Topic: SecondLife Content Moderation Needs to be Addressed

I believe that the current Content Guidelines need to be altered to allow SecondLife images and videos to be posted, and held to the same standards as current uploads of all kinds. Moderating the uploads is largely a factor of previous lack of quality from screenshots, which is no longer an issue. SL can natively render any resolution unconstrained, a fact most novice photographers in the program (or those not familiar with it) may not be aware of.

From a previous Forum post on this matter (https://e621.net/forum_topics/47232):

I would like to request the rule about sandboxes to be adjusted.

This post will use the high quality animations I tried to upload as an example, and the arguments used by the Janitor Mairo, the Quotes from the artist talking to me on their discord server.

Current rules:

Screen captures: Screenshots from games, still images from movies, video snippets from YouTube, etc.

This includes all content created in sandboxes like Second Life, Minecraft, and similar.

I am not quite familiar with the game/software that the artist used, however In my opinion it should not matter what software is used, as long as the quality is good.

The artist used something called Charastudio which is apparently based on Koikatsu.
At first, I had a miscommunication where I wrote with the Janitor that it's made with Koikatsu, and he kept referring specifically to that.

Koikatsu is the game that is violating the rule about sandbox content. The artist uses a tool that is based on it. Here is the artist's and Mairo's explanation. Although personally, I lack the context to understand it.
Koikatsu and Charastudio definitions

Yes. Well technically Charastudio is more accurate. Koikatsu is the game Charastudio is based on, like how SFM is based off of Half Life 2

Mairo's words about Koikatsu:

Koikatsu is considered to be similar to Second life as that it is still sandbox game, where Source Filmmaker even though using Source engine, has proper tools to properly render the animation out.

The fact that they kept talking about Koikatsu is probably still an effect of my miscommunication.

Mairo then argued about rendering and screenshots.
Mairo's quotes

You can correct me if I'm completely wrong, but Koikatsu is still sandbox game, not animation software. Even animation exporting is done via plugins that essentially just screenshot the game rather than render the animation out.
People do put a lot of effort into VRChat and Second life animations as well and make them high quality, but it's still outside the scope of the website, this isn't social media, pornsite or naughtymachinima.

The sites guidelines. If you can properly render out the animation or poster, then it's acceptable, if not, then it's considered screencap.
That's why 3DS Flipnote is acceptable, but Swapnote is not

I would argue that the method of rending does not matter as long as the quality is good enough.
The current rules are, in my opinion, too restrictive to high quality animations that are made in a sandbox.

I think content from sandboxes should be allowed if:

no game or OS UI is present in the video.
there are custom characters, and not predefined ones from the game.
my reasoning: default characters might get used too much and fill up the site.
there are custom animations with no presets
animations done with presets are repetitive and not adapted for specific situations. Custom animations allow one to make specific and high quality videos.
no characters whose movement is determined by IRL people
reason: if people control characters with movement, like in VR-chat porn, then it's not an animation and out of scope of e621. Animations are also superior to IRL movement, when it comes to create art.
the shading and lighting should look alright
some sandboxes may have interesting shading and lighting, this may not be wanted.
the animation should have a good sense of timing,
example: having a one-minute animation of a 5-second-long loop is low quality.

I think if animations that follow those ideas of quality should be allowed.
Restricting animations merely by the means of how it was created sounds like a bad idea to me.

SecondLife can natively render 3D scenes to up and above 8K, completely unconstrained. There are lighting engines (Windlight, Reshade) and posing tools (Firestorm, Alchemy and Aperture viewers all have native posing engines) in-software, as well as lens emulation, FoV, LoD and other post processing options. I can make a composition in 8K and fully processed by the time it is saved to my hard drive, and it takes real work. Why, again, do we not allow these high-quality, refined renders? We allow full on animated videos (edited and unedited) from Roblox of varying quality and processing, from a childrens sandbox game, but not still renders from SecondLife?

If I was to post a SecondLife render where I made:
The pose used, from T-pose.
The facial expression.
The setting/props.
The color grading.
The curves.
The lens emulation.
The normal map interactions.
The local lighting nodes.
Uploaded the image at 8K resolution.
Ensured there were no artefacts.

From the criteria for posting abuse:
Would this be considered "non-artistic" to you? Would you classify it as a screenshot/screencap even considering it is re-rendered at higher resolution using hardware and in-game tools? If knowingly posting SecondLife renders is "Posting abuse", does one get punished, even if the image in question meets the quality guidelines for posting? What kind of rule system uses subjective reasoning like this? Are you not creating a grey area to get stuck on?

