If this case goes to court, it will be interesting who the court decides has the right to, if at all, sell these particular NFTs of the "Tiger King".
Gawd, why do I find this whole business in really poor taste? I mean, a lot of it really seems low and shady. Am I the only one? It just seems....tawdry somehow. And I'm not talking just about the Tiger King story, although, wow...those images. Gah.
I am genuinly concern what this will mean for MY gallery here... will I risk someone deciding to steal one of my images or part of it to make one if these things?? (I Know I am not a good artist, but still...)
I'm also rather amused about the Nazgul one.. after all, Nazgul is (as far as I am aware, I may be wrong though) copyrighted to those that owns Tolkiens stuff, and I'm pretty sure that can be rather expensive for whoever sells it as this...
...this is my concern as well, since anyone can "right click save as". The advent of NFTs may actually promote digital art theft and there's absolutely nothing we as artists can do about it.save for pulling all our work offline, and then what is the prupose? There is no "copy protect" unless that is somehow disabled by the hosting site. However even that isn't foolproof as one can still take a screen shot and crop all the surrounding imagry out.
I posted a question to the blog to ask how DAZ can protect the works in the galleries from having NFTs sold for them by people who are not the artist. I don't expect to see it - or get a satisfactory answer.
I don't think there's anything anyone can do to stop someone creating an NFT - but that applies to all other abuses of copyright, I've seen people taking Daz promo images (and probably gallery iamges or images from social media) and selling it as cover art, for example. But as far as I read the license Daz doesn't have any title to resell gallery, or other, artwork so they are not going to take your work without permission and NFT it.
DeviantArt has a copyright and usage option at the bottom whenever you submit an image. Nothing is going to stop thieves from trying to steal art, but no gallery endorses or openly allows it, people who sell others' art without permission are breaking the law regardless.
I think ownership rights are all stored in the etherium blockchain, so you would still be a registered owner but not sure if the actual assett is as safe.
Gosh, this thread moves fast.
...tell me about it. Last night when I went to bed there were five pages. This evening when I got on there were eighteen
It makes the old Complaint thread look like it's moving at a geologic pace.
I think ownership rights are all stored in the etherium blockchain, so you would still be a registered owner but not sure if the actual assett is as safe.
Gosh, this thread moves fast.
...tell me about it. Last night when I went to bed there were five pages. This evening when I got on there were eighteen
It makes the old Complaint thread look like it's moving at a geologic pace.
I have read all the 7 (!) pages of comments now, but to be honest, I still don't get how this works. Now, let's assume I would be the customer, and I click on the link Daz provided where I can buy "something". I just learned that I get a link to a copy of a file (which might disappear at some point of time), but I still have this NFT, a long number. But - what do I do with it? Do I keep it and sell it somewhere to a higher price at some point of time? How does that work? And what is it I am actually selling here? Is this a kind of stock exchange Daz is entering now??
Its a bit like selling a square meter of real estate on the moon. You don't have it, you cannot visit it (right now). All you have is a piece of paper from some more-or-(most lilkely)less trustworthy organization that tells you "Congrats, you own a square meter on the moon."
At least I can go visit my 1 sq ft of land in Scotland. :P
..If I ever can make it back to Green Bay WI in late July I can attend the Green Bay Packers Shareholder Meeting at LambeauField (10 shares).
While that treaty is in fact in place, only 18 states have signed it, excluding: the US of America, China, The USSR.... The two largest signees are France and Australia.
...hmm, I wonder if a roo can leap into lunar orbit.
If this case goes to court, it will be interesting who the court decides has the right to, if at all, sell these particular NFTs of the "Tiger King".
Well that's the thing, I do not think it will make any difference for those particular NFTs, in fact, it could make them worth even more because they become more well known (Sales voice: "Now but these exculsive NFTs from the Tiger King court case, there are only 12 of them"). The pictures are not the sole unique identifiers but more like the pictures on a baseball card, buying the baseball card does not give you the copyright of the baseball card or the picture on the baseball cards. Maybe they have to remove the pictures from the NFT (not sure how that works), but as far as I can see the NFT would not nessecarily be stopped from existing.
But if anyone else know, perhaps they can clarify.
That is something that has been brought up in the past, I'm curious what your views are on it.
I'm not sure if it is feasible but if you could opt-in on a gallery image and allow other community users to get a print of your gallery image and have some portion of that sale show up in your store credit account, would that be interesting?
...I'm still wondering about the rendering Bridge in the Daz programme Advanced Render Settings which is apparently still in "beta" mode.
That is something that has been brought up in the past, I'm curious what your views are on it.
