Loading...
> >

NFT and the Future of Digital Content

1…1314161819…53

Comments

  • MistaraMistara Posts: 38,675

    certaintree38 said:

    Mystiarra said:

    are they saying they want to pay us to show our renders? 
    how much will give me to put  my renders in their gallery?

    does that include carrara renders? cuz i dont tender in daz studio.  might if the pay was motivational.

    The idea was floated but they didn't actually offer it. They just want to know if people would be interested. I don't think the software you used would matter. You would only get "paid" or given credit or whatever if someone wanted to buy a print of your work. Deviant Art also allows you to sell your prints, but for cash, not credit. I don't think a lot of prints sell, though. Not sure why Daz would be any different. 

    i like cash.

    seemed odd they'd introduce something that would flow their money towards me instead of mine to them. 

  • darth_giles@yahoo.com[email protected] Posts: 12

    So, add me to the list of people who really don't want to see Daz getting into or supporting NFT/cryptoart. And I'd rather see the effort put into getting a Big Sur build and Filament for Mac, instead of this nonsense.

    Not sure what else I can say, that hasn't already been said.

  • MelissaGTMelissaGT Posts: 2,611
    edited March 2021

    margrave said:

    Mystiarra said:

    are they saying they want to pay us to show our renders? 
    how much will give me to put  my renders in their gallery?

    does that include carrara renders? cuz i dont tender in daz studio.  might if the pay was motivational.

    In theory, if Daz did implement an NFT system for the gallery, they would not be selling your renders. They would be selling a token that the buyer has seen your render. And if you decide to take your renders down one day, those tokens would theoretically increase in value since you've introduced scarcity. So if it suddenly becomes an important bragging right to have experienced looking at a Mystiarra render, then the NFTs would skyrocket in value.

    Of course, Daz could also add the stipulation that the buyer does get a copyright to your renders, but that's different from the NFT itself.

    This totally reminds me of an episode of Star Trek Voyager when the crew visits a planet that has a very hush hush black market all built upon selling the memory of a person's illicit experiences (mostly violent if I remember correctly) so others can essentially get off on them. Or was it Star Trek Enterprise? Now I can't remember which one. 

    Post edited by MelissaGT on
  • margravemargrave Posts: 1,822

    melissastjames said:

    margrave said:

    Mystiarra said:

    are they saying they want to pay us to show our renders? 
    how much will give me to put  my renders in their gallery?

    does that include carrara renders? cuz i dont tender in daz studio.  might if the pay was motivational.

    In theory, if Daz did implement an NFT system for the gallery, they would not be selling your renders. They would be selling a token that the buyer has seen your render. And if you decide to take your renders down one day, those tokens would theoretically increase in value since you've introduced scarcity. So if it suddenly becomes an important bragging right to have experienced looking at a Mystiarra render, then the NFTs would skyrocket in value.

    Of course, Daz could also add the stipulation that the buyer does get a copyright to your renders, but that's different from the NFT itself.

    This totally reminds me of an episode of Star Trek Voyager when the crew visits a planet that has a very hush hush black market all built upon selling the memory of a person's illicit experiences (mostly violent if I remember correctly) so others can essentially get off on them. Or was it Star Trek Enterprise? Now I can't remember which one. 

    Wasn't that Strange Days, by James Cameron & Kathryn Bigelow? Or was Star Trek just ripping it off?

    Anyway, while we're on the subject of films, Network used to be considered a far-fetched satire about the state of American media.

    Operative words: used to be.

  • FirstBastionFirstBastion Posts: 7,760

    There's still time to reconsider,  and declare this all an April Fools joke.

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,306
    edited March 2021

    margrave said:

    Of course, Daz could also add the stipulation that the buyer does get a copyright to your renders, but that's different from the NFT itself.

    Without permission and a hefty fee paid to the artist(!), that's called stealing people's work.

    Post edited by Torquinox on
  • ShelLuserShelLuser Posts: 749
    edited March 2021

    BradCarsten said:

    marble said:

    I'm one of those old-timers who don't understand what's happening with digital trading so I have a simple question: how does this NFT thing affect me, as a mere hobbyist who never displays any of my "artwork"? I just make pictures for fun and, apart from a personal project where I'm recreating scenes from my own family life, I delete most of the stuff I create. 

    So, to be more precise, is this going to end up costing me when I want to buy store content to make my hobby pictures? Will I have to use tokens to buy from the store? Will the prices start to go up and down depending on the trading of these tokens? Or is it all limited to selling the completed images? I mean, even the promo pictures for store products might be considered completed artwork and any subsequent artwork created using that product might be considered derivative. Oh, so confusing and, to me at least, quite senseless: tulips indeed.

