Inkbunny

Moderators are updating the content policy, and this is basically the only condition for me to be allowed here

SomeAIArtist

1 year ago

link

If it's anything like it is with AI stuff, you might be required to list the 'resources used' on every image/video that uses them.

Telain

1 year ago

link

There's less 'unique-per-image' things to worry about with renders, and the goal is to provide credit to the original works the derivatives are based on, rather than verification that the rules are being followed.

SomeAIArtist

1 year ago

link

@ Telain

Oh, Ok! 😊

LITTLEFisky

1 year ago

link

Alctually, no. It is enough to post it once, and leave a link to this list on every post

Arikado

1 year ago

link

If that's all, then this sounds like a good deal. (Aside from the stress from before)

SomeAIArtist

1 year ago

link

👍

VilePlume

1 year ago

link

Plus, if it is like 'on every post', they can just have this journal link in every one of them

GreenReaper

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 5 months, 1 week ago by Owner

@ VilePlume

The final text says "as long as the resources used for each submission are clearly identified" so there would be some details on each submission, but it could just be names there like "LittleFox Melody A3, Kiki Sunflower, ChocolateBombs hedgehog..." and here could be the actual links to the resources (where they are still available, we don't really expect people to dig through the Internet Archive for decade-old content), and for content before January 2026 we're only asking for "major character models and focal points" and "a brief description of any work done to customise it".

LITTLEFisky

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Oh, glad you're here - I was just thinking of you. Why can't I just credit the author of the model and give model's name on request? There is a very few DAZ Studio users who will be interested in model's name on this site. And

macavity

was the first person who asked me for model name in ten years!

GreenReaper

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 5 months, 1 week ago by Owner

Well, in short, staff are interested because per the ACP we have to be able to check that a model is a) actually modified (and in a way that "constitutes 'unique' work"), and b) permitted to be modified by the original creator (i.e. "provided you are authorized to modify the models" - not "no-mod" as on SL, though this likely isn't so popular for 3D rendering in general).

We aren't likely to do that for every submission; but we need to be able to do it for any submission, on demand. Having it upfront is preferable to hiding a submission (or a gallery) until the member in question gets back to us.

Similarly, for AI work we need model/LoRAs and keywords/seeds/workflow, because there is a duty on us not to allow proprietary models or keywords featuring living or recently deceased artists or work that tends towards that. In the case of AI we need to be able to actually reproduce the work; in some cases, this cleared the submitter of guilt, in others they were clearly in the wrong. Here the check is less stringent, but non-zero.

We also want to enhance member's knowledge so they can say "hey, I can do that with that too" without having to ask you (this is what "Providing credit also furthers the creative ecosystem" is getting at); as I understand it popular modellers tend to have several models, so their name isn't enough.

Who knows how many people would have looked into there if the data was there, but never asked? But the verification bit is probably more important from a staff perspective as it affects our ability to handle tickets.

LITTLEFisky

5 months, 1 week ago

link

What you said has a point, but I still partially disagree. For example, lets take my base model: Melody A3. As-is the models look bad, and for past 10 years I was improving it by adding new morphs to it, so there is no way for a new DAZ user to replicate my work. And I actually can't share new morphs or character presets because it can onlu be shared by sending the model with this morph applied to it, which the creator prohibits. Ask Telain - I we talked and I showed then what I mean.

Regarding crediting environment creators and their models names: I have a pretty bid (over 150GiB) of environments from different creators, who listed in this journal. I have problems with my memory and I will simply forget to post the list every time on every submission. Can we settle with something like "*link-to-journal* dont hesitate to ask me what models i used here" in post description?

And I kindly ask you not to mention SL: you are referring to a GAME while talking about 3D composing and rendering program

GreenReaper

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 5 months, 1 week ago by Owner

As-is the models look bad, and for past 10 years I was improving it by adding new morphs to it, so there is no way for a new DAZ user to replicate my work. And I actually can't share new morphs or character presets because it can only be shared by sending the model with this morph applied to it, which the creator prohibits.

Completely not an expert, but I don't suppose you can use the Diffeomorphic DAZ Importer to export from DAZ to Blender (It seems to be able to import morphs) and export a glTF from that (the manual refers to morphs as "shape keys")? (This wouldn't be something "expected" like the workflow is for AI, but if might be useful if you actually wanted to do that for someone asking.)

"	Can we settle with something like "link-to-journal dont hesitate to ask me what models i used here" in post description?

I will have to talk with the staff and try to determine reasonable expectations. The text of the policy currently is "the resources used for each submission are clearly identified", with a caveat that this currently only refers to main characters and focal models. In some cases it might be obvious what resources you used, in other cases not; but it will probably only be clear with a listing of the models, not just the authors. Our understanding was that you would know what you used because a) you just did it (for future work, at least), and b) it's still in the scene and you have the files.

