dlodoski wrote:cerberus wrote:Thank you for separating this from the original thread, it is much appreciated.
I think what I want to see come out of this thread is a set of guidelines on what is and isn't OK on this forum. At the moment it is all a bit "anything goes" and there've been a few things that made me wince. But the moderators didn't act and I couldn't help wondering if we were putting the forum in jeopardy. We should also bear in mind that things posted here may be reposted elsewhere.
I would need specific examples of wince inducing posts to comment with any real meaning. But I will say that I have been following the threads here pretty closely and other than a few (intentional as it turns out) age related images, I haven't seen anything that caused concern.
Again, celebrity based work is nothing new. On the one hand, it could be considered flattering. But not everyone will see it that way. Such is life. The board, and by extension, the management is pretty much protected from liability by 'Section 230'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230
If that is ever taken away, it's likely that this and many, many, many interesting places on the internet will shut down overnight.
It sounds as though you may have acted on, at least, some of my "wince inducing" posts already, it's the age thing that mostly makes me wince. I can understand some "young" images being produced by accident, as a lot of the subjects end up looking airbrushed and blemish free. This makes them look younger. It seems better now but ADetailer used to have a habit of making heads slightly larger, this also tended to make results look more childlike. So, even if you start with a mature woman's picture as source, the resulting image will look considerably younger (blondes moreso for some reason). To date I've only found one checkpoint model that gives a realistic skin texture and presents results that look the age you'd expect. This (I kid you not) is called "I Can't Believe It's Not Photography" - icbinpICantBelieveIts_newYear. It's a bit frustrating as it doesn't pose well but the faces are strikingly good.
I see section 230 seems to have you covered, but not the rest of us. But section 230 is specific to the US, we don't have anything like that in the UK and people have been prosecuted here. So I think we need to police ourselves and post what we are comfortable with and what fits in with our local rules and regulations.