler or VICE Mon? I don't think so.
cracking with vice mon is lame, it's much easier with breakpoints and full memory access (incl stack, zp, cia timers, nmi, etc etc) than doing it on the real thing with just a cartridge. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Quoting BurglarQuoting TheRykAbout cracking: Is it bad if someone uses a disassembler or VICE Mon? I don't think so.
cracking with vice mon is lame, it's much easier with breakpoints and full memory access (incl stack, zp, cia timers, nmi, etc etc) than doing it on the real thing with just a cartridge. Joke's on the copy protection allowing for an easy-to-image disk, then! :) |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: Quoting TheRykAbout cracking: Is it bad if someone uses a disassembler or VICE Mon? I don't think so.
cracking with vice mon is lame, it's much easier with breakpoints and full memory access (incl stack, zp, cia timers, nmi, etc etc) than doing it on the real thing with just a cartridge.
you are right. same with ntsc / pal fixing.
its way much easier than it used to be in the 80s / 90s. |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1101 |
Quoting Peacemakeryou are right. same with ntsc / pal fixing.
its way much easier than it used to be in the 80s / 90s. everything is much easier :)
and now we have this damn AI that makes everything too easy! :P |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
Quote: Quoting CopAssThey must have "good" reasons for hiding the creating process.
Those who are honest won't make a problem out of it.
It probably has to do with the accusations w/o proof you post in many threads, the swear words and general awful behavior.
And then you expect everybody to dance to your tune. LOL
The words I quoted from you are a perfect example, you basically claim that everybody who does not answer to your demands is dishonest. But you forget nobody has any obligation to answer to you.
The way you and a very small amount of others keep screaming, keep misbehaving and keep destroying every thread about graphics is very off-putting and very far from general scene ethics.
You need to learn how to bring your ideas without blame and attacks and without virtue signalling. You'll be much more effective this way.
@Burglar: what kind of ethics are you talking about?! wtf?!:D
These are facts: everyone knows, has seen, and it has been proven that they are cheating.
Yet nothing happens, because "art is free" and then everything is fine!:D
But apart from the fact that it "appears" that these are made from AI generated images, it can now be detected with very good efficiency.
This is the most accurate one at the moment: https://sightengine.com/detect-ai-generated-images
Yeah, and then we call this evidence. It's free, you can try it.
The result will be quite surprising.
https://ibb.co/Gxm55Ps
 |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 369 |
@ CopAss
Interesting (a bit at least)...
You could test the graphics here aswell, because they are 100% AI Converts iirc:
Matt |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: @Burglar: what kind of ethics are you talking about?! wtf?!:D
These are facts: everyone knows, has seen, and it has been proven that they are cheating.
Yet nothing happens, because "art is free" and then everything is fine!:D
But apart from the fact that it "appears" that these are made from AI generated images, it can now be detected with very good efficiency.
This is the most accurate one at the moment: https://sightengine.com/detect-ai-generated-images
Yeah, and then we call this evidence. It's free, you can try it.
The result will be quite surprising.
https://ibb.co/Gxm55Ps
forget this crap already.i tested such GREAT AIs and the results are not acurate. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Peacemaker
I’m sceptical about these things too. I haven’t been playing a lot with this one. However. I’ve seen quite a lot of false negatives (just try some from wired AI ninja compo). I guess C64 treatment messes up the trail. Not one false positive. So, when this toy shows something like 80% positive on a C64 picture, I believe it’s AI allright (try Ramsay’s pics Matt released). |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
not 100%, but it convincingly hits the AI.
I'd be interested to see what kind of images he said it wasn't AI.
 |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@CopAss:
This one: https://c64gfx.com/image/237472
Perhaps I cheated and entered a hand drawn pic into AI compo. ;-) |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
then it just works! :D
 |
| |
rexbeng
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 37 |
Cool toy! However, my Operation Milf pic got just 2%. Even AI won’t recognise my AI pic as AI. :( |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@rexbeng:
Haha yes, it seems you cheated too, tagging your handmade pic as AI.
