5 ms·

Oh that's really cool but how about making every frames as NFT and sell? I think that can be a thing in digital animation as well.

fsloth 5y ago
I presume in their current form NFT:s are perceived as 99% pathological. Aren't they?
KronisLV 5y ago
For many the actual appeal is of the physical object. If they want a JPEG of the thing, they can just look it up on the Internet.
- dialogbox 5y ago
  I know that it can't be 100% same but some part of the appeal also bound to the ownership. The feeling that one owns the partial of the anime they love is really important. In that sense, I thought NFT also could appeal especially for those digital animes because there is no other way to get the same feeling.
  - KronisLV 5y ago
    > The feeling that one owns the partial of the anime they love is really important. If made by the company behind the anime, then maybe. If made by some third party in a copyright infringing manner, then that most certainly isn't applicable, which i've seen be a problem with the NFT space insofar. > In that sense, I thought NFT also could appeal especially for those digital animes because there is no other way to get the same feeling. How about physical collectibles? Plushies, keychains, figurines, posters, cosplay outfits, that sorts of stuff. Seems like many video games, cartoons and anime out there all have that in some capacity, unless it's very niche and merch is never made. Actually, it seems like a pretty interesting space, for example, the Potekoro Astolfo bean plushies from the Fate anime series seem to go for about 300-400$ nowadays. I agree that a lot of it is sentimental value, but i'm not sure that non fungible things will capture people's attention quite as much, or will feel the same as something physical that you can put on a shelf or whatever people do.
    - beardedwizard 5y ago
      How do you explain the millions spent on in game purchases of digital goods then? Seems like you are projecting your own issues with NFT and the person asking is just imagining ownership paradigms.
      - techdragon 5y ago
        “There’s a fool born every minute.” P. T. Barnum Just because people are buying something doesn’t make it a smart decision. I understand the technology but I’ve never come across an new idea for using NFTs that didn’t feel like I was just going to be scamming the person buying them. The fact others don’t have the same ethical compunctions I do does not in any way make me feel more like disregarding my own personal ethics.
      - KronisLV 5y ago
        > How do you explain the millions spent on in game purchases of digital goods then? With different forms of interaction. The game IS the product and those items directly affect how you interact with it, for example, with different items or skins for those items or other types of customization. There, those things aren't necessarily all that different from a DLC that adds more content, though microtransactions are a slippery slope in an unregulated industry and sometimes ethically dubious. Anime isn't necessarily like that, since getting a new item (NFT or otherwise) won't change how you interact with it directly. Your figurines, mouse pads, mugs, pillows etc. will probably spruce up your place a bit, maybe even a background image might... but that's largely orthogonal to it being on a blockchain. Of course, NFTs are the new hotness, so i don't doubt that some will try to speculate, others will want to get on the trend and so on. Human perception of value is a curious mess.
  - ruined 5y ago
    it really isn't about ownership. it's about the artifact, and the feelings associated with knowing an artifact you behold was physically part of an event or process. for collectors, the appeal may be in responsibility for preservation, and interpersonal details of access to an artifact. for usable artifacts, there may be joy in recreating the original conditions of use or adapting the artifact to newer uses. ownership is just the legal framework and social norm we use to manage those activities, it is not those activities. NFT ownership provides none of the fun bits.
- nybble41 5y ago
  There is no particular reason why an NFT must be associated with a JPG file, as opposed to a physical object. It's just a certificate, after all. Instead of (or in addition to) the usual IPFS URL you would have a detailed description of the physical artwork, including any identifying marks, and of course some evidence that the NFT issuer was in fact the original owner of the piece. It gets a bit dicey if someone later decides to sell the physical art without passing along the NFT, or vice-versa, but then again the same thing could happen with a traditional (physical) certificate of authenticity. Presumably the artwork would still have some value even without the certificate, as there are other ways to establish its authenticity; the reverse may or may not be true.
JohnBooty 5y ago
There's nothing really logical about the desire to own NFTs or physical animation cels, so I'm not going to claim one is better than the other in some objective way. But, to put it extremely mildly, those two things scratch entirely different itches. I guess if you don't care about either of them, then they might seem superficially similar. However I don't think anybody interested in one of those things would consider the other one to be remotely similar. NFTs are about proving you own something. "This is 'mine', and nobody else can 'own' it, until I sell it." Owning a physical animation cel is about touching a piece of history; a physical artifact of a near-magical process. It's like holding one of Michaelangelo's paintbrushes, versus looking at a picture of one of Michaelangelo's paintbrushes. Again, nothing logical about one or the other, but we are not robots.

fsloth 5y ago

I presume in their current form NFT:s are perceived as 99% pathological. Aren't they?