I'm not sure if it is feasible but if you could opt-in on a gallery image and allow other community users to get a print of your gallery image and have some portion of that sale show up in your store credit account, would that be interesting?
...I'm still wondering about the rendering Bridge in the Daz programme Advanced Render Settings which is apparently still in "beta" mode.
Is Daz hard up for cash? I would be upset if that were true. I thought sales had gone up recently? But between this and the "can we sell prints of your stuff?" thing, I have to wonder.
Honestly, Daz might do better to just sell high-end assets: something with lots of bells and whistles but no blockchain (and of course a designer price tag). I don't think a lot of people would opt in to a $400 dollar dress, but you might sell some at $80 if it was really impressive and never went on sale. (I'm not suggesting you only sell high-end assets of course. I'm sure most of us can't afford that).
Or what about a contest where people could opt in to have their renders voted on? The winner gets a predetermined prize or amount of money and then Daz gets some rights to print it. That's probably less paperwork.
...the old galleries were sort of like that. If your work was selected you received a 25$ voucher (basically store credit). I felt it really incentivsed people to put submit their best work.
Ok, did some research on NFTs, and it kind of makes sense from a financial perspective as it gives more options for your capital if you're interested in that, but,...it has nothing to do with art as far as I can see, it's a financial thing. The art attached to it, is more of a unique identifier in practice (like the picture on a baseball card).
The average NFT transaction takes about 48kWh of power (equivalent to more than a day’s worth of power consumption of the average US household), every(!) transaction which means: Biding on an NFT, mining a NFT, cancelling a bid on an NFT, selling an NFT etc. If there is one NFT for sale, there will be likely multiple bidders, multiple cancellations and probably a sale,...you can see how this would impact an environment that is already fragile as it is.
IMO: The world really doesn't need capital to have more options, there are options enough, and most people don't use them. The power consumption is really, really bad. This seems outside of Daz core-business as it effectively makes Daz a kind of financial broker I guess. Why not first concentrate on reaching excellence in your core-business? NFTs are by all standards still a form of gambling as far as I can see.
Also comparing making renders to making transactions with NFTs is kind of comparing a moped to a Boeing 747 in terms of pollution.
...actually more like a moped compared to a Concorde which has four 1960s era afterburning turbojet engines. A 747 (even the first generation) is more efficient than that as it was powered by the first high bypass turbofan engines. Basically, afterburners dump large amounts of fuel into the hot exhaust a th rear of the engine to increase thrust making it possible to exceed Mach 1. This is why a one way ticket on a 747 to London from New York was around 300USD whereas on the Concorde was upwards of 6,000USD.
Not sure if this has been brought up but I'd have at least expected this work to be fully animated instead of simply done in a program like photoshop (the reflection isn't animated). Forget about the environmental impact debate, this is stretching it in terms of what's worth a gas fee.
Ok, did some research on NFTs, and it kind of makes sense from a financial perspective as it gives more options for your capital if you're interested in that, but,...it has nothing to do with art as far as I can see, it's a financial thing. The art attached to it, is more of a unique identifier in practice (like the picture on a baseball card).
The average NFT transaction takes about 48kWh of power (equivalent to more than a day’s worth of power consumption of the average US household), every(!) transaction which means: Biding on an NFT, mining a NFT, cancelling a bid on an NFT, selling an NFT etc. If there is one NFT for sale, there will be likely multiple bidders, multiple cancellations and probably a sale,...you can see how this would impact an environment that is already fragile as it is.
IMO: The world really doesn't need capital to have more options, there are options enough, and most people don't use them. The power consumption is really, really bad. This seems outside of Daz core-business as it effectively makes Daz a kind of financial broker I guess. Why not first concentrate on reaching excellence in your core-business? NFTs are by all standards still a form of gambling as far as I can see.
Also comparing making renders to making transactions with NFTs is kind of comparing a moped to a Boeing 747 in terms of pollution.
...actually more like a moped compared to a Concorde which has four 1960s era afterburing turbjet engines. A 747 (even the first generation) is more efficent than that..
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.
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.
....I remember years ago when NBC changed the format for their Nightly News programme where anchor Tom Brokaw would stand on a stage with a bank of video screens behind him just like in the film.
They still use that format (though updated) and others have adopted it as well.
In any case, everyone needs to put visual watermarks on all the art they care about, right through the middle, with your name or website. If you don’t have Photoshop, you can use free phone/tablet apps like Snapseed or PS Express to do it. Don’t stop showing your art, just protect it and it’s actually great marketing for you too!