No, really, like I said, quite a lot of false negatives. But I haven’t been able to confirm a single false positive. |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
Above 80%, you might wonder if it's really a hand drawing...
it's even more interesting if there are workstages... |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
jesus, stop this already. the website is trash and gives false positives. |
| |
El Jefe
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 81 |
@Peacemaker: I was not able to spot false positives yet (only checked with pictures from which I for 100% know that they are NOT AI generated). Can you share some examples of false positives? |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
The AI-based ninja woman I made in the Koala format, my "Himari Rin: The Inner Battle" Himari Rin: The Inner Battle . I spent countless hours in Photoshop(75+), layering dithering tricks to emulate Talent's incredible style. I saved 24 versions, merged them, refined the pixels, and flattened it into one file and then used all them to then again merge Koala file outputs and in the final end convert again and then alter them pixels. It is far from Talents craftsmanship, but it was still dismissed as "just a convert." That stings in a way, especially when those who know the effort understand it was so much more. BUT it do not sting as I sold it as a convert and entered the compo where it was so, that was the whole humor and irony selling it all...
The obsession with picking apart every pixel is draining. Why do people do this? To push real C64 artists that are creating something that shine so beutiful on the screen out of the scene? It feels that way now. Sharing progress GIF animations in the last FIG demo just feeds this toxic cycle. I will not do it again - it kills creativity and all the joy when just in the flow.
Criticize me if you want, but this approach is killing the scene. When I am working on pixels for fun - and often drunk too - I will not document my process to satisfy all those unwritten rules. If others want to, fine. But not me, now I have done it in the last demo we did, https://csdb.dk/release/?id=247275.
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? |
| |
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> |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Higgie:
Of course, the website should be tested more thoroughly. In my limited experiments it produced zero false positives, but I haven’t experimented enough to reach something really conclusive. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
 |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Oswald:
I think I told you this once before. Maybe I forgot. Here it goes. Please rewatch the “Spanish inquisition” Python sketches. Because you’re making a fool of yourself. You’re using it wrong, like you don’t understand them, but only laugh at them yelling the “Spanish inquisition” part. The sketches are exactly about someone yelling “What’s this? A spanish inquisition?” when confronted with the most benign and normal questions. You’re welcome. |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
it's sad that fair play is so fucked up.
it's more important to shout "let the creation be free", "respect the way I create" and other bullish clichés!:D
it's pathetic that they refer to why I have to prove anything, I'm an "ARTIST"...
thank you AI, this is a new world.
in real life, if someone is "caught" cheating or "just suspected of it", then their "career" is over!
how strange that those who use AI have been so fucking talented since 2021. |
| |
Higgie
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 127 |
Quote: @Higgie:
Of course, the website should be tested more thoroughly. In my limited experiments it produced zero false positives, but I haven’t experimented enough to reach something really conclusive.
of course! |
| |
Higgie
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 127 |
@Oswald:
It would have been sufficient if you had simply posted the text. That wouldn't have made your post any more relevant, but it would have cost us a little less data volume. ;)
(I sometimes long for the days of the old BBS networks, where users who posted too much binary data were regularly banned.) :-D |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@CopAss:
Yes, we are now living in the post truth world. The truth is deliberately being obfuscated by noise. Sadly, some people mistake this sabotage of truth for freedom. Some of them even imagine they will extract some petty benefit from this development. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Higgie:
I wonder how he got to 4 exclamation marks. Historically, there was one. Then, there’s three of them if you really want to express yelling. But four? Now if that’s not art, I don’t know what is. ;-) No, really, I guess that’s how some people see art(work). Screw culture, screw history, screw education, just hit the keyboard randomly and the machine will regurgitate all that art history into a piece of art, and I’m the author. |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
Quoting 4gentEScrew culture, screw history, screw education, just hit the keyboard randomly and the machine will regurgitate all that art history into a piece of art, and I’m the author.
some idiots try to protect it "AI art", then they don't understand why it's a problem!:D
https://www.instagram.com/p/C9KumtJADzT/ |
| |
Sander
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 496 |
Quote:Honestly i give a proper fuck from where the motive or the work originates. (edit, you forgot the word ‘don’t’)
For me what counts is if the result is pleasing.
Looking at the csdb charts, this is the general consensus in the demoscene.
As a pixel artist, I do care about the origins and processes. This is how I value c64 pixel art. And why I consider transparency crucial to value c64 pixel art.
And I do think transparency should ALWAYS be given, not just in pixel art compos. We also have CSDB charts, which some may wave off as unimportant.. Yet i've seen the ugliest things happen, for some 'elite' groups/people to keep a top spot. Stay true to yourselves guys ;)
I wonder how do YOU rate C64 pixel art? |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Since I rarely rate gfx at CSDb, I don't have an elaborate method. But I will say this.
