Moved from post #315296:
And as I mentioned, using a webp as wallpaper without recompression might not be possible either.
I don't think pixiv supports webp either. If they do, it's certainly not common to find any there. So it's not like we're forcing contributors to convert any significant number of images just to upload here.
There's certainly no problem with supporting it. It's just not likely to happen.
If it's not supported already, it probably won't be. The owner doesn't have anyone they allow to work on the site code. We use a fork of Moebooru and they haven't been willing to make it public.Jennifer003b said:
The weird thing is...WebP is a free format and it's right now (not tomorrow, not in a year) supported by ALL major browsers (see https://www.keycdn.com/support/webp-browser-support ) so the only "excuse" not to use it it's because someone wants to pay more for his server's bandwidth (or doesn't want to bother to update the site) which is perfectly fine by me I don't pay my internet connection based on how much I use it so...
And as I mentioned, using a webp as wallpaper without recompression might not be possible either.
I don't think pixiv supports webp either. If they do, it's certainly not common to find any there. So it's not like we're forcing contributors to convert any significant number of images just to upload here.
There's certainly no problem with supporting it. It's just not likely to happen.
Not true. I have an example:Zolxys said:No. If you're cropping or rotating, that's not true. That is unless you're just cropping a multiple of the block size (usually 16 pixels).mattiasc02 said:
It's better if you press "use quality settings from original image"
Otherwise you'll just lower the quality even further.
Let's take this image for example.
The original quality of this image tooken directly from Twitter is at 85 (as most images compressed by twitter). I check the jpeg number using IMGonline. Now, I got that image, cropped and rotated, and have both versions:
cropped:
exporting it at 85 and exporting it at 100
rotated:
exporting it at 85 and exporting it at 100
There is no difference in quality within the image itself. However, there IS a difference in file size and the jpeg number. But that don't mean jack shit, is my point.
Don't get me wrong, however. I also do understand that sometimes, the artist/handler of the image can be a fucking trickster (like with this. Number is at 100 but it got a shit ton of artifacts anyways).
This is why it's best to just export at original settings, since it keeps the file size the same as the original, and also exporting it at a higher jpeg does nothing but up the file size and that's problematic.
Sorry for late response. I've been thinking about responding, but not executing cuz my life is SOOOO emotional and stressful right now </3 I feel like an abandoned princess peach
Here are this differences highlighted. Mattias, you need to get a better monitor or something, the differences in quality are obvious.mattiasc02 said:
Now, I got that image, cropped and rotated, and have both versions:
cropped:
exporting it at 85 and exporting it at 100
There is no difference in quality within the image itself. However, there IS a difference in file size and the jpeg number. But that don't mean jack shit, is my point.
Edit: that being said I think even the "original" from twitter has an unacceptable level of artifacting.
What's that?traz64 said:
Here are this differences highlighted. Mattias, you need to get a better monitor or something, the differences in quality are obvious.
But not when you zoom in. Both have the same amount of artifacts in it. At least when I use my naked eye.
edit:
I know that. I was just using that as an example.traz64 said:
Edit: that being said I think even the "original" from twitter has an unacceptable level of artifacting.
Sample from 85
Sample from 100
Switch back and forth between the two. You should see that the artifacts are far more prominent in the 85.
Sample from 100
Switch back and forth between the two. You should see that the artifacts are far more prominent in the 85.
Oh yeah... it DID
Strange.
I'm feeling like posting more lewd stuff now.
I'm feeling like posting more lewd stuff now.
Tbh I bet Nozek is another one of those troll accounts.
Probably. I just haven't been online today to moderate.PrimalAgony said:
Tbh I bet Nozek is another one of those troll accounts.
Even if they were serious all they'd have to do is use Konachan.net. Problem solved.
Making a motion to officially ban AI art from Konachan.
Motion sustained.otaku_emmy said:
Making a motion to officially ban AI art from Konachan.
At least for the time being.
I've seen at least 100 examples on other sites. And half of those should be among the best of what is being produced. But nearly every example would qualify for instant deletion here. Only one or two might have been left, probably just to be deleted after 3 days.
I've seen at least 100 examples on other sites. And half of those should be among the best of what is being produced. But nearly every example would qualify for instant deletion here. Only one or two might have been left, probably just to be deleted after 3 days.
Anime art is so generic that it may as well be an algorithm.
I straight up cannot remember how to format links so here's the link raw:Cade said:
Anime art is so generic that it may as well be an algorithm.
https://media.tenor.com/YY5PrBA4UHAAAAAM/patrick-star-boo.gif
Ahhhhhhh. I remembered but had the | in the wrong place.
I don't even browse the posts but I agree.otaku_emmy said:
Making a motion to officially ban AI art from Konachan.
