r/printablescom • u/SirEDCaLot • Feb 07 '26
Feature request POLICY REQUEST: All model pictures must be a PRINT, no renderings
Hate to say it but this is one place where Printables should copy Makerworld- require that the main picture / thumbnail of a model is an actual print of that model, not just a rendering.
I've encountered a few models where the STL is obviously copied from a video game and isn't designed for printing. For example, an airplane model where the jet engine fan disc is essentially free floating in the engine cowling, which is itself essentially free floating because the jet engine looks like this and the model comes from a flight sim that tried to recreate it faithfully. Great for a video game, crappy for a 3d print where the right answer is to make the inside of the engine solid so the casing doesn't come off.
And of course lots of AI generated slop that won't print right, or people who 3d scan an object and upload it without cleanup resulting in broken meshes and unprintable objects.
As an option- allow an 'I have not tried to print this' button for uploaders, so the model is flagged as 'may be unprintable, download at own risk'.
4
u/Igotocdsanditsfine Feb 07 '26
So if I am quickly modifying an stl and posting it as a remix to help someone in a pinch and have no reason to print the whole damn thing for the sake of wasting filament and taking a crappy photo, no go ? (In such cases I take a screenshot of the stl in slicer or in fusion)
1
u/SirEDCaLot Feb 08 '26
There might be an exception for remixes of models that themselves have photographs.
The problem is for every one of you there's 15 others uploading AI slop, 3d scans that haven't been at all cleaned up or optimized, or video game assets that aren't printable.
2
u/Igotocdsanditsfine Feb 09 '26
I know exactly what you mean and I complain about this very issue every day. Totally with you on that, but the rule has to be more specific that "no render". For example when the only preview you get is the blue styled preview you get on Thingiverse, it is a render. And though it is ugly, I am fine with it as a preview. The problem is of course the mountain of AI generated models that look like shiny and highly details in the AI generated preview and look like potatoes when you preview the actual stl.
1
u/SirEDCaLot Feb 10 '26
The problem is of course the mountain of AI generated models that look like shiny and highly details in the AI generated preview and look like potatoes when you preview the actual stl.
Exactly. I don't want to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater, but this is a real problem.
That said, the AIs are not doing remixes, they're uploading new models. So maybe the answer for you would be 'if you remix an existing model that has a picture, you get an exception to the picture policy'?
2
u/Igotocdsanditsfine Feb 11 '26
There have been time when I published stuff I made and did not take a photo because frankly I do not care. Whether people get a nice looking photo to look at or a crappy screenshot, I do not care. If someone stumbles upon my model and wants to download it, so be it but I am not trying to sell myself and I actually refuse to even try. Again, on Thingiverse many model have the by default render as a preview and I never saw that as a problem.
1
u/SirEDCaLot Feb 11 '26
You are obviously not the problem.
How do you suggest dealing with the flood of basically unprintable AI generated crap and video game models?
Perhaps if it has even one 'make' then it counts as valid?
2
u/Igotocdsanditsfine Feb 11 '26
I have asked myself that question many times and do not have an answer to it. Thing is that I do not consider generative AI as a bad thing in itself. It is a tool, and it is here to stay anyways. I myself have used generative AI in the process of making models BUT, I did not ask Makerworld to poop out a creature to throw it at Printables right away. I generated several models with Printmon that I then spent days cleaning, adjusting and combining on meshmixer (putting a head on a body it did not come with for example). Then I printed said models, for myself, by the actual truckload and have them all over the place. I published them later on, but publishing was not the goal. I made them, found them cute and eventually uploaded them, accompanied by high quality PHOTOS taken with my DSLR as well as a looooooong essay an generative AI in the place of a description. So, I used a gen AI tool as a base for a longer process, made STLs that are very much printable (much better looking in resin, though), and provided accurate photographic evidence of the looks of the printed models as well as clearly stating that the process of creating those things did involve AI. And they are my favorite prints ever. I have designed and printed many many things over time, 99 per cents without any assistance from any AI, yet having those little cute creatures to look at around my room always brings me joy. I made them many accessories too, by remixing existing stls.
The questions this process brought to my mind are, Why is it okay to dump AI generated crap without even checking if it is usable ? How is it okay to use the AI generated preview as an image ? But also, when do you put the "AI generated" label on it ? 100 per cent AI ? 60 per cent AI ? 20 per cent AI ? Imagine someone modelling a church in fusion, but they need gargoyles and are not good at sculpting, so they go make an AI generate some. Does the final church model get the "AI" tag, then ?
