Hey everyone! I reviewed almost all the other threads about the problem with AI-generated models on Makerworld, but I felt this issue is too specific and also a bit lost in the long & streched argument of the older ones, so I created a new topic.
I’ve been a designer on Makerworld for more than a year now. I’m also an enthusiast and researcher of open-source maker communities. It might sound absurd, but I wrote a thesis on Designing for Open-Source communities, including a chapter on the dynamics and environments of the eight most prominent model-sharing platforms, including Makerworld.
Makerworld has done some very clever moves that could make it an ideal platform to compete even with the design industry beyond 3D printing. One of them is the Exclusive Program. They reward and encourage original product designs, offer competitive monetary rewards to keep high-profile designers on their platform, and their legal protection team is doing a decent job with IP protection of designs. Because of that, here you can find designs that are competing with outside-world name brands, including innovative designs for furniture, lighting, shoes, you name it.
Long story short, since about five months ago, I’ve been seeing instances where several AI-generated models rise to the top of the trending page, all marked as “Exclusive Models”. When you check the account, you often find about 89 models there, created in the past two weeks, some with a few downloads and others with none, but overall reaching the exclusive program’s accumulated print count. This messes up almost everything in the platform’s environment. Although Makerworld has implemented a policy to stop AI-generated models from joining the exclusive program, it doesn’t seem to be working very efficiently.
I posted a YouTube video reviewing this Policy and this issue.
I’ve edited this part of the post to include the content of my video here as well. After reading the first few replies, it felt like, instead of listening to my argument, a lot of people had just decided to dismiss this thread as me fishing for views on my YT. So this is the video’s content if you can’t or don’t wanna visit the video. Instead, this post has become twice as lengthy.
What is this policy actually doing? The AI-exemption policy is mostly serving as an excuse for MW to show that “They care and they tried their best to prevent it.”This policy still relies on human reports, while users or moderators are not able to recognize AI-generated meshes. And many reports are getting neglected because it is becoming increasingly difficult to spot AI models. Instead, it’s mostly sparking new conversations. (And maybe by increasing discussions around it, in a hopeful scenario, we could get some feedback from the platform.)
How the exclusive program is malfunctioning: The exclusive program works on two limiting thresholds to identify “quality” models & designers. One is the accumulated print on all the models, and the other is the follower count. Both are meaningless in AI-generated accounts, where an account could publish 200 models in a week. Even if the models are of poor quality, having just one print per model can get you past the threshold in no time. So, could it change in any way, without harming creators who are not using AI?
Why AI-generated models shouldn’t compete in the same space (exclusive program): When every AI-made and repetitive model is also exclusive, the exclusive program fails to uphold its premise. Now, the exclusivity is hindered since this badge doesn’t mean value or uniqueness anymore. The platform’s overall value is declining over time, while innovative ideas are being recreated and posted using AI. The spotlight of the exclusive program is becoming meaningless.
What are some complexities around regulating AI content on the platform: Considering the nature of 3D modeling, it’s difficult or even impossible to have a tool to spot AI-generated meshes. A lot of mesh optimization and retopology in standard 3D modeling is already handled automatically by algorithms. So, what are even our options?
And who is really at a loss in the middle of it: Designers with open-source models whose work is shared on the internet for free, and are exposed to not only the harms of AI (their ideas getting replicated and their models used to train AI) but also competing with it in the same space for attention and funds. This could, of course, harm the open-source design and permanently alter its environment. So, aren’t we all?
I believe this is an issue that needs more serious discussion, and this forum is one of the only places where people knowledgeable enough to discuss it come together. I look forward to your replies.
So, are you okay with the idea of beautified covers and renderings that don’t match the actual 3D model? Personally, I’m just confused about where you’re drawing the line. Does that mean you’d also demand real images for the covers?
I just want to point out that criticism isn’t directed solely at AI, but also at covers that don’t reflect reality: And yes, I’m now throwing AI and image rendering together, because the underlying problem often arises right from the cover which often makes MakerWorld unusable.
So about your first question: Yes. I’m against AI (I count it as you haven’t watched my video). And sure, I think AI-generated model shouldn’t compete with human-made ones.
