oooh, i was just coming to the forums to find out about this guy, it’s definite AI Slop and it’s a garbage practice that waters down the website with mediocre content
there’s another one that keeps popping up as well with 999+ models in the last month, thousands and thousands of likes and downloads, and every single file is a 2d line art thing just being spammed.
removing these accounts just cleans makerworld up a bit
It’s in fact pretty simple to know what people think about this topic
Do you feel misled when you see a model with these type of image thumbnails :
Don’t hesitate to share this poll. The more the merrier 
It is only misleading if they don’t match.
I don’t know if I have a problem with renders or not… probably depends on the size.
The larger the print, the less layer lines are in comparison to the size of the object. But for small prints, it is very misleading, because they are very noticeable.
Agreed I have the same kind of mix feeling about some renders. But more when it’s hard to tell if it’s a render or not ^^
I think that renders are fine if they include a real photo too.
I agree, only if the “pretty” render is not misleading.
I currently make a point of never printing anything without a photo of the final model completed, unless there is no other choice.
It’s just laziness or point collecting by any submitters in my opinion.
Of the first 10 I tried on other platforms only 2 were worth keeping and I wasted lots of filament in the learning process.
In my opinion, as already said here and many agree, is that if the render portraits the real object, with it’s intended height/width/etc, and if doesn’t trick the user to download and be deceived with the final printed object, then… and only then is acceptable.
That would depend on the object itself. In my case i use renders to show off details of a model that otherwise i couldn’t show. Of course, the printed model is exactly the same in every sense as the render and the printed picture shows it as it should and even better, in it’s intended place and use. There is no shame using renders, only if they mislead the user downloading the model.
Render in question bellow. Details in the render shown to anyone that needs it and also printed model already in place serving it’s purpose.
Yup! That’s the kind of render I like 
Yeah, that’s how it should look like!
Points for downloads , from what i see the better you make it look the more likley profiles will be downloaded, as designers have no real rules or moderation to adhere to , although i do believe there will be a compromise of a photo in a couple of weeks, at the end of the day normal ads have standards they need to follow and keep
I will try and make a very rational post about this matter and from my point of view as a civilized person i am and always will be.
I think that the problem with many people is lack of imagination. And i get it. Sometimes is hard to release models. That user mentioned here must be one of those people and relies heavily on AI to give him ideas, and to be fair, it’s all good in my book. Many creators, as already said, are doing the same. That’s a valid point and not all of us have the same imagination or needs.
The problem arises when they use AI not only to have some extra creativity and ideas, but also as a way to get an uptick or inflow of downloads without measuring the consequences for the end user, the person who is wasting material and time.
It’s the same as someone that creates an Instagram/TikTok account and all of the sudden they get thousands of followers. They start going sideways eventually because they not only get the “need” to be “liked” more and more but they also get the pressure to release things on a daily/hourly basis. Eventually that uploaded content will not be as good as it was in the start and people will notice it.
That creates a problem and in this case, said user has “tasted” what to be known means and how easy it is to “exploit” certain less informed users in trade for points that can be accumulated and transformed in real goods, worth real money. And so, from that point onwards, a trend is created. Everyday that same person will have to come with anything to fulfill his (and only his) needs to be “liked”, appraised, etc. With that it becomes more and more usual to see less quality and more quantity. But he also gets those points/rewards and those are important to him since they are easy to get.
And every time said user creates something, he has to rely on AI generated, totally fake models that only correspond to his quality standards, in his own eyes, and not to the real modeled object that will be printed by the user that is giving him those same rewards.
I am pretty impressed with my own 2.9k downloads with my “not good or perfect” models and i feel good with that. I got many rolls of PLA and even printers out of those points, no shame in that. And i have to thank not only Bambu Lab but also those who downloaded and printed my models.
Some people will never get happy like i do and that’s ok. What’s not ok is to step on everyone else just to be rewarded. And so, AI generated content should only be used as a mean to get inspiration and that’s why every image that is AI generated, usually has a foot note saying that they were generated in that form, to clarify the end user.
This is something that would solve many of the confusion here, that is, if @MakerWorld would make that happen and enforce. Afterall, many laws in many countries around the world, including Germany, are already enforcing it since i remember.
Many users would not download or atleast were more aware, if they read in small letters that “this content was AI generated” in a model they liked.
Just my 2 cents and without anger directed at anyone specific 
This is one of the reasons I post a larger picture in the description of all my stuff.
Now none of it is earth shattering, as I’m learning this stuff and experimenting at my own pace. But if you download my files you’ll know what you’re getting before you download. Warts and all.
Perhaps it would be more constructive to offer a workshop demonstrating how users can create usable photos for publishing their models using simple tools and common image editing software.
Additionally, a workshop should be offered to show users step-by-step and in an easily understandable way how to create the best renderings for publishing their models in Blender, setting up different perspectives and scenes, etc.
And thirdly, a workshop describing how to create product images for one’s own models using AI, but without deceiving the user. Again, a step-by-step guide.
This could be included in the Bambulab Wiki or simply published on MakerWorld, or…
Each user can then decide what they want to do and what they consider useful.
Creating a level playing field is a proven way to create peace.
Fighting with different weapons, where each party defends their weapon with which they get the furthest, leads to conflict and the threads / themes that we have.
that’s not a bad idea, but on the other hand, there are tutorials on youtube for all of that already 
You could collect them to a new collection called ‘trash’.
And the suggestion to have wiki link to some good tutorials would be great.
The problem with “tutorials on youtube” is that there’s plenty of them and a bit portion of them is like “here’s how to do product photography on budget, all you need is a piece of string, $2000 MILC and $5000 in lenses and studio equipment”
A curated selection of “good” tutorials wouldn’t be too bad of idea
We need to launch a discord channel ^^
Designers united XD
Those are all good ideas but i bet that most people would look at it and say: “nah, i jsut want to upload something, i don’t want to spend hours learning new stuff”.
A mere: “This picture was created using AI” as a watermark would solve much more problems because, again, most users would read that and “oh, that means this model may not be real or the same exact one”.
My opinion and nothing more. But hey, as a tutorial maker for my community, i support that idea. It just takes lots of hours to prepare said workshops/tutorials.
Touché my friend… Touché 