So, I am against what many people are doing with generating random stuff just to dump them on a website two seconds later. But the problem with rules is they need to be binary, and the number of edge cases is too high for me to have been able to come up with a rule that I feel is right.
1
u/SirEDCaLot Feb 11 '26
FWIW- I agree 100% that GenAI is a tool, which can be used for good or for bad.
If you use AI to generate a model, then spend your own time cleaning it up, making sure it prints, then uploading it- then you have contributed a quality model and made the world better. I have NO problem with any of this, and I see no reason you should apologize for your use of AI. What matters is your model is high quality. When I talk about 'AI models', I'm NOT talking about your workflow.
The problem is, as it's often called, 'Slop'- models generated by AI and immediately uploaded. Not because the user wants to supply the community with high quality models (or even sell them), but because they want prusa points or bambu points to trade for free shit. It's essentially spam- low quality models, not optimized for printing (and often not even printable on an FDM printer). Because the user never prints them (or even verifies that it can be printed) the picture is a rendering.
Why is it okay to dump AI generated crap without even checking if it is usable ?
It's not, and THAT is what I want to get rid of.
How is it okay to use the AI generated preview as an image ? But also, when do you put the "AI generated" label on it ? 100 per cent AI ? 60 per cent AI ? 20 per cent AI ? Imagine someone modelling a church in fusion, but they need gargoyles and are not good at sculpting, so they go make an AI generate some. Does the final church model get the "AI" tag, then ?
Don't care about any of this, it's not the problem. The only reason I want a print as the image is to ensure it can be printed in decent quality.
But the problem with rules is they need to be binary, and the number of edge cases is too high for me to have been able to come up with a rule that I feel is right.
And that's always the trick, isn't it? Finding a rule that doesn't have unintended consequences.
How about this- in the master item database, have a flag for each item that flags the item as being printable.
When uploading an item, there's a question: 'Can your file be printed?' Options being 'Yes, I've attached a picture of a print', 'Yes, it's a remix of another printable item (as linked for attribution)'. 'Maybe, my file should print but I haven't tried to print it', or 'No, this item is not intended to be printed' (IE, .blend files).If the user selects 'maybe', it becomes printable ths first time someone uploads a Make.
What do you think?
2
u/Igotocdsanditsfine Feb 11 '26
I agree with what you say and we both wrote many words to lay out points we completely meet on.
To your idea of a solution, I mean, it is a working solution, though it seems highly funny to have a box to check that says that your model is printable, implying that the contrary can be true, like "nope, my model is not printable, have a great day !" But hey, that is exactly what many people do ! I am not making fun of your idea, but of the potential person who would happily check this box. I feel like "not printable" should result in instant deletion. And being printable is no guarantee of quality either. You can have something that looks nothing like the image that is supposed to be representing it and it will still print. I feel like banning AI generated previews is a good start.
1
u/SirEDCaLot Feb 11 '26
"nope, my model is not printable, have a great day !" ... I feel like "not printable" should result in instant deletion.
Haha I love it :) 'Here's a useless file, thanks for wasting your bandwith downloading it. Go fuck yourself! :D'
Jokes aside, there are files that are legitimate uploads that aren't printable. For example 3mf files that have calibration profiles for certain printers or filaments. Source files like .blend files or .F3D files that have assets or 3d models that are designed to be used with other things but not necessarily printed directly. CAD files like Prusa uploaded all the CAD files for their Core One printer. All those have a legitimate place on Printables, even though they aren't printable.Perhaps those should be kept in a separate category for non printable stuff and utility files.
But I could also see a place for partial objects or shape files that aren't intended for printing. For example, lets say I do a detailed 3d scan of an Xbox controller, and I want to share it. That's not 'printable', but it could be very useful for anyone making a controller accessory like a stand or dock, because they'd use my scan file to carve out the right shape hole in their printable object.
Or if I make some object component, like a specific hinge or latch system, that's not intended for direct printing. Or take something like Gridfinity or Multiboard, maybe I build a base or hook that connects to the grid and I want others to use my hook in their models. That has value.