Producing, rating and appreciating artwork has some real metrics, just like rating cracks. Or fan heaters. Some things work, some don’t. It’s not all “artistic impression”, magic and “feeling”, there’s actual science. To a point, producing artwork is a craft not unlike any other craft. So I’ll be allowing myself to share my thoughts on this here artwork without going into actual “art” territory, just the craft. By no means is my intention to push my views on anyone, I just want to explain myself and the way I observe artwork. Open the pic, read this, and decide for yourself if I make sense or not. And, please do forgive me for the length of this “review”.
Lighting and atmosphere are great. Nice, lush aurora-ish setting. Pixelling is OK. This “diptych” idea is getting old quickly and it was not that great in the first place. And shouldn’t that “deer” be further in the distance to make it kinda work in the first place? Two pics without a clear border, pretending to be in the same space but in distorted proportions (collaged in un-creative and un-interesting way that is). Deers are exquisite, ellegant creatures, this is a deformed evil boar or at best a bull with antlers. You don’t have to be accurate, but you gotta get the essence right. And a bunny? What? Xmas bunny? Did the author mix up his cliches? Is the demoscene so embarassingly superficial that you can take easter stuff and shove it into xmas? And they won’t notice? Reminds me of how Chinese ebay sellers used to wish me “happy easter” at Xmas time or vice versa all the time, because they just didn’t know, they just wanted to play nice and sell. Someone told them those crazy rich europeans like to be sweettalked. So, this is the general feeling I get. CK just wants to play nice and sell. And it’s OK. It’s a nice motive for holiday wrapping paper from China. But all that 10s. C’mon.
Also, the pic raises some questions, and doesn’t answer them, which is an ambiguous thing. Like, why is the bunny a humanoid biped, while the deer is not? Also why is the bunny in one style and the deer in another? On the other hand, some unanswered questions are not ambiguous nor ambivalent. Like why crop "the deer" (oh God having to call it a deer almost hurts) just above the hooves? OK, I understand not everybody can “feel” their way to a decent framing. But "don't cut off fists and feet" is surely mentioned at the very beginning in every "photography for housewives" type thriftstore book.
I think the pic would actually look & feel better without that "deer". Having a classic fore-mid-back dynamic. It would make for so much more interesting framing. The bunny about to leave the frame to the right and giving one last look over the shoulder. Now THAT would be visual "storytelling". This? Nah.
I spoke to a friend about this pic. He goes: "But why don't the 2 subjects communicate? He (author) always misses that opportunity when doing these 2 subject pics." Then he goes on and answers himself: "Oh, I see, when you take and collage readymade objects, you can't be that flexible with positions/figures/poses."
And this is a near 10 picture. So, you see, to me personally, all this AI/wirejob racket is just the top of the iceberg in this case. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
 |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Wow. You win. 👏 |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Try wrapping your minds around this. These are the facts. A year ago, in a discussion with similar theme to this one here, it's been said and repeated that the gfx artists initiative is "chasing people away". Me, "being on their side", got accused of the same. A year has passed. I see same people discussing. Peacemaker is here. Oswald is here. A whole bunch of other old coders (sorry for not giving each of you a shout out by name) are here. Just like last year. You know who is not here? The Sarge is not here. Electric is not here. Deev is not here. CreaMD is not here. Spider-j is not here. OK, Sander just got back thank god. So, yes, you guys are right that people "get chased away". But you're the ones doing the chasing. Newbies are not chased away, look how Critikill came fresh to make jolly good fun of us all. It seems that top gfx artists are in fact getting chased away, along with a bunch of others. Don't you wiseguy coders regret that? Making top gfx artists shut up about gfx? |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
how I vote:
#1 composition: most important, if it's bad then the picture won't interest me. the essence of a good composition is to generate emotions.
if it's cliché then I won't interest.
I don't look at the implementation at this time.
#2 implementation: what gets to this point will definitely not be under 6 points.
here I look at the colors, the technique. |
| |
Higgie
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 127 |
This is how I vote:
I find Sanders' set of indicators quite useful to rate an image.
I must admit, however, that first impressions are already effective before I apply the parameters mentioned. This first impression determines whether I even take a closer look.
Direct conversions or AI receive a -10 penalty in my ratings (usually normalized to one point based on the scale provided), regardless of what other indicators would suggest at first glance.