I think we've only had two AI-generated posts so far, and both were rather...obvious, like Zolxys mentioned. It's not been a "problem", I just wanted to get out ahead of it JIC.
Maybe for you but not for me. :<otaku_emmy said:
I think we've only had two AI-generated posts so far, and both were rather...obvious
Ai art is pretty new to me.
We have no plans to ban AI porn as a company on our sites.
We will hold it to high standards however and adjust as things change, we hope that permission will be sought etc and it will get regulated.
We will hold it to high standards however and adjust as things change, we hope that permission will be sought etc and it will get regulated.
I'm opposed to the idea of people letting AI generate something and then passing it off as their own work. I am opposed to people running pre-existing art through AI and then publishing that themselves. I am opposed to the blatant theft of artwork made by real artists that AI perpetuates (it is, after all, what the AI is being trained on). I am opposed to artists letting AI finish a piece for them and publishing that as their own work. I don't think AI art should be allowed on sites like Konachan. Sites that, for over ten years, have celebrated the hard work and dedication of real people. Real artists. Whether it's porn or not someone put effort into it and into honing their craft.
I'm not an Admin so my opinion is just that: an opinion. And I know discussing the moral implications might sound a bit silly given the subject matter of the art but it's something I've been passionate about in general for a long time (not just anime but all forms of art). It's just kinda sad to me, honestly.
If you want to allow it then ultimately it's your decision, and I will respect it and continue to enforce the rules of this site to the best of my ability.
I'm not an Admin so my opinion is just that: an opinion. And I know discussing the moral implications might sound a bit silly given the subject matter of the art but it's something I've been passionate about in general for a long time (not just anime but all forms of art). It's just kinda sad to me, honestly.
If you want to allow it then ultimately it's your decision, and I will respect it and continue to enforce the rules of this site to the best of my ability.
Boi who the fuck are you?Mr_K said:
We have no plans to ban AI porn as a company on our sites.
We will hold it to high standards however and adjust as things change, we hope that permission will be sought etc and it will get regulated.
He's one of the two admins that took over the site when Shuugo gave it up.
*Edit
I saw that statement by Mr_K as a decision to not ban it from all of their sites, but yet to at least keep it regulated. That doesn't mean it's has to be allowed on every single one of their sites. Every site has it's own set of rules after all.
There are good and bad things about AI, but AI will be unavoidable. Still, there's nothing wrong with promoting or favoring works done by humans. Excluding AI works from a site is one way to do that. Again, not every site has to allow the same things.
Current AI image generation almost always has some glaring flaws. Though, you might not notice at first because they will often blend well into the image. The works we accept aren't always perfect either, but it's easier to grant just a bit of leeway to an actual skilled artist's works.
For this AI example which is one of the best I've seen:
The use of low detail objects/backgrounds is normal in many works and will hide flaws. Or rather than hiding them, it more that flaws there are normal and generally accepted. It's drawn in a rough style where nothing ends up square or accurate. Even so, that railing with only one post that blends into the path toward the end bothers me. Maybe because I'm used to seeing that kind of flaw in AI artwork.
But focusing on the character, the one thing that stands out to me more than anything else is that light colored trim in the dress. Not only does in look incredibly random/uneven, but that bit near the bottom which only extends over a rather short portion looks very out of place.
I could pick out other things that don't seem quite right, from the upper necklace to other parts of the dress. Nothing that I wouldn't put past an artist to do, but...
---
When AI gets to the point that it can create some spectacular, flawless images that you think we absolutely need to see, then bring it up for discussion again. I'm not all that against AI, but I don't want to have to go over one image after another explaining why the technology just isn't good enough yet.
*Edit
I saw that statement by Mr_K as a decision to not ban it from all of their sites, but yet to at least keep it regulated. That doesn't mean it's has to be allowed on every single one of their sites. Every site has it's own set of rules after all.
There are good and bad things about AI, but AI will be unavoidable. Still, there's nothing wrong with promoting or favoring works done by humans. Excluding AI works from a site is one way to do that. Again, not every site has to allow the same things.
Current AI image generation almost always has some glaring flaws. Though, you might not notice at first because they will often blend well into the image. The works we accept aren't always perfect either, but it's easier to grant just a bit of leeway to an actual skilled artist's works.
For this AI example which is one of the best I've seen:
The use of low detail objects/backgrounds is normal in many works and will hide flaws. Or rather than hiding them, it more that flaws there are normal and generally accepted. It's drawn in a rough style where nothing ends up square or accurate. Even so, that railing with only one post that blends into the path toward the end bothers me. Maybe because I'm used to seeing that kind of flaw in AI artwork.
