[randyrand]

>why not use a free stock image or a great work of art for the demo

Because a stock image is not standardized and has not been a standard for decades like Lenna has.

It's just about impossible to go back in history and change all the research papers and recompile all the algorithms and update them to a new image.

Of course we could still do it if enough people cared. But do we? is pornography morally bad? What about cropped pornography like lenna? Do the majority of people even think pornography is sexism? If it is sexism, then does that inherently make pornography bad? is all sexism bad? Is it bad that men are attracted to females/vis-versa and that sexually biased attraction exists? To me I would answer in the negative to all of these.

[OOPMan]

While I personally feel like porn is dubious (primarily due to the exploitative nature of the industry) I feel like this whole controversy is way overblown.

Before this thread I had no idea said controversy even existed. As far as I knew the Lenna image was just a pretty decent photo, not the result of cropping a playboy cover.

I guess the idea that a derivative artwork can be seen a unique artwork in its own right doesn't mean anything anymore...

[randyrand]

> (primarily due to the exploitative nature of the industry)

Could you elaborate on this?

[OOPMan]

It's no secret that there is a lot of exploitation happening in the industry. I'm not sure how you need it elaborated?

If you think that everyone in the porn industry wants to be there and loves their job then you're missing the wood for the trees...