BTW:
I must say, however, that this explanation of my voting behavior has significantly slowed down my creative flow. I believe that it is fundamentally unnecessary for me to explain my voting behavior here. After all, I am free and I fear that this explanation could reduce the magic of my votes. :-D |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 369 |
Well,
i vote ONLY 9 or 10, if i like something and seldom a 8 when people are beginners (to motivate them).
SERIOUS VOTING SERIOUSLY? Well, ... .. .
To make a science about voting on CSDb is really weird! Sorry! |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
Quoting ShineWell, i vote ONLY 9 or 10, if i like something and seldom a 8 when people are beginners (to motivate them).
If someone rightfully gets a lower score from me and if they can overcome the "hist", they will learn from it.
If I give them a higher score, I lie to them and they believe it's good.
By doing so, I only do them harm. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
 |
| |
Higgie
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 127 |
@Shine:
It's less of a science but rather reflecting on what you think when you vote for something. At least that's how I would call it.
edit: I think Oswald is just thinking about what lame meme he might come up with next. ;) |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 954 |
Quoting 4gentETry wrapping your minds around this. These are the facts....
As far as I can see, facts, recent gfx compos (Fjälldata, Zoo, Transmission, ...) are still listing the same old hardcore tops. Not sure who's been chasing who?
As for rating, never been that academic about it, and I don't vote, but the originality / theme / concept seems to be most important to me. The style, composition and technique are usually a matter of the artist's persistence, compulsive behaviour and stamina. Which I respect alot, great art never comes easy, but I don't think it's the most surprising factor for me.
AI doesn't do well on originality, mind, only when it's a funny generated meme that makes me laugh. But I guess that's also depending on the person who's typing in the fucked up prompt. :P |
| |
Higgie
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 127 |
Quote:
@Oswald: When I look at the notebook in the background, the cat must be long gone. (R.I.P.) |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Hein:
I meant (and wrote) how the graphicians were chased away from the discussion, how it seems they've been silenced. Not that they ceased releasing. I hope it doesn't get to that.
But perhaps we should all go away and leave Harry and Lloyd to exchange memes they fail to understand and laugh like crazy. |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
Quoting 4gentE Not that they ceased releasing. I hope it doesn't get to that.
Some people are only submitting pictures for 3 parties next year... |
| |
astaroth
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 8 |
Actually, I didn't want to comment any further because I see such discussions as wasted time, but I'm a bit annoyed by it all and so I'm going to make my last post about these things.
I was away from the demoscene for 14 years because of family. I had already left the C64 scene in 1993 because the groups started to fight each other. After all that time I felt like doing something again and it started with “Fallen Heroes” as a tribute to lost friends.
For my part, I can say that I make all the graphics myself and don't use AI. If you use AI or your own mistrust to check whether I have created my images with AI, you are welcome to do so, I am honestly no longer interested. I do it all because I enjoy it. In the future, I'll handle it in such a way that I'm no longer interested in other opinions because they may be based on a false foundation. If people don't trust me, why should I trust the judgment/opinion of others?
From now on, I will no longer rate any work and ignore the entries for my releases. And no, I won't record videos just to satisfy others, because I work on different computers and if I always have to invest time beforehand to prepare the recording for 5-10 minutes of pixelling in between, then it takes the fun out of it. And it's a shame that hardly anyone understood Critikill's gag with “you're AIrested”.
Let's see, maybe I'll move away from the C64 stuff again and go back to the PC, because not much seems to have changed here. |
| |
astaroth
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 8 |
Quote: Quoting 4gentE Not that they ceased releasing. I hope it doesn't get to that.
Some people are only submitting pictures for 3 parties next year...
Yes, you're right, because for more I don't have time, because I have a job and a family.
It's a hobby not the single point of my life. |
| |
LMan
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 83 |
2cts:
- actually demanding from artists to record themselves to validate their works is nothing else than putting them under surveillance. This is the Demoscene, not some Orwellian nightmare club.
- even videos can and will be faked easily. YouTube is full of digital artists doing exactly that. |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
Quote: 2cts:
- actually demanding from artists to record themselves to validate their works is nothing else than putting them under surveillance. This is the Demoscene, not some Orwellian nightmare club.
- even videos can and will be faked easily. YouTube is full of digital artists doing exactly that.
AMEN |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
Quoting LMan2cts:
- actually demanding from artists to record themselves to validate their works is nothing else than putting them under surveillance. This is the Demoscene, not some Orwellian nightmare club.
