To add to this, they also changed out the render photos to try and argue with the other user that what he was pointing out was incorrect.
The original renders absolutely had two top layers as pictured at the very beginning of this post.
Unfortunately it seems they are acting in bad faith, another thing I don’t appreciate as a fellow designer.
Read my first post. I stated I uploaded only the model with the renders (from my pc) then directly go to edit the uploads and add the photos from my phone. You know that these changes go to „uploads->verifiying“ and then has to be approved by MW. And for this contest it took ages until they were visible publicly. Nothing you can do about it. Why would I lie or deviate from all my other models with printed pictures ? My workflow is always the same. Same background for the real pictures etc.
But I can understand that it looks suspicious if the pictures appear a day later 
You realise I have over 300 models here and 600 profiles, I know how long things take when it works well and when it doesn’t.
Your dog didn’t eat your homework and I didn’t coincidentally manage to find that sliver of time when all four examples I listed were between model upload and photo upload.
The rules you said you agree with say you need to provide photos with the model, not some point in the future, and photos with the profile, not sometime in the future.
Im just dying inside right know 
Don’t want to be rude but please
Go to google type in „moire effect“ try to understand
Look at this picture of the moire effect caused by overlapping line patterns and compare the resulting pattern with the picture from the original post.
Exactly this is what I meant with false accusations
Not even trying to let the explanation count
Okay that’s a fair point and you are right.
I will try to post all required things at the same time in the future if I upload more designs. 
Than there also will be no more discussions if I testprinted it or not 
Just a little disappointed of the mistrust, if you try to clarify things
But in general you are absolutely right.
Could I ask you stop adding the fake layer lines to your renders as it makes your work look deceptive.
It may not be deceptive, but it LOOKS deceptive.
I’m well aware of the moiré effect and simply commenting on what I saw on the model page prior to the photos you provided in this thread.
I’m not ignoring your attempts at explaining things, but do not believe you are being genuine or acting in good faith here.
I’m going to go ahead and remove myself from this discussion as it’s gone beyond my initial point.
If that is a moire effect on his “model pics”, I have some ocean front property in southern Kentucky I’ll sell for cheap. “Pics” upon request.
Um, I can update something and it gets approved in less than a minute (I’d know I just updated all of my models). Also, you can just save it as a draft and then add photos & post from your phone? (IDK if this would work, but it seems logical to me). Nobody’s worried about the original figurine manufacturers (IMO they make enough $), but it seems more like a grab for points. I understand uploading scans and just using renders, but that doesn’t comply with MakerWorld TOS, and it’s just generally scummy to get money from someone else’s work. IK it’s time consuming to make these, at least it would be for me, but it involves little creative work (arguably none.) That’s just my opinion, but I think that’s the popular opinion of designers like me who actually design stuff. Hence the name 
. I personally put dozens of hours into my more complex/time consuming models to design, but I know there’s others who have spend hundreds of hours on a single design. Sure, you’ve made like $20 max on the most recent animal “sculptures,” but it’s still $20. Also, you do currently have photos, but IMO they should be first. Maybe that’s just me 
Here is one to stop all this nonsense :
Make a feature request…
Should be no problem to include a verification that a model was printed.
Same for linking some screenshots from the build in camera.
Since Bambu like encryption and closed source it would be no problem to make sure those verifications can be verified as genuine upon uploading them to Makerworld…
Might not give you a decent pic and none of assembled models but at least a foolproof way to ensure THESE pics are not faked…
Just saying…
You comment made me think to this ^^
I think you unfortunately misread the comment.
As there is only one reference to scans other than the two you used, I suspect you are referring to this…
You will notice the words ‘and’ and ‘just’, these are very important for the context of those words.
Whilst I’m not speaking for @Zammer3D I believe what was written matches my understanding of it.
Firstly, it’s clear they agree that using a scanner is fine, but, if there are no photos provided as evidence (the whole point of this post thread) then it’s not fine.
A further understandable point is a distaste for those who use the scanner to take work of someone else’s hard work and upload that. I will give an example, scanning a Disney Mickey Mouse sculpture and uploading it should not be allowed as its copyright theft.
This thread is and has always been about people not providing actual photo evidence of their correctly printed models using the profile they provided and instead using renders and worse renders designed to make people think they are real photos. It’s deceptive and against the rules of submission.
In short, scanners not bad, renders not bad, not providing actual evidence of a successful print IS bad, faking that evidence IS bad, copyright theft IS bad.
Yeah, basically that. Scanning Airpods so people can designs stuff for them or print “fake” ones? That’s fine. Scanning something someone put lots of work into and commercially sells as a small business? Meh, that’s really scummy and possibly illegal. Scanning a well known statue that was created hundreds of years ago, yeah. That’s the whole point of something like Scan the World. The main problem in my eyes is that they did not credit anyone, or even state that it was a scan. From the descriptions of all of their recent models “there is enough resolution in the sculpt” implies that they sculpted these. They are also using renders, which is of course the main issue. 
Not everyone has a camera on their machine, also not everyone has their printer hooked into the cloud.
I take every photo using the camera on my phone.
Mickey Mouse entered public domain on January 1 this year (2024). But your point is well-taken. IP infringement is overlooked in 3D printing communities. This probably won’t change until someday some IP owners take up this issue againt one or all of the platforms and win a landmark case.
Only the Steamboat Willie version is public domain I believe.
As @01makes pointed out, the Disney Corporation still owns the IP and everything associated for Mickey Mouse.
The recent move to public domain was the incarnation known as Steamboat Willie first created in 1928 meaning its IP expired out of private ownership.
Disney has been very vocal about going after anyone for using Mickey Mouse as whilst they look similar, they are very different from an IP and legal consequences perspective.
This was the very reason I used it as an example - because it has been in the news so much.
They still have trademarks I think, so it’ll never truly be free to use.
If you mean Steamboat Willie, nope, that is free and clear for you to use in any fashion you like unencumbered by legal fallout.