    This won't affect you in the least. It doesn't change anything. the Blockchain is simply a massive online register that can record transactions, that no one can alter. that's all it is. So if I sell something to you, using the blockchain, that record will be there forever. If that person sells the same item, that record will also be recorded. Now, a future owner can retrace all the sales to find the original owner.

    Not exactly: they can trace it back to the account which provided the material. But the link between account and actual person will not be part of the blockchain itself, so in the end it relies on trust. And that is also the archilles heel because you won't have any guarantees that the account actually belongs to the person. You'll only have hearsay to go on. This is fully implied because of the de-centralized setup of a blockchain, it means that anyone can add to it thus there won't be a central account registration. Anyone can make any kind of account, and it'll be up to them to make it publically known which account(s) they own.

    Which is also information which can be easily forged. Good luck proving me wrong that $artist didn't have 2 accounts and that my NFT isn't even worth more because they seldomly use that other account. Unless you can contact the artist themselves to verify (good luck when it's someone like Rowling) then....  you're open for a good scam.

     

    (edit)

     

    melissastjames said:

    This totally reminds me of an episode of Star Trek Voyager when the crew visits a planet that has a very hush hush black market all built upon selling the memory of a person's illicit experiences (mostly violent if I remember correctly) so others can essentially get off on them. Or was it Star Trek Enterprise? Now I can't remember which one. 

    That was Voyager, the original series.

    Post edited by ShelLuser on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 100,765

    AbyssalEros said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Until we know where this lies between a single NFT and a tool to soak up every cycle on our GPUs that isn't devoted to rendering to the production of NFTs [...].

    I can only hope that this was some bad form of sarcasm!
    But as this topic was already brought up — hopefully, it's just a joke — it would not hurt if DAZ Productions, Inc. would make an "official" post declaring not to use DAZ Studio users' systems for mining. Or in any way incorporate a mining feature into DAZ Studio.

    It was intended to offer two extreme ends of the possibilities - not a serious suggestion (and in as far as I was visualising any details at all I certainly assumed it would be something people would consent to use, not something that would be foisted on them).

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,306

    This thread has the most awful stench to it.

  • fred9803fred9803 Posts: 1,564

    Richard Haseltine said:

    ...... In the absence of any idea of what is going to be offered pretty much any non-general comment seems pointless.

    This doesn't seem to be a project thought through very well. Might I say like the encrypted content one. Perhaps the Diigitals timer should have been extended a few week/months until the project's details were finalised. We watched the clock go to zero but there's little clarity in what is being offered, hence the confusion and complaints.

  • MistaraMistara Posts: 38,675

    i made a bunch of biguanna renders to sell.  wheres my billion nft dollars?

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,306

    FirstBastion said:

    There's still time to reconsider,  and declare this all an April Fools joke.

    Good point!

  • AbyssalErosAbyssalEros Posts: 289

    @ Richard Haseltine
    I assumed as much, but your employer recently lost a huge deal of credibility, so an "official" declaration of DAZ Productions, Inc. about their plans regarding NFT and all related topics would not hurt.

  • wooferwoofer Posts: 17
    edited March 2021

    Daz, your defintion of NFT is flawed. Here's a more appropriate one: NFTs are a means of guaranteeing the authenticity of some digital data.

    Authenticity of objects is valuable because people want to have originals, whether it be a painting/artwork, jewelry, or anything else. While a replica may serve the same function as an original, its value is questionable, whether due to inferior quality or simply because it deviates from the original in some aspect, making its universal appeal subjective.

    And that's where the absurdity of NFTs comes in. Unlike physical objects, every copy of digital data is as perfect and authentic as the original, and the data is easily reproduced. Nothing prevents either the purchaser or creator of an NFT from creating an infinite number of perfect, "authentic" replicas. To any purchaser, there is no guarantee that copies of the data won't be made, or whether the seller even had the rights to that data to begin with. Furthermore, as there are no laws protecting your "rights" as an NFT owner (and frankly, never will be due to it being at odds with current intellectual property laws), all NFTs are ultimately worthless beyond having the bragging rights of ownership, which equate to nothing more than just bragging rights that you have more money to throw away than someone else. 

    Now, I don't personally care about some random fool getting scammed out of their money if it doesn't affect me, as these things happen all the time both online and in the real world. However, the proliferation of all things crypto does negatively affect me indirectly:
     - CO2 emissions damage the environment, meaning humanity will need to pay to fix the planet, or we risk perishing.
     - Reduces the supply of energy, meaning everything else costs more.
     - Increases the supply of money, which devalues everything else.
     - Enriches people in their act of destroying the planet and producing nothing of value.
     - Enables money laundering/criminal activity.
     - Enables tax evasion and undermines government, which risks us heading into anarchy. If governments were unable to collect tax, there would be no laws.
     - Wastes hardware/GPUs, and hence hinders human progress.

