Topic: No photopgraphs rule

Posted under General

Two of my recent posts were deleted for containing a background made up of a real world photograph. That's fair since it is the rule.

My problem is therefore the rule. The rule is bad and retarded. E621 allows mixed_media and a significant amount of posts have real life backgrounds and even real people in them. From the forum's archive I have not found anyone complaining about those kinds of posts.

What is the moderation's rationale behind not allowing real photographs to be used as a component of a post as long as it is not the main focus?

I'm really unsure of what you are refering to: e621 allow for photograph (or scans) of artworks. They even forbid a bunch of furry-adjacent photos in their on guidelines.

Anyway, the question is about e6ai, so here we go:

modern AI can generate images that are visually indistinguishable from real photographs. That means, allowing photographic material (or similar) would create serious moderation and legal risks.

  • It's difficult to reliably distinguish AI-generated images from real photos.
    • That means there's a risk to accidentally allowing illegal real-world content like beastiality.
  • It's impossible to tell if the face (of a human) is one of someone you know personally.
    • What if the artwork being moderated is some sort of elaborate revenge-porn-like post?

Rather than relying on subjective or error-prone judgment calls, e6ai avoids the issue entirely by disallowing photographs, and photorealistic render that might be confused for real (even at a glance).

Updated

unsure of what you are refering to

Check post ID 5808489.

serious moderation and legal risks

I would believe that if e621 didn't already host a bunch of political cartoons that have literal real face cutouts of public personas.

one of someone you know personally

What? Use your eyes.

elaborate revenge-porn-like post

Someone's likeness can be reconstituted without photorealism too. Of course, I'm not advocating for having photorealistic humans inside images. I just want to use photorealistic backgrounds.

anonsuper said:
I would believe that if e621 didn't already host a bunch of political cartoons that have literal real face cutouts of public personas.

The threshold for public figure (e.g. Obama, Trump, Bieber) is different, otherwise satire would immediately be subject to litigation.

anonsuper said:
one of someone you know personally

What? Use your eyes.

I don't know how "using my eyes" would help if you decide to make a gen with your personal bully getting it up the butt.

anonsuper said:
Someone's likeness can be reconstituted without photorealism too. Of course, I'm not advocating for having photorealistic humans inside images. I just want to use photorealistic backgrounds.

True, but if you make the claim that a cartoon of your bully getting it up the butt is a proof that said bully is a zoophile, you'll look pretty crazy.