But about your question about my cover images, you’re making a mistake. My cover images are traditionaldigital renders created with Keyshot, that’s CGI, not AI. And I have to say quite regular too in the page of big creators in Makerworld. In CGI you create a scene using a mesh that you exported (from Zbrush in this case) and attribute physical qualities to it to create a photo-realistic scene. These two pictures that you sent are from the exact mesh, (which is a multipart, btw, can not be AI generated for now, thank god) and it is not hindering the usability of the platform, since it is literally the same model you can download its 3MF.
But again, I feel like you’re replying to me without spending a few minutes listening to the argument I offer in my video. My argument is not about the beautiful renders and cover pictures only. It’s about the lack of regulation or any type of tool to sift out accounts with hundreds of AI-generated models that could be piped out by anyone on any platform, from the exclusive program. Since it is negating the premise of exclusivity, flooding the platform, and competing with human designers for exposure and funds.
I just want to point out that criticism isn’t directed solely at AI, but also at covers that don’t reflect reality: And yes, I’m now throwing AI and image rendering together, because the underlying problem often arises right from the cover which often makes MakerWorld unusable.
I never claimed that you were using AI. I labelled it correctly as rendering. In fact, I wrote that specifically, so I’ll quote myself:
Still, you’ve completely missed the point - or rather, you haven’t answered my question. Thanks for taking the time to reply, but that was completely off the mark.
I watched the video, so why can’t you answer my simple question about your stance on using rendered images instead of real ones? I thought we were talking about creating a fair playing field for everyone. Or do you mean that the playing field should be tilted in your favour?
Why do you think rendered images are better than AI-generated covers? Neither accurately depicts reality. Those are all renderings, aren’t they?
This argument is so off topic. I tried to take the discussion back on track, but since you’re insisting that I get into details, sure.
I did, very clearly. I argued that rendered images are exactly the same mesh, loaded in another program, and captured to create photo-realistic scenes. So no, to me it’s not hindering the usability of the platform cause:
Speaking of fairgrounds is also irrelevant here, since creating CGI imagery is a skill, like photography or digital sculpting. Comparing it to AI-generated art is like saying digital sculptors aren’t real sculptors because they didn’t sculpt everything by hand.
To me, it feels like you don’t quite grasp how different a render is from an AI cover image. The answer is simple. Most of the AI cover images I’m seeing are the “prompted” picture that the AI uses to create the mesh for the user. So, although the picture has lots of details and shows amazing depth or whatever, the generated mesh doesn’t. AI is still not great at capturing various details, perspective, or zero-thickness geometry. So the picture could be cool, but literally impossible to mesh. So the mesh comes out flat or has missed details, even before printing.
Again, my argument is completely different. But of course. I’m showing a mesh. In the next slides, I’m showing the exact mesh printed, and it’s the same one that the user can download. I’d appreciate it if you didn’t try to make it sound like a deception. I’m skilled in rendering, so I do try to show all the angles of the mesh in renders. Someone else is skilled at photography, so does that using their camera. And yes, it is fair.
And again, I’d appreciate it if you could stay on topic and offer your insight about the “AI-generated models being exclusive" problem, instead of sharing my entire collection in the thread. All of your messages at this point are about me, the topic is completely neglected.
I think you’re barking up the wrong tree. Take a look at my profile. I’ve been discussing how to spot AI and possible solutions on MakerWorld for a long time.
I’ve started three threads on this topic, all of which argue against AI.
But still, you dodge the essential questions and deliberately play dumb, because the question apparently makes you uncomfortable. It’s not Bambu who reads what you’re writing here; it’s the community that gives her unfiltered feedback. If you came here just to seek validation rather than to engage in discussion, then you clearly haven’t understood the purpose of this forum.
I’ll gladly post it again: A lot of people on MakerWorld also view rendering as a major issue, too.
So if you want to discuss the topic as a whole, you’ll have to address the issue of rendering as well. But let me repeat: posting this here won’t change anything. The forum is community-driven, and Bambu doesn’t care if someone is against AI. Bambu love AI.
And once again, take a look at the thread I started on this topic - you’re really barking up the wrong tree.
This is just someone taking a hot topic that has been discussed to death around here and trying to drive traffic to their YT account by making a new thread.
I think I may have a different way of seeing all this AI stuff, I dont care how the model was made, if it is good it is good, what I dont like is the dishonesty with the cover images, and I don’t make a distinction between a render or AI generated, it is not a real picture of a print of the model showing what it looks like printed.