    As such, I have vowed to boycott any business that deals with or proliferates crypto as much as possible. I get that Daz wants to hop in on the get-rich-quick ponzi-like scam that's been hyped up recently, but I refuse to support that. If this were really about supporting artists, you could have added a payment option to the gallery, similar to what Deviantart has.

    Hence, while the NFT link remains in your header, I will not pay a cent of money on this site.

    Post edited by woofer on
  • margravemargrave Posts: 1,822
    edited March 2021

    Torquinox said:

    margrave said:

    Of course, Daz could also add the stipulation that the buyer does get a copyright to your renders, but that's different from the NFT itself.

    Without permission and a hefty fee, that's called stealing people's work.

    I never said they should do it without getting people's permission.

    Well, I never said they should do it, period, but while I was playing devil's advocate I wrote that with the presumption it would be an opt-in service.

    Post edited by margrave on
  • angelikmayhemangelikmayhem Posts: 21

    CNN just published a story explaining some of the horror stories involving NFTs. https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/30/tech/nft-hacking-theft-environment-concerns/index.html

  • IceScribeIceScribe Posts: 694
    edited March 2021

     Exclusivity with crypto money, some kind of agents in charge (no doubt for a cut) and their 'seal' of the arbitrary consensus of worth-who decides? Not just the artist, as we have seen with Andy Warhol Pop Art. Well,  the introductory 3d model just doesn't appeal to me. I know they're popular features but I  don't care for bee bite lips, or scouse eyebrows, I would like to beautify the model in my way. If I understand correctly, the model is purchased in some exclusive way, and cannot be modified. So, no sale here. I may be mistaken about the modification accessibility.  I modify every 3d model I buy. I change textures, lips, eye slants, lips, I kit bash, it entertains me. I'm not passing off the originals as my work. When I work, I try to sense, to feel out what I know from my experience working with diverse peoples in a long career, try to find that good note that makes a viewer say, that looks like a real person, they are feeling something I recognize. That's up to me. And, I don't think that is so unusual with many other artists. 

    It's presented as one in a set of collectible models.  Exclusivity makes collectibles all the more tasty. I don't buy for collectibility, or celebrity, or for exclusivity, to be part of the In-Crowd. I've been around old school art scenes of the 1970S and 80s, and the clique scene is not my cuppa.   Thing is, it's back to somebody else's approval, and I'm not so sure about the crypto of crypto currency. Someone might be skimming off the top or it might just blow away in a puff of electrons. My personal view, if someone wants to make collectible art, more power to them. However, I don't see it as a money making scheme---for the artist. I may be wrong, I'm not knowledge about the financial doings of art business especially with invisible money, but I know some artists who have attained some fame, but they are not rich because of their art. Although I don't collect art/gamer/sports cards, I appreciate the fact that the cheap cardboard they seem to be printed on can actually be held in one's hand by candlelight when the power goes out. C'mon, the power has gone out in many places for millions of people. It's something to consider. I do digital art with my 3d purchases for my personal entertainment, and I don't think I'm in such a small crowd, the 'hobbyist'. The most annoying thing about being a hobbyist is that people who see my work will say, "hey, you could sell that". Curiously, they rarely buy it. As for 3d models anyway, I've agreed to the Eula, but I have a helluva lot of money invested in digital models which I cannot leave to my heir or donate to a charity. All it is is dust in the wind, just that moment of fortuitous arrangment of pixels unless I print on paper, still ephemeral. 

    Post edited by IceScribe on
  • StorypilotStorypilot Posts: 1,675
    edited March 2021

    Seronita said:

    So, add me to the list of people who really don't want to see Daz getting into or supporting NFT/cryptoart. And I'd rather see the effort put into getting a Big Sur build and Filament for Mac, instead of this nonsense.

    Not sure what else I can say, that hasn't already been said.

    I second this! I am patiently waiting to upgrade my OS on account of DAZ Studio. (Bootcamp is not an acceptable alternative)  

    Also the sooner the NFT tab gets moved out of the main nav bar, and the Forum and Gallery come back out of a submenu that doesn't work on mobile, the better. smiley

    Post edited by Storypilot on
  • BlueFingersBlueFingers Posts: 903

    FirstBastion said:

    There's still time to reconsider,  and declare this all an April Fools joke.

    That would be the best April fools joke ever!!!

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,306

    margrave said:

    Torquinox said:

    margrave said:

    Of course, Daz could also add the stipulation that the buyer does get a copyright to your renders, but that's different from the NFT itself.

    Without permission and a hefty fee, that's called stealing people's work.