And to add to this, this site regularly and consistently allows 3D Roblox content to be uploaded. I fail to see how one can meet content guidelines, and the other cannot. Surely, if SecondLife is forbidden, Roblox has to go immediately. You'd allow content from a children's sandbox game before content from an adult sandbox game that is actually driven by fandom creators? Can you even guarantee to me now that the Roblox content on here was made by adults, only contains characters owned by adults, and was uploaded by adults? Can you guarantee me it wasn't made with the base game? Considering the scrutiny Roblox is under, is allowing it really a sound decision? SecondLife hasn't had a teen grid for 14 years, so the issue is not present there anymore.

What are we really trying to moderate, here? I fail to see how we couldn't moderate SecondLife Renders/Videos the exact same way everything else is moderated: by the people using and maintaining the website. You trust your users to upload varying-quality Roblox content, but not to understand how to create high-quality content in SecondLife. SecondLife gets lumped in with Minecraft somehow and left in the dust.

rhuska said:
We allow full on animated videos (edited and unedited) from Roblox

Do we?

Uploading Guidelines says:

• Screen captures: Screenshots from games, still images from movies, video snippets from YouTube, etc.
• This includes all content created in sandboxes like Second Life, Minecraft, and similar.

roblox wiki says:
Roblox is an online game platform and game creation system that allows users to program games and play games created by other users.

Sounds to me that anything rendered in/captured from Roblox should be deleted, just like anything made in SL or Minecraft is. Of course, that wouldn't count for inlay reference images, where the post contains original work not rendered by Roblox. But screen caps of the game aren't allowed by the guidelines.

rhuska said:
What are we really trying to moderate, here?

Ultimately, the rule is to stop people from making screen captures from random games or modded games that anyone can make by playing the game. Making exceptions for screen caps of Second Life, which is a game, because people can put in effort to make it look nice would open the door for people to argue that screen caps from their preferred game should also be allowed for similar reasons. It's more manageable to make a blanket restriction, and suggest that people use 3D art programs for 3D art to post here, instead of games that happen to be able to export decent-looking 3D images/videos.

On top of that; What if someone in a SecondLife screenshot did not want to be in a public image?
What if their screen name was shown?

And, honestly, a blanket 'No game screen grabs' makes sense. Clicking a poseball in Second Life and then taking a screenshot has very little artistic merit.
It would be just as devoid of merit as a screenshot of a Skyrim sex mod; The 'creator' of the screenshot did nothing but click a button and then press 'Print Screen'.

I'm of the opinion that the 'No Screen Captures' rule is valid and the correct way to prevent people from flooding the website with uninspired screengrabs from videogames.

Edit: I also did a search for 'roblox 3D' and could not find a single screenshot or screen recording of the game. So the rule is being applied, at least insofar as my blacklist will show me.
Hand-made 3D images and videos are not screengrabs. So pointing them out as if they are somehow breaking the 'No Screen Captures' rule is incorrect.

In Essence:
It's not that 'Second Life' ITSELF is against the rules. (As far as I know?)
It's that screenshots and screen recordings of the game are.
Though it's in a gray area because it's a sandbox game with such a varied player-base and no set 'mascot' species. So it's hard to make Second Life-themed 3D renders/videos outside of the game. Roblox, at least, has those Not-Lego-Men, so you know a hand-made video/image is Roblox.

Just like Roblox ITSELF is not against the rules.
But screenshots and screen recordings of the game are.

I can go further with the example:
Skyrim is not against the rules. We have tons of skyrim dragon & dragonborn porn on here.
But direct screenshots and recordings of the game are.

Monster Hunter images and 3D creations are not against the rules.
Screenshots and video recordings of the games are.

Do we?

Maybe try searching "Roblox 3D_(artwork)" or "Roblox 3D_Animation" to verify?

Ultimately, the rule is to stop people from making screen captures from random games or modded games that anyone can make by playing the game. Making exceptions for screen caps of Second Life, which is a game, because people can put in effort to make it look nice would open the door for people to argue that screen caps from their preferred game should also be allowed for similar reasons. It's more manageable to make a blanket restriction, and suggest that people use 3D art programs for 3D art to post here, instead of games that happen to be able to export decent-looking 3D images/videos.