II have a basic question one NFT I looked at was 0.15 (mystery blockchain valuation, hmmmm) on the DAZ site. That translated to about $276 and some odd cents USD (not a mystery as to why that valution is at all - that's a lot of money! LOL). So if I were to buy said NFT for $276 & some odd cents USD would that take the NFT and the associated art work off the market from other buyers? Yes, I know people can screen shot & such and skilled 3D artists can easiliy enough replicate these 3D DAZ 3D style scenes, this is a technical business question about NFTs. So, if that same art can be sold again associated with another NFT there is no way on earth that treats the customer fairly.
If I had to say to you that I have a piece of NFT Harry Potter art that can be traced back to J.K Rowling, and the exact same piece of art that can be traced back to id3456234245 but no one knows who that is, which would be more valuable? They are exactly the same, with the only difference being that the majority of people will accept that one is the original and the other one isn't, and that gives it its value. It's a strange and foreign concept, but 23 years ago, when half life released as a digital download I hated the idea of buying a game without having a box and cd rom to accompany it. This also seems strange, but who knows how things will shape out in 23 years time.
So that's reasonable. I have no interest in NFT with regard to selling them myself, I have other interests, learning to animate and making games with those newly learned skills; but I could see a future in games such that NFTs were offered as part of a game IAP so this in DAZ is educational.
If DAZ did start allowing it's users to sell NFTs for me it would just be yet another thing interfering with my focus on the goals I already have.
In any case, everyone needs to put visual watermarks on all the art they care about, right through the middle, with your name or website. If you don’t have Photoshop, you can use free phone/tablet apps like Snapseed or PS Express to do it. Don’t stop showing your art, just protect it and it’s actually great marketing for you too!
I hate using watermarks like that but you do make a very valid point in using them to protect your art. I have photoshop and wasn't aware that you could add a copywright with it. Something to check out, thanks.
NFTs for the uber rich when that 10th Bugatti just doesn't fill the hole anymore.
Yeh things do seem a tad over-priced. Shudu 24k on OpenSea $184.09 and all you get is a video. I suppose it would be bought on speculation that it could be on-sold for more.... like how the stock market works.
$185 might be a small amount of money, unless you are planning to use that investment to conduct a private sale to move a large sum of money untraced.
This may not be what will / can happen, but its one of the things that concern me about the whole scheme.
..185$ would be a new 2 TB SSD for my content library to replace the HDD I currently have or a 48GB memory kit . Much more useful.
That is something that has been brought up in the past, I'm curious what your views are on it.
I'm not sure if it is feasible but if you could opt-in on a gallery image and allow other community users to get a print of your gallery image and have some portion of that sale show up in your store credit account, would that be interesting?
...I'm still wondering about the rendering Bridge in the Daz programme Advanced Render Settings which is apparently still in "beta" mode.
That is something that has been brought up in the past, I'm curious what your views are on it.
I'm not sure if it is feasible but if you could opt-in on a gallery image and allow other community users to get a print of your gallery image and have some portion of that sale show up in your store credit account, would that be interesting?
...I'm still wondering about the rendering Bridge in the Daz programme Advanced Render Settings which is apparently still in "beta" mode.
It works fine.. what are you wondering about?
...who's servers is it on? What doesit cost?
IIRC, you need to set the server up yourself with proprietary NVIDIA technology. Basically it's a paywall so corporations can't set up a render farm without paying for an enterprise license.
...ah thanks. So useless then as I don't have a render server.
I was under the impression Daz was setting up an in house render service. That would be much more valuable to and useful for the community than selling NFTs, particularly as the NFT thing along with cryptomining and a silicon shortage has made getting new powerful GPUs a trying and expensive venture.
...ah thanks. So useless then as I don't have a render server.
I was under the impression Daz was setting up an in house render service. That would be much more valuable to and useful for the community than selling NFTs, particularly as the NFT thing along with cryptomining and a silicon shortage has made getting new powerful GPUs a trying and expensive venture.
Selling NFTs isn't for the community Daz already has, it's to attract the people who make NFTs so they'll use the Daz Studio platform.
Comments
If this case goes to court, it will be interesting who the court decides has the right to, if at all, sell these particular NFTs of the "Tiger King".
Gawd, why do I find this whole business in really poor taste? I mean, a lot of it really seems low and shady. Am I the only one? It just seems....tawdry somehow. And I'm not talking just about the Tiger King story, although, wow...those images. Gah.
I don't know how many times Richard has to say that isn't happening, but I really doubt that is anything to worry about.
...this is my concern as well, since anyone can "right click save as". The advent of NFTs may actually promote digital art theft and there's absolutely nothing we as artists can do about it.save for pulling all our work offline, and then what is the prupose? There is no "copy protect" unless that is somehow disabled by the hosting site. However even that isn't foolproof as one can still take a screen shot and crop all the surrounding imagry out.