Why? When you knew this thread was made to drive traffic to the Youtube video,
Photo of the printed model for the cover image. No AI image, no render, no design drawings, but feel free to use these in the other 14 image slots. Can we have our wish in 2026, @MakerWorld ?
It’s crazy to me that this thread is getting so much hate. I visited almost all of the previous topics on AI-generated models before starting this one. Those are all stretched-out threads (some literally from two years ago) that discussed anything and everything about AI, and any specific part of the problem is lost between tens of thousands of messages.
This is a specific issue I’m outlining here: AI-generated models are driving the exclusive program to malfunction. That’s exactly why I’ve started a new topic.
Amazingly, it’s going super off topic. Talking about why the other discussions are so stretched out.
Its not hate. This has just be discussed to the ends of the earth and we all have our strong opinions.
Most of us agree that AI models themselves are not bad. It is the misrepresentation. You can always scroll past something, but when a print comes off the printer looking different from the model images, that is a problem.
The exclusive program itself is a joke. I personally think that the threshold should be something like 1000 prints instead of 100.
You can always report AI for not being eligible, but chances are MW will not do anything about it (especially if it is getting downloads).
This isn’t hate. No one has insulted or offended you. People have simply asked questions and expressed different opinions. This is just a normal part of everyday life on the forum, and it’s no different to real life.
If it were hate speech, the moderators would have deleted it immediately. Labeling opinions as hate speech is very disrespectful.
To get back to the point, in a nutshell:
Many users also demand this from rendering. In other words: Any misleading content, image or text should be excluded from competitions, regardless of whether it is created through rendering, AI or any other method. Anything that deviates from reality.
Honest people are at a disadvantage. Perhaps they also lack the experience required to produce perfect images, whether through rendering, AI or other methods.
Many people feel that these rules are not strict enough, and would prefer to see a requirement for real photos to be used as the first image. That would affect you, too.
So, for example, if you’re calling for stricter rules, it could very well affect you if a real photo requirement is introduced for the cover - just to give one example - or for a competition.
hmm… and i… : )
i like renderings and i like real pictures…
the renderings can show more details of how much love and time was spented in designing something…
the real picture shows only the way how you would print/slice it and what is left from the “perfect” original design…
hmm… its very hard to explain what i mean… but…!! i like it, working my ideas out without ai… i simply drawing it… i create it… in my mind.. on the computer… every detail… a roundover or a radius… outer and inner proportions… thats what i like to do… and i would never and ever let someone or something decide it for me…!
because i like the overall prozess of everything that is in to it oo much…??
and the exclusive program..??
are you people have to living on 3d printing..? and on makerworld..?? i mean…? you know…? hmm…
for me, it feels like, it is nearly impossible.. to join this exclusive program so i can not realy talk with you about this topic at all but i dont know…?
She is pointing out in the exclusive model guidelines how ai generated models are not allowed under current exclusive guidelines:
“AI-generated content, Hueforges, plane/flat/2D models, or models that are clearly not structurally sophisticated will be removed from the program.”
Also how ai generated models are becoming harder to recognise and we cannot distinguish between them and human made ones. She is absolutely right in pointing out how they cannot (its nearly impossible now) follow their own policy and it 100% needs to be changed, whatever your stance on ai is, it’s currently useless words! It’s been over a year and makerworld are doing nothing. There is nothing wrong in raising attention to it because nothing is being done about it!
Bambu loves AI - of course anyone can speak up - but Bambu still loves AI. Why would they do anything when things are going well for them?
Unfortunately, the harsh truth is that most of Bambu’s current customers, such as Bambu app users, aren’t concerned with this. They see something they like, print it, and that’s it.
For people who don’t like AI, there are much better alternatives than MakerWorld - thankfully, so everyone has a choice. AI annoys me too, but I also know that Bambu doesn’t care, because I don’t deny reality. That’s why I’ve decided to use other websites that don’t use AI, too - because I have a choice.
Bambu set this course a long time ago and will not deviate from it. As long as the money keeps flowing, nothing will change.
I tried to take the discussion back on track, but since you’re insisting that I get into details, sure.
When you knew this thread was made to drive traffic to the Youtube video,