So just anyone can make my custom textured character? Anyone can make my set with 46 different objects placed in? Anyone can recreate my 5 point lighting system?

I understand what the rule is meant to be preventing, I just don't see why SecondLife should be lumped in with all of this.

The "screencap" argument you're making hardly applies. I can render any resolution out of SecondLife natively, which most games cannot do on the spot. It is not a capture, it is a spot render, like when you render a scene in Blender; the argument kind of falls flat.

Iirc, those Roblox posts weren't rendered in Roblox, they just use Roblox avatars, but I'm not sure. That said, I'm honestly very ok with just nuking them for low quality regardless.

The pose used, from T-pose.
The facial expression.
The setting/props.
The color grading.
The curves.
The lens emulation.
The normal map interactions.
The local lighting nodes.
Uploaded the image at 8K resolution.
Ensured there were no artefacts.

All of this is something I can achieve in more than one AAA video game with vanilla photo mode, less than 5 mods, SweetFX, and bit of torture of my PC. Allowing SecondLife screenshots on these merits would mean that my random modded video game screenshots should be allowed as well.

fuzzy_kobold said:
On top of that; What if someone in a SecondLife screenshot did not want to be in a public image?
What if their screen name was shown?

And, honestly, a blanket 'No game screen grabs' makes sense. Clicking a poseball in Second Life and then taking a screenshot has very little artistic merit.
It would be just as devoid of merit as a screenshot of a Skyrim sex mod; The 'creator' of the screenshot did nothing but click a button and then press 'Print Screen'.

I'm of the opinion that the 'No Screen Captures' rule is valid and the correct way to prevent people from flooding the website with uninspired screengrabs from videogames.

Edit: I also did a search for 'roblox 3D' and could not find a single screenshot or screen recording of the game. So the rule is being applied, at least insofar as my blacklist will show me.
Hand-made 3D images and videos are not screengrabs. So pointing them out as if they are somehow breaking the 'No Screen Captures' rule is incorrect.

Notes: UI elements and avatar names are omitted by default. Anyone can draw anybody's character in drawn artwork, too (I do appreciate the concern about consent, but consent can be broken in traditional arts as well). Anyone can use pose references, anyone can download a posed skeleton to apply to a model in Blender. Would I be breaking uploading guidelines if I rip all of the meshes and models and put it into Blender or SFM like everybody else?

What I am asking is why we choose to so subjectively apply rules, and put SecondLife in a blanket ban beside ONLY Minecraft.

ruppari said:
All of this is something I can achieve in more than one AAA video game with vanilla photo mode, less than 5 mods, SweetFX, and bit of torture of my PC. Allowing SecondLife screenshots on these merits would mean that my random modded video game screenshots should be allowed as well.

So why not disinclude SecondLife alone from this standard, instead of putting it directly by MineCraft by name? It is a powerful 3D rendering tool. The entire furry community on there is driven by user created, unique 3D meshes. Can you edit the meshes of your AAA game models natively in-game too? Can you change the meshes applied to the skeleton in real time and resize them as linked or unlinked models? Can you upload custom textures and apply them in real time using native engine tools? By your standards, SFM should be completely disallowed, too.

I'll reiterate that there is no exception; Roblox content rendered in & screenshotted from Roblox is removed. SFM isn't a game, it's a tool for making renders.

aacafah said:
I'll reiterate that there is no exception; Roblox content rendered in & screenshotted from Roblox is removed. SFM isn't a game, it's a tool for making renders.

I'm glad to hear that Roblox Engine media is removed, but still concerned that the models from the game are allowed as acceptable. That is an entirely different issue though, as it regards characters potentially belonging to underaged people.

So we classify SFM as a rendering tool (that uses many stolen assets and video game models directly by extraction), but other rendering tools as games now? Would you indulge me in giving a stark description of what a "rendering tool" is, other than an engine designed to draw 3D objects? Is the definition of what is a game the flaw here? I do not use SecondLife as one uses a "game", people are getting distinctly skilled at creating renders in the software, spot-rendered with no constraints. You can upload your own 3D meshes and textures. You have to purchase rights to any 3D meshes you use, like models made for VRC currently posted here rendered using blender. How is this different?

I need this explained in no uncertain terms. Why are we stifling real creators and just blanket sweeping it under the rug as a "game screenshot"?

rhuska said:
Maybe try searching "Roblox 3D_(artwork)" or "Roblox 3D_Animation" to verify?