...but what about sites like DA?
DeviantArt has a copyright and usage option at the bottom whenever you submit an image. Nothing is going to stop thieves from trying to steal art, but no gallery endorses or openly allows it, people who sell others' art without permission are breaking the law regardless.
...the pin that pierces the bubble.
...tell me about it. Last night when I went to bed there were five pages. This evening when I got on there were eighteen
It makes the old Complaint thread look like it's moving at a geologic pace.
probably really 40 pages
..If I ever can make it back to Green Bay WI in late July I can attend the Green Bay Packers Shareholder Meeting at LambeauField (10 shares).
...hmm, I wonder if a roo can leap into lunar orbit.
Well that's the thing, I do not think it will make any difference for those particular NFTs, in fact, it could make them worth even more because they become more well known (Sales voice: "Now but these exculsive NFTs from the Tiger King court case, there are only 12 of them"). The pictures are not the sole unique identifiers but more like the pictures on a baseball card, buying the baseball card does not give you the copyright of the baseball card or the picture on the baseball cards. Maybe they have to remove the pictures from the NFT (not sure how that works), but as far as I can see the NFT would not nessecarily be stopped from existing.
But if anyone else know, perhaps they can clarify.
...I'm still wondering about the rendering Bridge in the Daz programme Advanced Render Settings which is apparently still in "beta" mode.
It works fine.. what are you wondering about?
...the old galleries were sort of like that. If your work was selected you received a 25$ voucher (basically store credit). I felt it really incentivsed people to put submit their best work.
...for the time being I have removed my gallery as I am getting a number of confusing signals regarding ownership..
...actually more like a moped compared to a Concorde which has four 1960s era afterburning turbojet engines. A 747 (even the first generation) is more efficient than that as it was powered by the first high bypass turbofan engines. Basically, afterburners dump large amounts of fuel into the hot exhaust a th rear of the engine to increase thrust making it possible to exceed Mach 1. This is why a one way ticket on a 747 to London from New York was around 300USD whereas on the Concorde was upwards of 6,000USD.
.Apologies, aviation geek here.
Not sure if this has been brought up but I'd have at least expected this work to be fully animated instead of simply done in a program like photoshop (the reflection isn't animated). Forget about the environmental impact debate, this is stretching it in terms of what's worth a gas fee.
Link to the work directly from Daz themselves (I expect this to be removed): https://opensea.io/assets/0x63e0eab409f1c1e737aad225003d709b57dbe9e5/5
I agree, that's probably a far better analogy.
...there actually is malware which does this.
....I remember years ago when NBC changed the format for their Nightly News programme where anchor Tom Brokaw would stand on a stage with a bank of video screens behind him just like in the film.
They still use that format (though updated) and others have adopted it as well.
In any case, everyone needs to put visual watermarks on all the art they care about, right through the middle, with your name or website. If you don’t have Photoshop, you can use free phone/tablet apps like Snapseed or PS Express to do it. Don’t stop showing your art, just protect it and it’s actually great marketing for you too!
So that's reasonable. I have no interest in NFT with regard to selling them myself, I have other interests, learning to animate and making games with those newly learned skills; but I could see a future in games such that NFTs were offered as part of a game IAP so this in DAZ is educational.
If DAZ did start allowing it's users to sell NFTs for me it would just be yet another thing interfering with my focus on the goals I already have.
I hate using watermarks like that but you do make a very valid point in using them to protect your art. I have photoshop and wasn't aware that you could add a copywright with it. Something to check out, thanks.
This is stupid. This is stupid for every reason listed thus far and more. There's little I can say that hasn't been discussed or mocked outright.
..185$ would be a new 2 TB SSD for my content library to replace the HDD I currently have or a 48GB memory kit . Much more useful.
...who's servers is it on? What doesit cost?
....sadly don't have PS for creating watermarks or posting a copyright, only Gimp, an old version of PSP, and Krita.
IIRC, you need to set the server up yourself with proprietary NVIDIA technology. Basically it's a paywall so corporations can't set up a render farm without paying for an enterprise license.
...ah thanks. So useless then as I don't have a render server.
I was under the impression Daz was setting up an in house render service. That would be much more valuable to and useful for the community than selling NFTs, particularly as the NFT thing along with cryptomining and a silicon shortage has made getting new powerful GPUs a trying and expensive venture.
Selling NFTs isn't for the community Daz already has, it's to attract the people who make NFTs so they'll use the Daz Studio platform.