So I participated in the painting model contest and I was pretty confident one of my five entries would do well. I did in fact receive an excellent participation award, but not for my model with 722 likes, 66 boosts and almost 700 downloads. No, it was for my model with 100 likes, 3 boosts, and 52 downloads.. Both are updated and enhanced versions of existing models, so I can’t fathom why the one that was an order of magnitude less popular was selected?
Then there are the rest of the winners. First, second, and third place are all the same thing—a modular paint system. An ergonomic paint handle got a participation when the most popular entry was a print-in-place print handle that (imo) shows a lot more design skill and that got nothing.
It’s incredibly perplexing how they’re selecting winners, which seems to have little-to-nothing to what the people who would actually use these items—the ones downloading, printing, and boosting the models—would want from the contest criteria.
Yes, I know I sound ungrateful, but I’m just confused as to how this is all supposed to work.
Edit: After discussing this with my wife, I realised why this bothers me—what is valuable from a participation win is the visibility which leads to more downloads and boosts. So if my popular model had won—popular because it’s a model people want to download and print—that would lead to more downloads and boosts. But the brush box wasn’t popular in the contest—people didn’t download and boost it‚—so it’s not going to benefit as much, if at all, from the visibility.
Oh, and another gripe—the message you get when you win a participation prize says
Your exceptional skills and creativity have impressed the judges, and your design has been selected as the best among all the entries.
Kinda disappointing to click through to the contest and see that doesn’t actually mean first place. But that’s feedback for their automated message system or whatever.
I can confirm that they don’t take stats in to consideration at all. I got excellent participation on a contest months ago and I think the model had 1 download at the time. Now, all these months later it has 4 downloads.
If you ever want to be really confused go look at some of the previous winners on Printables.
What’s worse is that model popularity is literally one of the judging criteria:
Create something popular. Consider what other people would find useful or interesting.
My participation prize winner, which has almost 1/10 the engagement as the model I thought would do better, still has more engagement than 2nd and 3rd place combined.
Also this makes me laugh
Be creative and original! The judges will be looking for models that are unique and eye-catching.
1st, 2nd, and 3rd are all the same thing, so much for originality
They might be using ChatGPT there as well, and it could struggle with evaluating factors such as quality or usefulness. In that case, the only thing it can really base its decision on is how others react to your model. As shown in this post — Who won the h2d? - #73 by L0rdS474n — this is exactly how Bambu Lab has previously determined winners in a competition, by letting ChatGPT make the selection.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Use the contests as a way to get extra engagement and consider winning something as a happy bonus. I have won in a couple contests and I’ve lost as well. Never won by having the most popular model.
But I think having a judging system that doesn’t look at popularity is better than it being a popularity contest since some creators naturally have more engagement. Secondly some models might be very novel, specific or complex but might therefore be less popular.
So yes, having a judging system might be more confusing but I prefer it, even if there is not much clarity. It is a bit of a lottery so I’m happy when I win and still happy when I don’t. Maybe I’m just happy. I’ll work on that.
Jeez louise that is depressing… Gibson save us from AI
But I think having a judging system that doesn’t look at popularity is better than it being a popularity contest since some creators naturally have more engagement.
I feel like this is a situation where the judges aren’t looking at anything, especially if it’s true about using chatGPT. Heck, using popularity to cut the top 100 and then looking at those would be better. Literally one of the criteria of the competition was make popular models.
I agree with it being a space for engagement, but something I’ve found is that being a participation winner is really valuable engagement-wise. So I’m miffed that a model I know doesn’t have much engagement value (likely because of how involved it is to print) is getting that space over one that evidently does have engagement value and could benefit from it more.
Oh, and congrats! Nice V2’s
Thank you and thank you! I should be more grateful, it’s nice to win a prize. I’m just stunned it’s for a model I’d literally forgot I even entered over one I’ve been actively developing. I’m literally working on a mod for it that will let you use the light arch for miniature photography.
They used ChatGPT in that contest — their own words from my communication with them. They also admitted it was an unfair contest and much more, so never be surprised by Bambu Lab’s creativity when it comes to unfair contests.
I can’t even fathom why you’d need to use ChatGPT? Sure, there were a lot of entrants but looking at the most popular results would filter things down a lot. Seems like the endemic problem of using AI for AIs sake.
Just to be clear, is it fair to say that these are two separate scenarios? One was a raffle on the forum with the intention of randomly choosing a winner whereas the other was a subjectively judged contest?
What are you even talking about…that’s not even the same thing! The one that used ChatGPT was for a lucky draw, not a design contest…jeez the level of nosensical discussion is to another level today
What are you even talking about…that’s not even the same thing! The one that used ChatGPT was for a lucky draw, not a design contest…jeez the level of nosensical discussion is to another level today
I think you may need to pump the brakes as you’re coming in hot here. I didn’t know it was a raffle, all I know is what I was told which was they might have been using ChatGPT again as they had used it previously in a contest. I wasn’t aware of the specifics of the contest or that it was a raffle. Seriously, here’s what I was told:
They might be using ChatGPT there as well, and…this is exactly how Bambu Lab has previously determined winners in a competition, by letting ChatGPT make the selection.
If that was a raffle rather than a contest with criteria, that’s completely different. I would say using chatGPT to draw names for a raffle is absurd overkill and still AI for AIs sake, but not the same as this contest.
Just to be clear, is it fair to say that these are two separate scenarios? One was a raffle on the forum with the intention of randomly choosing a winner whereas the other was a subjectively judged contest?
I wasn’t aware the other contest being referenced was a raffle, that would be a different scenario yeah. Either way, my initial point about these contests seamingly not being judged by the criteria they list makes them frustrating to interact with still stands
If i remembered correctly, this is not your first time complaining about contest results. Me personally, i think both your models are nice designs, and i like the first and second picks, not so much the third.
If the results bother you that much, you can always choose not to participate. Dont let it ruin your good mood. MW is still going to pick who they believe its the best(and more.importantly, what suits them), sometimes you may like it sometimes you may not, its the nature of how contests are ran
yea nothing against you, i just thought this other response seems to be delibrately casuing confusions. I like the light arc better than the winner they’ve chosen, but most of the other winner seems fine to me. From my experiences, mw likes GRAND projects more than clever gadgets, unless they are super smart.
How can we know when they don’t disclose how the selections are made?
Can you say with 100% certainty that they didn’t use ChatGPT this time as well? But yes, it’s two different scenarios.
I understand they are different contest formats, but the principle remains the same — transparency in the selection process matters in both cases. Whether it’s a lucky draw or a design contest, knowing exactly how winners are chosen is what builds trust. Without that clarity, people will naturally question the process.