I have no idea what I'm looking for. I don't play Roblox, so I couldn't tell you what's captured from the game, vs using an asset or character from the game in a proper 3D art program. roblox 3d_(artwork) has ~480 hits (which includes still images and animations). If you feel any of them are screen captures of the game, flag them for not meeting the uploading guidelines.

rhuska said:
So just anyone can make my custom textured character? Anyone can make my set with 46 different objects placed in? Anyone can recreate my 5 point lighting system?

It's not about what you can make in it. People can go through a lot of effort to make unique-looking images or animations in many games, but they're still screen grabs from games. Requiring moderators to consider how unique a screen grab from a game is would lead to both an increased workload, and more variability in acceptance as different moderators can have different opinions (which can also depend on how well they know the game to determine how unique a particular image or video really looks).

Consider also that we don't allow photos of sculptures for similar reasons. It gets very muddy just how unique it is when it can range from some generic store-bought thing sitting on a table, vs a uniquely modified store-bought figure set, to an entirely hand-made original sculpture placed in very well-designed lighting and background scene.

rhuska said:
I understand what the rule is meant to be preventing, I just don't see why SecondLife should be lumped in with all of this.

Second Life is the quintessential example of a sandbox game that people would make random images/videos of questionable quality. That it's improved in the intervening decades doesn't change what it fundamentally is.

watsit said:
I have no idea what I'm looking for. I don't play Roblox, so I couldn't tell you what's captured from the game, vs using an asset or character from the game in a proper 3D art program. roblox 3d_(artwork) has ~480 hits (which includes still images and animations). If you feel any of them are screen captures of the game, flag them for not meeting the uploading guidelines.

It's not about what you can make in it. People can go through a lot of effort to make unique-looking images or animations in many games, but they're still screen grabs from games. Requiring moderators to consider how unique a screen grab from a game is would lead to both an increased workload, and more variability in acceptance as different moderators can have different opinions (which can also depend on how well they know the game to determine how unique a particular image or video really looks).

Consider also that we don't allow photos of sculptures for similar reasons, even for hand-crafted personally made ones. It gets very muddy just how unique it is when it can range from some generic store-bought thing sitting on a table, vs a uniquely modified store-bought figure set, to a modified store-bought figure placed in very well-designed lighting and background scene, to an entirely hand-made original sculpture.

Second Life is the quintessential example of a sandbox game that people would make random images/videos of questionable quality. That it's improved in the intervening decades doesn't change what it fundamentally is.

So you trust an artist to choose a sufficient canvas resolution and pixel density, but can't fathom moderating the same aspects from another render source? Should I just rip my paid assets from one rendering engine against artist ToS to render in Blender to appease these "moderation concerns"? Will it be less strenuous that way? How do you validate concerns of questionable quality with Blender? SFM? The same way, right? Are Blender artists incapable of producing objects of "questionable quality"? Are Blender artists incapable of IP theft? Do blender artists not pay for their models on gumroad, much like I had to purchase all of the unique parts to make mine? Do they not edit the UVs/Textures on those meshes to make them unique?

Make it make sense to me. Why can I reskin real game models in SFM and post it with no issue, but this is an issue?

rhuska said:
So you trust an artist to choose a sufficient canvas resolution and pixel density, but can't fathom moderating the same aspects from another render source? Should I just rip my paid assets from one rendering engine against artist ToS to render in Blender to appease these "moderation concerns"? Will it be less strenuous that way? How do you validate concerns of questionable quality with Blender? SFM? The same way, right? Are Blender artists incapable of producing objects of "questionable quality"? Are Blender artists incapable of IP theft?

Make it make sense to me.

"pixel density"?

also, what?

dba_afish said:
"pixel density"?

also, what?

Pixel density, the pixels-per-inch in an image. Directly related to image quality.

Also, the rules of e621 permit me to commit all kinds of character theft and create unoriginal content, as long as it is done using Blender or SFM and no complaints are brought up. I am trying to impress that point in the rest of my comment.

rhuska said:
So you trust an artist to choose a sufficient canvas resolution and pixel density, but can't fathom moderating the same aspects from another render source?