- even videos can and will be faked easily. YouTube is full of digital artists doing exactly that.
The Sarge doesn't make a problem of it, maybe because he doesn't cheat!:D
https://www.youtube.com/@JoachimLjunggren/videos
they even developed a fucking drawing program (albertpixels.com) that will do the timelapse for you automatically!:D
it's fucking hard to fake a timelapse, that's why cheaters are hysterical... |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Just a few questions. Please don't get offended. Who is "demanding" that artists record themselves? Who is even in a position of enough power to "demand" anything in the demoscene? Where are his/her levers of power to enforce this "demand"? Are you sure you're not being a little paranoid here?
It seems to me like some of You want to act out some kind of immature "freedom fighter" fantasy/LARP/cosplay so bad that you actually invent some bad actors taking your "freedoms". Just so that you can shout "WE WANT TO BE FREE!". It's ridiculous. If you don't grow up when due you become a monster.
P.S. This Orwellian this and Orwellian that is so misplaced it's not even laughable. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
We get it man. Why you're claiming timelapses can be faked.
You developed gfx skills just when AI became a thing by coincidence. Orwellian my ass.
https://imgur.com/a/KFIxJMr |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
To everyone:
Your creativity is only yours, you do not owe anyone any explanations. Keep creating for yourself just because you love it, it even brings joy into your life. Most importantly, do it because you can and will create what you envision. That is really all that matters.
You do not owe anyone "proof" (outside a competition with set/fixed rules). Your process and passion are enough.
At least they are for me. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Well said.
And if I may add: Your passion and will for creating fake workstages is extraordinary.
No one demands anything, no one will disqualify you from anything, it's just that now everyone knows how you operate.
Merry Christmas. |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
really? how?
Should I go to a new pixel paint software that has built in recording just to satisfy you? You are actually total out of control here.
PS: have I ever created fake workstages for anyone? You are absolutely a special case now.
your PAL |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
I was talking to LMan, take it easy man.
In fact to anyone that goes and fakes workstages.
Which rules you out. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Personal Note to The Sarge: I am not saying that image is AI. I just wanted to show how crap the websites engine is. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Peacemaker:
Wait, did you just actually fake this AI test result?
Here, take a look folks.
https://imgur.com/a/MOp0uND
 |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quoting 4gentE@Peacemaker:
Wait, did you just actually fake this AI test result?
Here, take a look folks.
https://imgur.com/a/MOp0uND
Since the start of the debate about converts and ai, you make yourself looking stupider and stupider. I mean, go ahead, its your reputation.
Did you smart guy not notice i removed the borders?
And will you apologize for the accusation you made towards me?
|
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
this is fine!:D
 |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: this is fine!:D
i told you the engine is trash:
original source:
https://i.imgur.com/RSbE0VP.png |
| |
LMan
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 83 |
4gentE what I was talking about is the bullying that's going on here. If the Sarge likes recording himself that's super. But you're at a point where you start calling out everyone who doesn't want to as cheats. I've always been pretty open regarding my sources, feel free to check my website. Your accusation I got into gfx only after AI got a thing is poorly researched. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Peacemaker:
Sure man, if you go and call me stupid a few times, and then on top of it demand I apologize, you’ll confuse everyone, so no one will try it with cropped borders.
I tried with cropped borders, the result is the same.
Now I can’t claim that I know exactly what’s going on, but if you really went and faked this forensics, that would paint you as so vile and deranged that I think I’ll just leave this thread because, frankly, you scare me. So, this is your chance to get rid of me, just say the word.
I urge other people to upload the pic in question to the sightengine website and check for themselves. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@LMan:
Aha, I get it, you’re talking about non-direct pressure to record on artists.
Perhaps I’m missing something, and my claims are truly unfair, so I think it’s best to speak totally blunt, and to the point, so:
Was this: The Lookout AI assisted or not? |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: @Peacemaker:
Sure man, if you go and call me stupid a few times, and then on top of it demand I apologize, you’ll confuse everyone, so no one will try it with cropped borders.
I tried with cropped borders, the result is the same.
Now I can’t claim that I know exactly what’s going on, but if you really went and faked this forensics, that would paint you as so vile and deranged that I think I’ll just leave this thread because, frankly, you scare me. So, this is your chance to get rid of me, just say the word.
I urge other people to upload the pic in question to the sightengine website and check for themselves.
*sighs*
You are still doing it althou i uploaded a gif where you can clearly see that i did not fake anything. But, go ahead. As i said, its your reputation.
