VEF and AI tampered content

[currentpeak]

I was searching for VEF rules regarding the videos and pictures "enhanced" by AI tools but have not found anything bar a few threads with like-minded posters who oppose such content.

For example, a VHS movie rip is posted in Classic Movies thread and some other poster will then take that video, cut it into scenes and make several posts in the Classic Models/Classic Pornstars threads.

My issue with that is that he:

• doesn't credit original poster of the movie, nor posts link to original video
• posts AI enhanced video, which is truly an abomination even if upscaling it to 720p
• doesn't clearly label his post in the title as AI upscaled

Same goes with AI upscaled pictures and galleries. 99% of these are garbage, because to truly enhance something, you need an original source of the film/photo and somebody skilled with these tools, not a "one-click upscale professionals". I truly doubt they even know what word enhancement means, because objectively and subjectively, their creations are exact opposites of that word.

There are exceptions to the rule maybe, but when we are dealing with vintage stuff when you are often lucky to find anything, whether it is a long out of print VHS or DVD or photo/video content from no longer existing websites, there is no way AI can make those look better.

It would be nice if there was at minimum something like this required when posting AI upscaled/enhanced/tampered content:

• clearly labeled AI upscaled in the post title
• link to original source post whether it is a video/picture/gallery
• in case the content was not posted before, or you are posting a scene cut from the movie, then you are required to post it in original quality/resolution as well

I will always prefer an original SD VHS/DVD/picture to AI upscaled HD smudges.

[Jazz67]

http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/t43...and-scope.html

[Jazz67]

you'd probably be better asking here
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/t17...osts-here.html

and here
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/t17...eups-here.html

[Scott T]

There is also the Rules about AI Enhancement thread

[currentpeak]

Thanks guys, though this was more of an appeal to governing body of VEF (admins/rulers/mods) to perhaps think about setting some universal rules re AI posts. But I see that basically both Classic and Modern forums are self-governed.

Seen the Rules about AI Enhancement thread thread too, but that is just Modern forum.

Anyway, I will repost in that Classic Movies thread, though unless there is a rule set, we can post re this issues ad infinitum.

[smacintosh]

I for one appreciate several of the posters who post upgrades. The technology is still very new and will improve over time and some of the older videos are in terrible shape. I have seen video upgrades i believe to be well done and hope they continue their work.

[currentpeak]

That of course does not collide with what I suggested above - if poster provides the links for both an original and upgraded version. Then it is a win-win for everyone.

Originally Posted by smacintosh

I for one appreciate several of the posters who post upgrades. The technology is still very new and will improve over time and some of the older videos are in terrible shape. I have seen video upgrades i believe to be well done and hope they continue their work.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by currentpeak

Thanks guys, though this was more of an appeal to governing body of VEF (admins/rulers/mods) to perhaps think about setting some universal rules re AI posts. But I see that basically both Classic and Modern forums are self-governed.

Seen the Rules about AI Enhancement thread thread too, but that is just Modern forum.

Anyway, I will repost in that Classic Movies thread, though unless there is a rule set, we can post re this issues ad infinitum.

Together with the other mods of the AI section, we're mostly on the same page with this stuff, but it could be different in other sections.

A lot of it is that this stuff is moving so fast.

I and the other mods hear you and others with respect to complaints, but there's still a lot of grey area in the facts.

With respect to video content in particular -- one thing to note is its a LOT of compute time even on a good computer to do an enhancement with something like Topaz video.

I am not saying that all of these "enhancements" are terrific -- some are plainly not, and a bunch fall into that "better in some ways, worse in others category -- but the thing is, if someone takes a 1980s VHS scan and runs it through Topaz, even on a fast computer with a beefy GPU, that took a lot of resources (maybe an hour+ of processing time with an Nividia 3090).

So that kind of thing, even if imperfect, that's something I do enjoy taking a look at, and where the guy who did the post, had to take time and expend resources to do it. So that makes it a non trivial thing, not just spamming cheap derivative content.

As I said in the Rules for our section, and I think has been said in other sections, "Please post before and afters"

-- that's the only way that a user can quickly ascertain "does this look better to me" vs "not worth spending time on"

. . . none of which is a complete answer, but it gives a general idea of where we are with this.

. . . and again, as I've said from the beginning of the first AI posts, this field is changing on an almost daily basis. The low end AI is boring crap, but the high end is amazing, and the high end keeps getting better. So things like image reconstruction of poor quality scans, colorizing black and whites, all kinds of things -- the quality can range from "don't bother with that" to "wow" . . . and I think that will remain true for some time

. . . which is by way of explanation that with AI tools, you'll see some stuff that's really good, and some that isn't; we're all looking at a lot of posts, trying to figure out where things are supposed to go, what shouldn't be here at all, and what we'd like to see more of, and its kinda "something new every day".

[Gruenspecht]

There's a discussion thread about the artificial intelligence here:
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...10#post7133610

Many people and forum VEF-members alike don't seem to grasp the implications to what these new technologies will have in life if we just embrace it and think it's a fun/amazing/useful tool to make an image "prettier" for example. If we just allow vintage material to be tinkered with so it's upscaled to a higher fidelity what will be the point of this forum? Most forum members come here to discover vintage smut or rediscover dirty magazines from when they first saw it as a kid. Still remembering the smell, type of paper used and the quality of the print of the magazine. Vintage material has a distinctive appeal by how it looks and should not be messed with. I can not think of one single reason as to what value content that has been "enhanced" by artificial intelligence has to this forum.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by Gruenspecht

Vintage material has a distinctive appeal by how it looks and should not be messed with. I can not think of one single reason as to what value content that has been "enhanced" by artificial intelligence has to this forum.

Well, I disagree there, not in full -- vintage has its appeal -- but the suggestion than enhancement is without value, well I can't agree with that.

Lots of vintage material has an underlying source which was _much_ better in quality than the print. We can -- sometimes -- recapture what the original image looked like, before it got smeared onto cheap paper.

I'm a particular follower of Nancy Suiter and Diana Rigg as examples. There is a ton of very low quality, but interesting, material, and lots of folks, including yours truly have been working to colorize Black and Whites, and to restore grainy photos. That may not be everyone's taste, but it is mine.

I'd add that we've got similar restoration projects in cinema -- people like Criterion are doing amazing thing restoring old and battered material, quite often producing versions that are better than have ever been seen since the film left the lab decades ago.

Film fades. Quite often our idea of "vintage" is just faded -- if you could see an original at the time, it was crisp and clear.

So image restoration and enhancement -- that's hardly a waste of time. Its done every day, and sometimes its better, sometimes worse . . . The idea that a film which has color shifted and lost definition is somehow "authentic" -- which a restoration that get it back closer to what the Director and Cinematographer themselves intended and saw in, say, 1965 -- that's fantastic.

. . . and for all kinds of things with no copyrights or studios, loops, rarities, there's no studio that's going to foot the bill or take the time to remaster material that they don't own. So its up to amateurs and enthusiasts . . . and as I say, a lot of what gets done doesn't stand as an improvement, but this is a one way ratchet, and the tools for AI remastering of content get better every day.

As just one example of a film that has been transformed -- what Peter Jackson's team did with the Beatles archival material, Get Back -- that's astonishing. And those tools are actually substantially available to consumers . . . hard to use, yes, but they're here, if not today, then tomorrow

See
"Restoring History | The Beatles: Get Back "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQFPnA8OgLo