By "sufficient", that just means "not designed for ants". And there's a significant difference between the image dimensions (which is an objective measure) and pixel density/size, compared to determining how unique a given screen grab is.

rhuska said:
Should I just rip my paid assets from one rendering engine against artist ToS to render in Blender to appease these "moderation concerns"?

Violating ToS is not encouraged.

rhuska said:
Are Blender artists incapable of producing objects of "questionable quality"?

Not at the same scope as it takes to hit PrintScreen while playing random games.

rhuska said:
So you trust an artist to choose a sufficient canvas resolution and pixel density, but can't fathom moderating the same aspects from another render source? Should I just rip my paid assets from one rendering engine against artist ToS to render in Blender to appease these "moderation concerns"? Will it be less strenuous that way? How do you validate concerns of questionable quality with Blender? SFM? The same way, right? Are Blender artists incapable of producing objects of "questionable quality"? Are Blender artists incapable of IP theft? Do blender artists not pay for their models on gumroad, much like I had to purchase all of the unique parts to make mine? Do they not edit the UVs/Textures on those meshes to make them unique?

Make it make sense to me. Why can I reskin real game models in SFM and post it with no issue, but this is an issue?

SFM is a game-engine based rendering software, so is SecondLife.

watsit said:
By "sufficient", that just means "not designed for ants". And there's a significant difference between the image dimensions (which is an objective measure) and pixel density/size, compared to determining how unique a given screen grab is.

Violating ToS is not encouraged.

Not at the same scope as it takes to hit PrintScreen while playing random games.

You cannot take acceptable quality renders in SecondLife using printscreen, and I know this. Your knowledge of the process isn't complete, there is an in-software rendering engine that is used for spot-rendering and image taking. The rules regarding SecondLife were made ~13-15 years ago, when this spot render was basically the same as a printscreen without UI elements included.

...and you can't """steal""" an IP by drawing it?

SecondLife is a sandbox/chat game. Not a game-engine based rendering software.

aacafah said:
...and you can't """steal""" an IP by drawing it?

You can steal an IP by extracting 3D files, which is what I was referencing. Anyone can rip assets and IP off of GumRoad or directly from any game's files to render in Blender or SFM, and they can post it here without any issue. Off-topic.

ruppari said:
SecondLife is a sandbox/chat game. Not a game-engine based rendering software.

It can be directly used as a rendering software.

rhuska said:
You can steal an IP by extracting 3D files, which is what I was referencing. Off-topic.

You know copyright & trademark infringement aren't limited to rips of 3D models, right?

aacafah said:
You know copyright & trademark infringement aren't limited to rips of 3D models, right?

You know that it would take an incredibly long comment to note every possible IP infringement and I was only naming the ones relevant to this forum topic, right?

A mod can correct me if I'm wrong, but rules are applied without exception to prevent Mods/Janitors from needing to make personal rulings on edge cases 100+ times a day.

Which would then lead to 'Why did <Mod X> allow HIS screenshot but you denied mine!' which leads to MORE time taken out to examine the denied image and see if it should be allowed.

And Mods/Janitors are (Again; Please correct me if I'm wrong) volunteers who don't need or want to be spending 10 hours a day judging edge cases.

Plus people saying 'Why is Second Life allowed but not MY favorite game? Why are they the exception to the rule!'
If yes Second Life, why not yes to Skyrim screenshots using sex mods?
If yes Second Life, why not yes to Fallout 4 screenshots using sex mods?
People would complain that one exception should lead to the exception they personally want.

So it's much more sane to say 'The rule applies evenly'.
And again; Correct me if I'm off-base with that, Mods/Janitors?

rhuska said:
Pixel density, the pixels-per-inch in an image. Directly related to image quality.

pixel density/dpi is a measurement for a monitor (or, like, a printer), it's not something that an artist has control over when creating a piece meant to be viewed on another user's screen.

rhuska said:
Also, the rules of e621 permit me to commit all kinds of character theft and create unoriginal content, as long as it is done using Blender or SFM and no complaints are brought up. I am trying to impress that point in the rest of my comment.

yeah, it's just-- y'know, kinda a total non sequitur. I don't see how hosting fan art is at all contradictory to not hosting screencaps.

fuzzy_kobold said:
A mod can correct me if I'm wrong, but rules are applied without exception to prevent Mods/Janitors from needing to make personal rulings on edge cases 100+ times a day.

Which would then lead to 'Why did <Mod X> allow HIS screenshot but you denied mine!' which leads to MORE time taken out to examine the denied image and see if it should be allowed.