KronisLV 5y ago

For many the actual appeal is of the physical object. If they want a JPEG of the thing, they can just look it up on the Internet.

dialogbox 5y ago
I know that it can't be 100% same but some part of the appeal also bound to the ownership. The feeling that one owns the partial of the anime they love is really important. In that sense, I thought NFT also could appeal especially for those digital animes because there is no other way to get the same feeling.
- KronisLV 5y ago
  > The feeling that one owns the partial of the anime they love is really important. If made by the company behind the anime, then maybe. If made by some third party in a copyright infringing manner, then that most certainly isn't applicable, which i've seen be a problem with the NFT space insofar. > In that sense, I thought NFT also could appeal especially for those digital animes because there is no other way to get the same feeling. How about physical collectibles? Plushies, keychains, figurines, posters, cosplay outfits, that sorts of stuff. Seems like many video games, cartoons and anime out there all have that in some capacity, unless it's very niche and merch is never made. Actually, it seems like a pretty interesting space, for example, the Potekoro Astolfo bean plushies from the Fate anime series seem to go for about 300-400$ nowadays. I agree that a lot of it is sentimental value, but i'm not sure that non fungible things will capture people's attention quite as much, or will feel the same as something physical that you can put on a shelf or whatever people do.
  - beardedwizard 5y ago
    How do you explain the millions spent on in game purchases of digital goods then? Seems like you are projecting your own issues with NFT and the person asking is just imagining ownership paradigms.
    - techdragon 5y ago
      “There’s a fool born every minute.” P. T. Barnum Just because people are buying something doesn’t make it a smart decision. I understand the technology but I’ve never come across an new idea for using NFTs that didn’t feel like I was just going to be scamming the person buying them. The fact others don’t have the same ethical compunctions I do does not in any way make me feel more like disregarding my own personal ethics.
    - KronisLV 5y ago
      > How do you explain the millions spent on in game purchases of digital goods then? With different forms of interaction. The game IS the product and those items directly affect how you interact with it, for example, with different items or skins for those items or other types of customization. There, those things aren't necessarily all that different from a DLC that adds more content, though microtransactions are a slippery slope in an unregulated industry and sometimes ethically dubious. Anime isn't necessarily like that, since getting a new item (NFT or otherwise) won't change how you interact with it directly. Your figurines, mouse pads, mugs, pillows etc. will probably spruce up your place a bit, maybe even a background image might... but that's largely orthogonal to it being on a blockchain. Of course, NFTs are the new hotness, so i don't doubt that some will try to speculate, others will want to get on the trend and so on. Human perception of value is a curious mess.
- ruined 5y ago
  it really isn't about ownership. it's about the artifact, and the feelings associated with knowing an artifact you behold was physically part of an event or process. for collectors, the appeal may be in responsibility for preservation, and interpersonal details of access to an artifact. for usable artifacts, there may be joy in recreating the original conditions of use or adapting the artifact to newer uses. ownership is just the legal framework and social norm we use to manage those activities, it is not those activities. NFT ownership provides none of the fun bits.
nybble41 5y ago
There is no particular reason why an NFT must be associated with a JPG file, as opposed to a physical object. It's just a certificate, after all. Instead of (or in addition to) the usual IPFS URL you would have a detailed description of the physical artwork, including any identifying marks, and of course some evidence that the NFT issuer was in fact the original owner of the piece. It gets a bit dicey if someone later decides to sell the physical art without passing along the NFT, or vice-versa, but then again the same thing could happen with a traditional (physical) certificate of authenticity. Presumably the artwork would still have some value even without the certificate, as there are other ways to establish its authenticity; the reverse may or may not be true.

JohnBooty 5y ago

There's nothing really logical about the desire to own NFTs or physical animation cels, so I'm not going to claim one is better than the other in some objective way. But, to put it extremely mildly, those two things scratch entirely different itches. I guess if you don't care about either of them, then they might seem superficially similar. However I don't think anybody interested in one of those things would consider the other one to be remotely similar. NFTs are about proving you own something. "This is 'mine', and nobody else can 'own' it, until I sell it." Owning a physical animation cel is about touching a piece of history; a physical artifact of a near-magical process. It's like holding one of Michaelangelo's paintbrushes, versus looking at a picture of one of Michaelangelo's paintbrushes. Again, nothing logical about one or the other, but we are not robots.