| Site Notice |
|---|
|
Remember to pay a visit to our Discord server and chat with our community! See here for more info. Be sure to check out the KHUX Wiki for the latest on Kingdom Hearts Union χ and Kingdom Hearts Dark Road! Go and pitch in! The KHWiki contains spoilers for all Kingdom Hearts games. Read at your own risk. Please remember not to add information about unreleased games from trailers. |
Forum:Use of AI to remove watermarks
This is an interesting question that I wanted to pose here before doing any serious research. I couldn't find any topics on this subject on the Wiki, so feel free to redirect me to a discussion on this subject if one already exists. Has the Wiki put any thought into the use of AI to digitally remove watermarks from images where an unwatermarked image may not exist at all? For example, many of the images marked as unsatisfying have watermarks, such as the trading cards. Here are [two https://ffg-forum-archive.entropicdreams.com/topic/595-daisukes-scans/page/1/#comment-5781] [threads https://note.com/cardland/n/n5447d88bd897] which contain watermarked images that could possibly be preserved if they are "unwatermarked" with AI. Any thoughts or policies on this? 
~D3xus 23:36, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
- Interesting. The way I see it, the key point is more about edited images in general, not AI specifically. Think about it this way: if someone went through each image in photoshop and manually removed the watermark, doing their best to fix every pixel, would we put it on the wiki? In general, we value authenticity over quality, but does restoring the image by editing the watermark out make it more authentic or less authentic?
- My first instinct was no – that an unedited image should have precedence over a fan-made restoration – but I'm not completely sure. After all, the watermark isn't an authentic part of the image, either. And for TCG cards specifically, the images have to be scans, so the lighting and such isn't going to be 100% accurate to begin with. I'd like to hear others' thoughts on it, but I think I could see it being a possibility. —Aid1043 04:49, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