And Mods/Janitors are (Again; Please correct me if I'm wrong) volunteers who don't need or want to be spending 10 hours a day judging edge cases.

Plus people saying 'Why is Second Life allowed but not MY favorite game? Why are they the exception to the rule!'
If yes Second Life, why not yes to Skyrim screenshots using sex mods?
If yes Second Life, why not yes to Fallout 4 screenshots using sex mods?
People would complain that one exception should lead to the exception they personally want.

So it's much more sane to say 'The rule applies evenly'.
And again; Correct me if I'm off-base with that, Mods/Janitors?

Explain why there is anything but unilateral moderation, then. Why is the SecondLife tag populated with images from SecondLife?

People don't complain about Skyrim because the models and environments have been ripped and modified. Content can be made in Blender or SFM.
People don't complain about FO4 because the models and environments have been ripped and modified.
Content can be made in Blender or SFM.

Correct me if I'm off-base here, but doesn't it appear that they haven't been applying rules without exception?

dba_afish said:
pixel density/dpi is a measurement for a monitor (or, like, a printer), it's not something that an artist has control over when creating a piece meant to be viewed on another user's screen.

yeah, it's just-- y'know, kinda a total non sequitur. I don't see how hosting fan art is at all contradictory to not hosting screencaps.

They are spot-renders, not screencaps, hope this helps. Don't recall ever mentioning fanart.

Nah, that's right Fuzzy Kobold.

rhuska said:
They are spot-renders, not screencaps, hope this helps.

Using assets from a game or a screenshot as a background is very different from just screenshotting a game and calling it good
It would be significantly more productive to point at actual individual posts rather than gesturing vaguely at nearly 100 posts

donovan_dmc said:
Using assets from a game or a screenshot as a background is very different from just screenshotting a game and calling it good
It would be significantly more productive to point at actual individual posts rather than gesturing vaguely at nearly 100 posts

https://e621.net/posts/6044313?q=secondlife This is on E621, no flags, no deletions. A SecondLife spot-render (Not a screen capture) with extra panels. Should this be removed in accordance with Upload Guidelines? Why can't images of similar quality taken in SecondLife be posted, if this was accepted, approved and unmoderated for 2 months? If there were no objections to this, is it worth flagging manually every time? Do you not rely on user flags and reports for input already?

People in this thread have mentioned how counterproductive it is to provide anything but unilateral judgement with no exceptions, and yet here we are?

More below:
https://e621.net/posts/6044298?q=secondlife
https://e621.net/posts/6044258?q=secondlife
https://e621.net/posts/6044252?q=secondlife
https://e621.net/posts/3436396?q=secondlife
https://e621.net/posts/3417562?q=secondlife
https://e621.net/posts/2139468?q=secondlife
https://e621.net/posts/2353416?q=secondlife
https://e621.net/posts/968460?q=secondlife

rhuska said:
Explain why there is anything but unilateral moderation, then. Why is the SecondLife tag populated with images from SecondLife?

People don't complain about Skyrim because the models and environments have been ripped and modified. Content can be made in Blender or SFM.
People don't complain about FO4 because the models and environments have been ripped and modified.
Content can be made in Blender or SFM.

Correct me if I'm off-base here, but doesn't it appear that they haven't been applying rules without exception?

If you want posts deleted, simply flag them without doing whatever this is.
If you want policy changed, don't just use approvers failing to recognize a post's source as justification for it, because you're framing it as staff mistakes instead of arguing for these posts' artistic merit.

Some approvers approve images traced from AI because they don't know any better, but if you left 20 different forum posts accusing e621 of supporting AI art everybody would rightly recognize that you are making an unsupported leap in logic.

lafcadio said:
If you want posts deleted, simply flag them without doing whatever this is.
If you want policy changed, don't just use approvers failing to recognize a post's source as justification for it, because you're framing it as staff mistakes instead of arguing for these posts' artistic merit.

Some approvers approve images traced from AI because they don't know any better, but if you left 20 different forum posts accusing e621 of supporting AI art everybody would rightly recognize that you are making an unsupported leap in logic.

I am arguing that the quality of these images has stood to the test of moderation and deserve to be allowed on the site, but an archaic 14-year-old uploading guideline is still in place causing confusion precisely like this forum thread. I would thank you to read all that I have posted in-line here.

rhuska said:
I am arguing that the quality of these images has stood to the test of moderation and deserve to be allowed on the site, but an archaic 14-year-old uploading guideline is still in place causing confusion precisely like this forum thread. I would thank you to read all that I have posted in-line here.