" I urge other people to upload the pic in question to the sightengine website and check for themselves."
Right.
Source:
https://i.imgur.com/RSbE0VP.png
Website in question: https://sightengine.com/detect-ai-generated-images
what will come next? maybe will accuse me of manipulating the source. hehe. so sad.so sad.
Look what you are doing. I have to prove that i did not do anything wrong and faked. Same with the GFX on here wher you demand that they need to prove that they are not using AI. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Peacemaker:
Then You tell me what I should think.
You show that screenshot. I go and upload The Sarge’s pic. The engine shows it’s not AI. Now, you can beat around the bush and obfuscate all you want, but the only way to settle this is if people take the source (from C64gfx.com not your imgur) and run it through the engine. See if anyone can repeat your result. |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
Dearest Scene Polizei.
I am creating some ideas for a demo and making some sketches. I do not know if it will amount to anything yet, but I have drawn some rough things — some ideas even based on reference images taken from the net. I will not use those directly, but they were inspirational.
My problem now is that I did not record everything from the very first moment I started jotting ideas in Notepad until now. I also did not capture all of my computer activity—browsing, Photoshop, Illustrator, promotion, and so on. What shall I do? Should I just end my quest to create something because I can not provide proof of every step from the very start?
Can someone help me? Is there a hidden "total recapture" function in the operating system that I can use to provide you with this history? |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: @Peacemaker:
Then You tell me what I should think.
You show that screenshot. I go and upload The Sarge’s pic. The engine shows it’s not AI. Now, you can beat around the bush and obfuscate all you want, but the only way to settle this is if people take the source (from C64gfx.com not your imgur) and run it through the engine. See if anyone can repeat your result.
its worthless to talk to you. you wont understand what you are doing here.
i have proven that the engine is shit. different results because i removed the black borders? wow. great engine. lol |
| |
astaroth
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 8 |
 |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@astaroth:
Which pic have you used as source? |
| |
El Jefe
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 81 |
@Peacemaker: I exported the pic from vice in various color palettes and cropped it in many different ways, different aspect ratios and resolutions and I could not get one single positive from the engine.
So at this point, where you are so close to delivering a proof, please share the steps to create a sample file like yours that gives a false positive in the engine. Seeing how quick you are with creating screen recordings, Im sure you will not mind making that few clicks.
Thanks!
PS: Nice to see that folder with all the pics. Did you find any other false positives among Sarge's pics or was it just work in vain? :D |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
while you all nerd on with a web page to check if someone used AI... I ask again this...
Dearest Scene Polizei.
I am creating some ideas for a demo and making some sketches. I do not know if it will amount to anything yet, but I have drawn some rough things — some ideas even based on reference images taken from the net. I will not use those directly, but they were inspirational.
My problem now is that I did not record everything from the very first moment I started jotting ideas in Notepad until now. I also did not capture all of my computer activity—browsing, Photoshop, Illustrator, promotion, and so on. What shall I do? Should I just end my quest to create something because I can not provide proof of every step from the very start?
Can someone help me? Is there a hidden "total recapture" function in the operating system that I can use to provide you with this history? |
| |
astaroth
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 8 |
This is really too stupid for me, good night |
| |
LMan
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 83 |
@4gentE
"The Lookout" has characteristics of AI imagery indeed, and it is because like everyone at that time I was fascinated by Midjourney and was looking for inspiration. However the workstages are real, it is not a copy of an AI image.
The only AI assisted image in my portfolio is the gfx on my tune "Pixelated Neon Nights", which is a paintover job.
Shortly after I got very quickly fed up with AI imagery, for the same reasons as many here are, and went back to relying on imagination and/or own references.
Your Match on "Shrooms Drummer" is definitely a false positive.
Can I go now? Or will you throw more dirt my way? |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
The engine is a little inconsistant, I can give you that. It showed either 4% or 13% for The Sarge's pic most times. After feeding it again and again, only one time it gave 28%. But never nowhere near positive.
https://c64gfx.com/image/219307
This is the source I used. Of course with cropped borders. Of course, no matter how stupid I am, the results were the same with or without borders.
So, please excuse me for getting the idea that you're cheating/lying @Peacemaker. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Quote:I am creating some ideas for a demo and making some sketches. I do not know if it will amount to anything yet, but I have drawn some rough things — some ideas even based on reference images taken from the net. I will not use those directly, but they were inspirational.