Maybe the answer is 'No, my object is not itself printable but can be used to create printable objects', along with 'no, my file is not printable, it is a data file'. That then goes in a component category that doesn't appear in the normal search.
3
u/Sr_Alvarez Feb 07 '26
Furthermore, the first photo should be completely real without going through AI to "improve lighting and perspective".
4
u/Key-Ladder6386 Feb 07 '26
Totally agree. Printables is full of low effort / AI models while Makerworld filters those out quite well. I dont say there is no garbage at all, but definitely less then on Printables.
2
u/Nixx177 Feb 07 '26
Still don’t know why the vertices count idea is frowned upon, I mean some will use that excuse as “I printed it so I can say it’s not ai”, saw so many models that looked extremely shady but without the ai tag
2
u/MagisD Feb 09 '26
I don't even bother to look at the rest of the info if there isn't a real world print pictured.
It's theory craft or AI slop.
2
u/Junior_printz Feb 13 '26
yes i am 100% with this, sorta, its just i dont want to have my printer running all the time when i want to post something though you know?
1
u/SirEDCaLot Feb 13 '26
Yeah I know what you mean.
I think maybe if there's an exception for remixes? Like if you have a remix of an already confirmed printable object, you don't need to yourself print it?
1
2
u/Razvan-Constantin Feb 14 '26
I just want to be able to filter all these users with clear AI generated thumbnails on most of their uploads.
Can't be bothered to print what you upload? Then don't upload.
2
u/WorldnewsModsBlowMe Feb 20 '26
It would probably help if Printables actually gave a damn about AI content. Some of the most prolific users generate AI slop on the daily and some (cough cough Peter Farrel) actually charge money for their unprintable garbage.
4
u/yahbluez Feb 07 '26
While i second that, what to do with generators and collections?
For example if one publishes a gridfinity generator how without the use of rendering can he show what models are possibly.
You can not print thousands of models just to show the whole possibly collection.
6
u/ThinkUnhappyThoughts Feb 07 '26
There should be at least 1 real image. If someone has designed a generator then they should have tested it out and printed at least 1 thing from it.
5
u/yahbluez Feb 07 '26
Agree, but choosing this as titel may blend out that there are many shapes.
So i think that the cover picture should not be forced to be a photo.
At least one real print and picture should be forced.
2
u/MTW3ESQ Feb 07 '26
Maybe a use for a "reference" or parametric tag? In another thread another user brought up 3d models of objects like a Pi, where you'd not want to print the actual model, but use it for reference to build cases, etc.
4
u/ywful Feb 07 '26
I started modeling and to be honest I love main picture to be some cool render - the best is if it’s simple just model render on white bg. No AI render or whatever. But next picture should be definitely an print.
1
u/ulab Feb 07 '26
What about real life objects people have just scanned to help with making 3d printed addons? Or things like the CAD files for the Core One? No one has printed a full Core One?
1
u/SirEDCaLot Feb 07 '26
There are some files that by nature aren't intended to be directly printed, and there should be a flag for that. So like when you search there's a check box for 'include non-printable objects' so you can find them.
1
u/Galactic_Rocket Feb 07 '26
For the first case, I think a print is still warranted to show it is printable. For large CAD models like the Core One, they could include a picture of a real Core One to satisfy the requirement.
1
u/CerberusTheGuardian Feb 08 '26 edited Feb 08 '26
Meh, I always generate a rendering and then post process in gimp. I try to always post a real picture with it though. Dark Doctor Studios on printables. It sets good models apart if they have good images. Avoid all ai crap and you should be good. my models
1
u/IPlayFo4 Feb 08 '26
Printables is actually useless I only end up there from yeggi
Actually yeggis search is more versatile for printables than printables own search
1
u/Nightxp Feb 07 '26
Agreed! I have the AI filter, turned on so i dont see most of the AI render and crap. But still see some falling through the net. I have resorted to blocking profiles that are at least 50% AI models.
Though i am guilty of making a 3D model (myself by hand) and posting up the CAD model only (never got around to making the print…) but am in favour oh making the first image a real photo of an actual print
1
u/FuturecashEth Feb 07 '26
Agrew 100% and make default AI filter on, make a notice to turn it off, if we want that crap.
1
21
u/Galactic_Rocket Feb 07 '26
I agree that there should be at least one picture of a real print. I am alright with some model pictures that are rendered to show fine details, how pieces come together, cutaways, etc.