If you're arguing that these have been approved in spite of being screencaps, then these posts "[standing] the test of moderation" has not been proven, because clearly the policy wasn't applied correctly anyway.

If you uploaded a vanilla FFXIV character in a vanilla FFXIV pose in a vanilla FFXIV location, I'd recognize it and delete it, but another approver who hasn't played the game will not. I know not to assess the post based on whether the base assets look nice, but whether the artist has used techniques and rendering methods that aren't found in FFXIV. Other approvers do not have this kind of foreknowledge, so they can and will approve posts incorrectly.

You have not argued for these posts' artistic merit at all.

lafcadio said:
If you're arguing that these have been approved in spite of being screencaps, then these posts "[standing] the test of moderation" has not been proven, because clearly the policy wasn't applied correctly anyway.

If you uploaded a vanilla FFXIV character in a vanilla FFXIV pose in a vanilla FFXIV location, I'd recognize it and delete it, but another approver who hasn't played the game will not. I know not to assess the post based on whether the base assets look nice, but whether the artist has used techniques and rendering methods that aren't found in FFXIV. Other approvers do not have this kind of foreknowledge, so they can and will approve posts incorrectly.

You have not argued for these posts' artistic merit at all.

If I was to post a SecondLife render where I made:
The pose used, from T-pose.
The facial expression.
The setting/props.
The color grading.
The curves.
The lens emulation.
The normal map interactions.
The local lighting nodes.
Uploaded the image at 8K resolution.
Ensured there were no artefacts.

From the criteria for posting abuse:
Would this be considered "non-artistic" to you? Would you classify it as a screenshot/screencap even considering it is re-rendered at higher resolution using hardware and in-game tools? If knowingly posting SecondLife renders is "Posting abuse", does one get punished, even if the image in question meets the quality guidelines for posting? What kind of rule system uses subjective reasoning like this? Are you not creating a grey area to get stuck on?

If I have created the whole scene, lighting, poses and environment for the photo, is there any artistic "merit" to that? If someone posts a SFM video with only assets ripped from games, and animations ripped from LoversLab mods, is there artistic merit to that? If someone makes the models move using the physgun in an SFM environment, is there artistic merit to that?

I see a lot of one and not a lot of the other on here.

https://e621.net/posts/425947?q=SFM
https://e621.net/posts/1180016?q=sfm+order%3Ascore_asc+3d_%28artwork%29
Artistic merit at work.

Would you care to define "artistic merit" in the context of uploading to E621? Because it still seems very unclear.

rhuska said:
If I have created the whole scene, lighting, poses and environment for the photo, is there any artistic "merit" to that? If someone posts a SFM video with only assets ripped from games, and animations ripped from LoversLab mods, is there artistic merit to that? If someone makes the models move using the physgun in an SFM environment, is there artistic merit to that?

I see a lot of one and not a lot of the other on here.

https://e621.net/posts/425947?q=SFM
https://e621.net/posts/1180016?q=sfm+order%3Ascore_asc+3d_%28artwork%29
Artistic merit at work.

Would you care to define "artistic merit" in the context of uploading to E621? Because it still seems very unclear.

I am intimately aware of what separates high-effort FFXIV shots from low-effort ones, the tools people use to get good-quality shots, and the reasons they don't just use things like Blender. You're just arguing terribly and confusing people, as evidenced by literally every other reply here. You cannot vaguely point at the entire concept of 3D Roblox posts even though roblox blender_(artwork) posts exist.

Yes, half of post #425947 consists of premade assets and added jitter. That just means this post is bad and not that we should begin accepting emulated Magic Pengel screenshots.

You're also repeatedly editing your posts, and you started today by replying to 9-year-old threads. It is clear to me that you are not thinking before posting. Chill out a little.

I once spoke about this in topic #58601 and I don't think I have anything new to add.

I'm still on the side that the artistic intention, effort that went into it (is it just prefabs slapped together?) and final quality should be the key factor rather than terms like "render" or "screencap" which are becoming increasingly vague as hardware capability increases. It's well beyond just hitting the print screen key and uploading whatever you get.