My problem now is that I did not record everything from the very first moment I started jotting ideas in Notepad until now. I also did not capture all of my computer activity—browsing, Photoshop, Illustrator, promotion, and so on. What shall I do? Should I just end my quest to create something because I can not provide proof of every step from the very start?
You mention demo.
Exactly which part of "gfx entering compos should comply to the compo rules, and that rules usually include show of workstages" don't you understand? |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Now its "only" 63% AI. Great tool.
 |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@LMan:
In that case I apologize. In my defense, I will say this: your 2 pics are the only false positives I managed to get from that engine. Nevermind Peacemakers antics. |
| |
El Jefe
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 81 |
@PAL: You know the answer.
1.) We are not talking about demos.
2.) noone demands anything from you, but I think the more you share about the creation process, the more people will appreciate it.
3.) Please dont repeat yourself over and over, also there is no need to post the same question twice within 10-15 minutes. |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
Do you really want to go on in this? We all agree that demo gfx can be what ever... but let us just say one of the demo gfx got so great so one could gain the world heavy weight championship of the world in a gfx compo too and by default because one live in a not dictatorship part of the world one was free and did stuff but did not record all progress... like having a camera on you, you know?... flash in your face, be creative now... what then? if it was not all recorded for your very important approval? What did you do there? prooof is needed... what in the hell you did something others would not do.... why? give explenations...
I do not care how light you all take it, but to be sat in a basket and now you must confirm or fit that basket is hell for creative people... the more you go on the less creative people will be here with you... |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
I give up. As someone wise once said above: "Too many people with assburgers around here."
@Peacemaker:
The only thing I'm still interested in is that engine's (in)consistency. Can you please download the pic from https://c64gfx.com/image/219307 crop the borders, run the downloaded and cropped file (not the screenshot) through the engine and post the result. |
| |
El Jefe
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 81 |
@Peacemaker: Interesting Tool you are using for making a Screenshot. How is it called? Does it have preset settings for creating screenshots?
Only difference I noticed is the color depth is 24Bit while everything I create via VICE and with "Snipping tool" has 32Bit. There must be more differences ... |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Peacemaker:
The pic you linked at imgur was made by you making a screenshot. In that way windows/gfx card driver sub-pixel enhancement gets picked up. Examine the pic, there's more colors than there should be. So no screenshots, download the file from csdb or c64gfx.com, crop the borders and upload that. So much for me "being stupid". |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
"Too many people with assburgers around here."
People with Aspergers (assburgers) often have a strong focus on specific personal interests and issues. The need for them holding correct answer and logic and they have a difficulty shifting perspectives, which can make it challenging for them to let go of certain topics or discussions.
It must be you? |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
hmmm... Actually I was tosay into something cool but I dropped it because of all this... so I wrote some text and had fun with that for Vandalism nws instead... What did you do for the scene today? |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: hmmm... Actually I was tosay into something cool but I dropped it because of all this... so I wrote some text and had fun with that for Vandalism nws instead... What did you do for the scene today?
did code 1 new part for a demo. its not finished yet, but looks promising. |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 292 |
Quote: did code 1 new part for a demo. its not finished yet, but looks promising.
fantastix... look so 4ward to see what it will be... like I told you in the past, you are insane great at democreating your stuff. all my love |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 680 |
Even if this tool could accurately detect AI generated images, which it could never 100% do with C64 images I think (to date no AI can generate in C64 format afaik - so all images would need some human work anyway), won’t it create a new problem..? Much like the AI text checker, people can use this tool in the opposite way:
- person creates some art with AI
- feeds the pic here to get a score
- modifies art some
- gets a new score
- blur, tint, modify, add extra elements
- get new score
- edit
- get new score.. boom, now it’s 5%
- release on CSDb and C64GFX, safe in the fact that you now have “proof” that it’s not AI.
100%, people can figure out how the algorithms used here work and can probably create tools that stop those algorithms being able to detect AI. Also, probably possibly to modify the AI algorithms to avoid detection too? |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Quote: It must be you?
@PAL
Sure. Perhaps. Are you making fun of my condition? That’s not very nice of you.
On the other hand, comprehension deficit doesn’t manifest itself in lack of arguments for one’s cause, it manifests in inability to understand what’s being written/told. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Raistlin:
Sure, but if it turns out that all false results are false negatives (either because of C64 treatment or deliberate masking it doesn’t matter), with not one false positive, then the tool is useful, right? I think some people here fear that. |
| |
El Jefe
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 81 |
I have been going through everything related to my latest scene project as it will soon enter the final development phase.