"	you are referring to a GAME while talking about 3D composing and rendering program

From the software developer perspective they're... kind of the same thing? Just with slightly different capabilities and a more significantly different UI, as well as price. 😅 Same for graphics cards and "AI accelerators" (or "game" vs "pro" cards/drivers).

From a rights perspective the expectations may be different, and that's largely because people are paying significantly more. But that is not guaranteed (for example a business might pay as much for a print as a furry artist might charge for the right to make prints) and can't be assumed - which was the main point of bringing it up.

That's part of why this discussion is so difficult; staff are trying to get reasonably equivalent rules for different ways of creating what is from a site perspective just a compressed 2D array of pixels (or sometimes a sequence of them), if not text or audio.

Speaking analogously (i.e. please don't take this too literally), the render attribution rules feel roughly like the equivalent in 2D art of "tracing from a base is allowed, but you still have to say who and what you traced from" (or coloured, etc.). From that view, perhaps you can see why we feel like it's not really too much to ask? We all stand on each other's shoulders.

LITTLEFisky

5 months, 1 week ago

link

"	GreenReaper wrote:
	I don't suppose you can use the Diffeomorphic DAZ Importer to export from DAZ to Blender (It seems to be able to import morphs) and export a glTF from that (the manual refers to morphs as "shape keys")? (This wouldn't be something "expected" like the workflow is for AI, but if might be useful if you actually wanted to do that for someone asking.)

Melody utilize an obsolete rigging technology, so there is no way to port it without re-rigging.
I'm able to export morph data by using different software, like Poser Pro. It's more about moral and personal request from LittleFox

"	Our understanding was that you would know what you used because a) you just did it (for future work, at least), and b) it's still in the scene and you have the files

Like I already said - I'm able to provide any info, name, technical details, etc. on request. I keep all my models.

"	From the software developer perspective they're... kind of the same thing? Just with slightly different capabilities and a more significantly different UI, as well as price. 😅

From 3D animaator's perspective - absolutely no. You can't buy sergal avatar and turn it into tiger. I can.

Speaking analogously (i.e. please don't take this too literally), the render attribution rules feel roughly like the equivalent in 2D art of "tracing from a base is allowed, but you still have to say who and what you traced from" (or coloured, etc.). From that view, perhaps you can see why we feel like it's not really too much to ask? We all stand on each other's shoulders.

Yes, I completely agree. But we are all human, and we can always come to an agreement, sometimes defend our opinion, sometimes compromise, and sometimes give in. And I am not refusing to credit the original, it's just a lot of trouble (at least for me) to consider every prop every time I upload something. Again, if someone want to know what model I used - I'll gladly bring a list for any of my prosts. try it

GreenReaper

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 5 months, 1 week ago by Owner

Regarding a complete asset list - it looks like Daz Install Manager allows export to CSV? Which is essentially just a text file and could be included as either a shared submission (probably best) or a file per-submission (as with JSON workflow for AI).

This wouldn't address identifying the specific files for a scene but it would perhaps give a chance to find it.

LITTLEFisky

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Unfortunately, I don't use DIM. I prefer manual install because it's easier to sort new content by type: environment, prop, pose, figure, etc

GreenReaper

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Edited 5 months, 1 week ago by Owner

Hmmm. Unfortunately I guess this means that something like this script I was looking at probably isn't going to help because those elements are not in a "product" [anymore, if they were]. 😾

As the user in an earlier thread I linked says:

"	anything you buy or own that DIM does not download, or that requires manual installation, is impossible to filter in either the product library or DIM. Those things slip thru the cracks and remain anonymous unless you step up to the plate and create a unique DAM system of your own.

Basically, IB is asking for the accounting that would come from a 3D digital asset management system (like DIM).

LITTLEFisky

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Checked: It's not even running. It requires local database server running. And yes, content must be installed via DIM

LITTLEFisky

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Looks like we have to talk about it again, because "Inkbunny Support Team" right now asking me to provide creator of the model, its name, and link to download. It's absurd. Especially in cases where artist is collecting models for YEARS

GreenReaper

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Right, but at least for the first two... you do have that information, right? It's in the model file somehow, or at least the file name?

LITTLEFisky

5 months, 1 week ago

link

Of course I do. I have both in file names for environments I use. The issue is I might forget to put these details in post description. I could add it to this journal, but it will be just a huge list of stuff and won't help identifying specific asset:

Creator *name*:
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
    *model name*
///more lines

Plus it will take a significant amount of time to gather and structurise all of this. It will be much easier if interested person just simply ask

DreamieFox

12 months ago

link