Decades ago when the no screencap rule was set it just wasn't possible to render images in Second Life with it's photography tools, adjustable camera settings, DoF, perspective, lighting and posing in high (4K, 8K, even higher) resolutions. You can do most the things SFM can do (and probably everything that the amateur SFM user actually uses) and yet it's still not treated as equal.

Since the method of rendering seems to be the only thing that separates it, the current approval rules really just end up coming down to how intensely you've ran your GPU rather than anything based on artistic merit.

faucet said:
I once spoke about this in topic #58601 and I don't think I have anything new to add.

Although I came across as supportive in that thread, and I do think the "it's the result that matters, not what it was made in" stance is good, there is the other angle that was pointed out earlier in this thread. How is a janitor/moderator supposed to know when some image or animation is some stock scene a user hit printscreen on, vs one that someone put in a lot of effort to distinguish as a unique work? And what is the cutoff point for distinguishing a unique work from modified stock assets?

As far as I recall, the rule against photos of sculptures has a similar basis. If anyone can take nice looking photos of some random sculpture, and multiple people try to upload photos of the same sculpture, which one gets to be kept vs removed as a duplicate? Does a better looking image of the same sculpture, but taken in slightly different conditions, mean the older photo that is technically different should be deleted as a lower-quality duplicate? How would moderators know when some sculpture is a mass-produced store-bought figure that the someone simply took a photo of, vs one that someone put time and effort to hand-make from scratch? And where would the cutoff be between the two, how much modification of a store-bought figure would be needed to pass muster?

watsit said:
How is a janitor/moderator supposed to know when some image or animation is some stock scene a user hit printscreen on

It should be pretty obvious to tell the difference between something like post #968460 (archive before the inevitable deletion) and an image that's clearly still covered with UI and other gameplay elements.

But all the other points? Yeah, that's a great question. People would have to be pretty familiar with the the content, how it works, be up to date on which prefabricated content already exists - it's asking a lot, and most janitors probably aren't familiar with any of this. I'm not saying we should just open the floodgates, but I do think it's something that needs consideration.

Yet SFM (and other rendering software) content has all the same problems, and is routinely accepted. If the wiki page is up to date, warfaremachine_(modeler) has made 63 models and yet there are 13,218 posts incorporating them. This feels very comparable to the same sculpture in different conditions analogy to me, with the only key difference being that they're posable.

faucet said:
It should be pretty obvious to tell the difference between something like post #968460 (archive before the inevitable deletion) and an image that's clearly still covered with UI and other gameplay elements.

Most games nowadays have the ability to hide the UI for making screenshots or videos. The lack of a UI doesn't mean it's not some stock scene the user hit printscreen on.

faucet said:
Yet SFM (and other rendering software) content has all the same problems, and is routinely accepted. If the wiki page is up to date, warfaremachine_(modeler) has made 63 models and yet there are 13,218 posts incorporating them. This feels very comparable to the same sculpture in different conditions analogy to me, with the only key difference being that they're posable.

I'm honestly surprised prefab models are acceptable as they are. I get that making models is more difficult and time-consuming compared to drawing a random character, but as you say, it's comparable to posable sculptures/dolls/action figures. If I buy some posable Zootopia figures and take photos of them in various scenes (perhaps with slight modifications like genitals and/or different clothing), how is that different from most 3D images of premade free-to-use models? At least with the Zootopia figures, they have a slightly higher barrier to entry as I would have to buy them with money, while free-to-use models only take a download to get.

I think, what it boils down too, is that the Roblox renders/pics/videos are not made in Roblox and, perhaps more importantly are not screenshots. They're exported or scanned hand-drawn images or exported 3D renders, or edited videos.

What OP wants is for SecondLife to be treated as a rendering program instead of a sandbox game, and allow screenshots because that's how it exports images; It takes a screenshot and puts it in a folder, like most games.

But the problem is that making ONE edge case will got other people irritated that their game is not allowed to post screen shots, and be in here asking 'Make it make sense!' once again.

watsit said:
I'm honestly surprised prefab models are acceptable as they are. I get that making models is more difficult and time-consuming compared to drawing a random character, but as you say, it's comparable to posable sculptures/dolls/action figures.

We do take that into account. Works made with somebody else's models receive significantly higher scrutiny than works made directly by the modeler themselves; we're not letting people to get away with abysmal, stuff animations filled with clipping just because they're using someone else's stellar model, & we're lenient for some awkward animation coming from a talented modeler.