    I never said they should do it without getting people's permission.

    Well, I never said they should do it, period, but while I was playing devil's advocate I wrote that with the presumption it would be an opt-in service.

    Ok! And in the interim, I added a clarification that the fee should be paid to the artist. So, opt-in, permission from the artist, fee paid to the artist. Something like that could be good.

  • margravemargrave Posts: 1,822

    Torquinox said:

    margrave said:

    Torquinox said:

    margrave said:

    Of course, Daz could also add the stipulation that the buyer does get a copyright to your renders, but that's different from the NFT itself.

    Without permission and a hefty fee, that's called stealing people's work.

    I never said they should do it without getting people's permission.

    Well, I never said they should do it, period, but while I was playing devil's advocate I wrote that with the presumption it would be an opt-in service.

    Ok! And in the interim, I added a clarification that the fee should be paid to the artist. So, opt-in, permission from the artist, fee paid to the artist. Something like that could be good.

    It'd certainly be good for the artist, since people would be giving them money in exchange for what is effectively a receipt that they (the NFT buyer) have seen a jpg on the internet.

    Frankly, I don't know what's scarier: contemporary people willing to pay for proof they've looked at a meme once, or that we actually will end up in some horrifying nightmare world where proving you saw a meme once is an acceptable form of currency.

  • StorypilotStorypilot Posts: 1,675

    BlueFingers said:

    FirstBastion said:

    There's still time to reconsider,  and declare this all an April Fools joke.

    That would be the best April fools joke ever!!!

    Yes, that would be great! laugh

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,306

    margrave said:

    Torquinox said:

    margrave said:

    Torquinox said:

    margrave said:

    Of course, Daz could also add the stipulation that the buyer does get a copyright to your renders, but that's different from the NFT itself.

    Without permission and a hefty fee, that's called stealing people's work.

    I never said they should do it without getting people's permission.

    Well, I never said they should do it, period, but while I was playing devil's advocate I wrote that with the presumption it would be an opt-in service.

    Ok! And in the interim, I added a clarification that the fee should be paid to the artist. So, opt-in, permission from the artist, fee paid to the artist. Something like that could be good.

    It'd certainly be good for the artist, since people would be giving them money in exchange for what is effectively a receipt that they (the NFT buyer) have seen a jpg on the internet.

    Frankly, I don't know what's scarier: contemporary people willing to pay for proof they've looked at a meme once, or that we actually will end up in some horrifying nightmare world where proving you saw a meme once is an acceptable form of currency.

    Lots of artists would benefit from someone doing something good for them. yes

    Those are both scary, yes.

  • fred9803fred9803 Posts: 1,564

    Storypilot said:

    BlueFingers said:

    FirstBastion said:

    There's still time to reconsider,  and declare this all an April Fools joke.

    That would be the best April fools joke ever!!!

    Yes, that would be great! laugh

    Probably not consirering the hype Daz has gone to.

    It would be akin to Loyd spending 20 years in a mental institution just to play a weak prank on Harry.

  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 9,455
    edited March 2021

    16 pages, 474 comments in just a few days. Big success of the forum topic. Looks like it concerns a lot of people.

    Congrats Daz 3D.

     

    Post edited by Artini on
  • cherpenbeckcherpenbeck Posts: 1,412

    This whole NFT concept sounds weird to me. Won't buy anything like that. And if DAZ continues this way. well,  then it's no longer a place where I like to buy.

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    edited March 2021

    I just deleted my creditcard info and I am done shopping here. I've seen this coming for a long time but the NFT thing was the very last straw.

    Post edited by Sven Dullah on
  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 9,455

    Sorry, but I do not have a time to read all of the posts in this thread.

    Does it means, that all new Daz products will be only NFT,

    that you buy here as a unique, collectors items and cannot be shown to anybody else?

  • margravemargrave Posts: 1,822
    edited March 2021

    Artini said:

    Sorry, but I do not have a time to read all of the posts in this thread.

    Does it means, that all new Daz products will be only NFT,

    that you buy here as a unique, collectors items and cannot be shown to anybody else?

    No. NFTs do not convey copyright. You basically get a receipt that you purchased an image, which is stored in a decentralized "blockchain". Daz launched a collaboration with the Diigitals to sell NFTs on OpenSea, an online market specifically for selling NFTs.

    Daz employees have told us this has zero effect on the normal operation of the site.

    Post edited by margrave on
  • plasma_ringplasma_ring Posts: 1,025

    Artini said:

    Sorry, but I do not have a time to read all of the posts in this thread.

    Does it means, that all new Daz products will be only NFT,

    that you buy here as a unique, collectors items and cannot be shown to anybody else?

    No. It's completely separate from the store. 

This discussion has been closed.