But focusing on the character, the one thing that stands out to me more than anything else is that light colored trim in the dress. Not only does in look incredibly random/uneven, but that bit near the bottom which only extends over a rather short portion looks very out of place.
I could pick out other things that don't seem quite right, from the upper necklace to other parts of the dress. Nothing that I wouldn't put past an artist to do, but...
---
When AI gets to the point that it can create some spectacular, flawless images that you think we absolutely need to see, then bring it up for discussion again. I'm not all that against AI, but I don't want to have to go over one image after another explaining why the technology just isn't good enough yet.
I changed my mind. I'm deleting obvious AI-generated art on sight. Especially when it's a case of someone using an engine to generate an entire image without any of their own personal touches at all. Besides that, the image was a bit too realistic for what this site was meant for in the first place.
You mean post #351633 ?
At first I thought it looks AI-generated. I'm just happy that I was right. So that means I'm getting more used to detect them.
At first I thought it looks AI-generated. I'm just happy that I was right. So that means I'm getting more used to detect them.
Yeah.
The individual in question doesn't do ANY original art. It's all creepily realistic AI-gens with AI-created backgrounds. Hell, their first post on Pixiv was a mere 12 days ago and they've cranked out 14 of these sorts of images since, all while asking people to support them on Fanbox and Patreon. It's shameless.
People are literally using this tech to create CP and porn of real people so I'd rather Konachan not have anything to do with it.
P.S. As a matter of fact, Pixiv discourages AI-generated images by removing them from the index. You cannot see them AT ALL. Even Pixiv is strictly anti AI.
The individual in question doesn't do ANY original art. It's all creepily realistic AI-gens with AI-created backgrounds. Hell, their first post on Pixiv was a mere 12 days ago and they've cranked out 14 of these sorts of images since, all while asking people to support them on Fanbox and Patreon. It's shameless.
People are literally using this tech to create CP and porn of real people so I'd rather Konachan not have anything to do with it.
P.S. As a matter of fact, Pixiv discourages AI-generated images by removing them from the index. You cannot see them AT ALL. Even Pixiv is strictly anti AI.
They use AI-images for paid content?
How shameless is that?! And why are people give them money for "stolen" art? What the hell!
How shameless is that?! And why are people give them money for "stolen" art? What the hell!
I'm not in favor of AI as well, but what are we going to do when the technology develops far enough for it to create stunning images from scratch that are practically indistinguishable from human-made art? It seems that anti AI art sites would be pretty much unenforceable.otaku_emmy said:
Yeah.
The individual in question doesn't do ANY original art. It's all creepily realistic AI-gens with AI-created backgrounds. Hell, their first post on Pixiv was a mere 12 days ago and they've cranked out 14 of these sorts of images since, all while asking people to support them on Fanbox and Patreon. It's shameless.
People are literally using this tech to create CP and porn of real people so I'd rather Konachan not have anything to do with it.
P.S. As a matter of fact, Pixiv discourages AI-generated images by removing them from the index. You cannot see them AT ALL. Even Pixiv is strictly anti AI.
I'm curious if imageboard such as Konachan or others have any plans regarding this or if there is any possibility of them staying human artist only. It makes me pretty sad to be honest, soon enough we won't be able to appreciate art without asking ourselves if it was made by AI in two seconds, or by an hardworking human who put their heart and soul into it.
I always loved browsing art sites because besides the art itself they also celebrated humanity's passion and creativity.
This future may even come within a decade's time. We may even be witnessing the death of one of our most sacred defining qualities as human beings.
Ugh, someone please pull me out of this dystopian cyberpunk timeline/dimension, I don't want it!
I would like to either limit or ban the use of post holding.
Personally, I never liked the feature. It messes up the post ID order, which causes problems for apps and users making use of ID ranges or ordering in their searches. It makes it quite a bit harder for users to see if an image has already been uploaded. And I really don't see a good reason to use it.
I was letting it slide while the posts were being activated within a couple days. But now I'm seeing held posts 20 days old by Yume and 2 months old by RyuZU.
At the very least, I'd like to add a rule that held posts are to be activated within 2 days. But unless someone can provide a very good reason to continue using this feature, I'd like to push for banning it completely.
Personally, I never liked the feature. It messes up the post ID order, which causes problems for apps and users making use of ID ranges or ordering in their searches. It makes it quite a bit harder for users to see if an image has already been uploaded. And I really don't see a good reason to use it.
I was letting it slide while the posts were being activated within a couple days. But now I'm seeing held posts 20 days old by Yume and 2 months old by RyuZU.
At the very least, I'd like to add a rule that held posts are to be activated within 2 days. But unless someone can provide a very good reason to continue using this feature, I'd like to push for banning it completely.
otaku_emmy
over 4 years ago