While I truly sympathize, I believe just like you real photos are the right direction to go. At the beginning, they weren’t necessary to get the platform started and growing. But once Bambu introduced incentives, models started pouring in, the site grew enormously, and naturally the rules had to evolve.
Do these new rules need to apply to everyone from day one? Absolutely not—it would be chaos. But at some point, yes, they do need to apply to everyone, simply from a logistical and fairness standpoint. Bambu has already given plenty of time and opportunity for people to update their posts.
Should the old rules permanently apply to us “early adopters”? I don’t think so—because that would only confuse new users. Imagine if I got my driver’s license in the 60s when seatbelts weren’t mandatory. The rules have changed since then, and even if I didn’t like it, I still comply. Life is full of examples where rules evolve, there’s an adjustment period, and eventually everyone is asked to follow the same standard—whether in government, education, medicine, or science.
I still think it’s tough—if you have thousands of models and hundreds to update, it’s a huge time sink, and I truly sympathize with that. But is Bambu in the wrong? Honestly, I don’t think so.
Donated all the models I have designed, including the working prototypes.
If there were only around 10 models, not an issue.
I am also not a big fan of the rug being pulled underneath people when BL decides to inform users of something on one date and then retrospectively applies it.
Imagine if your boss said you would earn one amount of money, you work there for a year and they say you now earn less. Now, they also claw back the difference from when you started. How happy would you be?
The whole dishonesty of it all is the most appalling.
Why the concern if this only affects three of your models? From what I understand, it’s a very small portion of your 850 models, and they even highlighted the specific ones for you.
I also don’t particularly like retrospective changes and was affected myself, with around 10,000 points deducted and a one-week suspension. Of course I wished they handled the process better. That said, I see the overall change as both reasonable and necessary, and in hindsight I could have avoided the issue by paying closer attention to the updated rules. For me personally, it was a reminder not to take 3D printing and Makerworld too seriously.
For the one print profile I had added to someone else’s model back before a pic was required I suddenly got a notification a few months ago that it had been taken down and all the points it had earned for 1 1/2 years had been deducted. But the notification linked to the model page and since my profile had been taken down it was not listed there anymore, so I didn’t know where I could get to it to add the required print photo (I know now but it’s too late). So I tried doing an appeal and in the comments of the appeal I said I was willing to add the photo but needed assistance telling me where to find it so I could do so. That appeal was denied with no other response which I don’t think was at all appropriate. I then open a support case and was told they would not help.
MakerWorld tends to enforce its rules with, let’s say, a creative interpretation. I’ve had multiple models removed for reasons that seemed… imaginative. I’ve been printing since STL was the only game in town, and I still keep the original CAD for my designs. Yet one model was taken down after another user claimed ownership; I submitted my source CAD, the appeal was denied, and that user kept collecting points. I’ve even seen my work reposted as “exclusive.”
These days I only publish designs that are fun or ultra-niche for my ultralight flying—things that might actually help other pilots. Meanwhile, the site is flooded with AI-generated files and “printable” models that clearly aren’t.
And yes, MakerWorld also uses AI for contest judging. We all remember that legendary first draw where only two of six “winners” had actually entered. You couldn’t script better satire.
For those of us who only have twenty or thirty models posted, it might be a bit of an annoyance, but not a huge one due to the small number of models we would have to adjust (in full disclosure, this would never apply to me as I’ve always provided photos of the real print for all my models… I might have one image showing the design opened in Bambu Studio, but the rest are always photos of the real printed item). The folks who are impacted the most by this, and the ones commenting most strongly in this thread, are those who have hundreds of models loaded to the site. For them, this would be a major undertaking, and I understand their angst.
But do I agree that all posted models should include at least one clear image of the printed item? Absolutely. There’s a lot of garbage with AI renderings, screen shots of the design in CADD software, etc. Most are legit. But there were enough that were bogus to get the site owners to apply the new rules. And with many things in life, its the actions of a handful of miscreants that create pain and suffering for the vast majority of honourable users. IMHO, that’s what we’re seeing here. Lots of really decent folks who have submitted hundreds of their models, but are now facing the major effort of attempting to ensure compliance with a policy that was instigated because of the misbehaviour of others. Alas, when that happens we all get painted with the same brush. Guilty until proven innocent.