We have a great concept and a funny story, with lots of great SID tunes and many original gfx by 2 of the best gfx artists around in the c64 scene, and I mean real, not wannabe-artists that have to resort to AI or converting existing gfx!
Then later, in the evening I took part in this unpleasant discussion. Should have stayed away from it! |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
There is only one irrefutable proof that a person took the picture: timelapse video.
Even the first 2 hours are enough to see how the first sketch is created from scratch.
If you see that "puff" appears immediately, a completely developed perfect contour, which does not change later, it already suggests that it is a fake.
So, everyone can decide whether it is authentic or not. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
I wrote a play.
Person A: “Perhaps we shouldn’t eat the yellow snow.”
Person B: “No one can make me eat green oranges!”
Person A: “But I’m talking about the yellow snow.”
Person B: “Demanding we eat red apples kills our creativity!”
Person C: “But we were talking about the yellow snow.”
Person D: “Yeah, you tell them Person B! We wanna be free!”
Person A: “What?”
Person E: “Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!”
Person A: “OK, Person B, tell me now who’s talking about red apples.”
Person B: “Imagine having to eat unpeeled bananas!”
Person E: “Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!”
Person D: “Busted! Person Z’s bottle falls and can’t stand on its own!”
Person A: “See, Person D, you’re doing it wrong, the bottle is upside down.”
Person D: “Busted! PersonZ’s bottle falls and can’t stand on its own!”
Person C: “He just told you, you’re putting the bottle upside down.”
Person D: “This table is crap! It doesn’t work! You’re stupid!”
Person B: “No one should tell you to eat whole pineapples!” |
| |
CopAss
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 21 |
@4gentE: brilliant!:D |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Quote:astaroth: This is really too stupid for me, good night
I find it adorable how a guy that released his first standalone C64 gfx in 2024, the year of AI, gfx which sightengine recognizes as 99% chance being AI (this set a record) swiftly jumps on the bandwagon of provoking the engine into false positives using Peacemakers “doctored” image. As it turns out, the image was of course “doctored” by Peacemaker’s incompetence, rather than his skill, but we’re used to him being a clueless clown by now. This burning itch, this squirming, this desire for the sightengine to be portrayed as broken is kinda fun yet sad at the same time. Of course, all these observations are coincidences. And we should stop making them because this will lead to dictatorship as certain someone brilliantly explained to us earlier. |
| |
macx
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 255 |
Make The Scene Great Again. Stop your nonsense. I have the best words!
Boar's Head Tavern | byob.hopto.org:64128 |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: Quote:astaroth: This is really too stupid for me, good night
I find it adorable how a guy that released his first standalone C64 gfx in 2024, the year of AI, gfx which sightengine recognizes as 99% chance being AI (this set a record) swiftly jumps on the bandwagon of provoking the engine into false positives using Peacemakers “doctored” image. As it turns out, the image was of course “doctored” by Peacemaker’s incompetence, rather than his skill, but we’re used to him being a clueless clown by now. This burning itch, this squirming, this desire for the sightengine to be portrayed as broken is kinda fun yet sad at the same time. Of course, all these observations are coincidences. And we should stop making them because this will lead to dictatorship as certain someone brilliantly explained to us earlier.
if you would be only half talented in painting as you insult other people on here over and over again. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Painting?
I have absolutely no talent for painting.
When a person calling me “stupid” on several occasions, among other things, last time totally unwarranted, whines how I “insult”, please excuse me for feeling no blame. So tell me, genius, did you try the engine with the right picture? What are the results, do tell us? Or you’ll just conveniently ignore that? |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: Painting?
I have absolutely no talent for painting.
When a person calling me “stupid” on several occasions, among other things, last time totally unwarranted, whines how I “insult”, please excuse me for feeling no blame. So tell me, genius, did you try the engine with the right picture? What are the results, do tell us? Or you’ll just conveniently ignore that?
you cant read. try again, i wrote "make you looking stupid". thats a difference. but its pointless to talk to you. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Just try the engine with the right picture. It’s all that matters. You don’t have to apologize. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
"with the right picture"
lol. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Peacemaker. Tom loves GB. Sightengine. Check. Result. |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2244 |
Mostly off topic blabla and kindergarten
-> Time to end this...
*closed* |
