- This topic has 19 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Look at the state of this.
https://www.renderhub.com/nidah/quinnie-azkadina-for-genesis-8-female
https://www.renderhub.com/adelia774/willamina-aruna-for-genesis-8-female
How are these people getting away with such shameless misleading thumnails, you know the actual product is not going to look like this.
Renderhub QC needs new glasses.
What's funny is I put in points for https://www.renderhub.com/arte3d/at-lane-for-genesis-8-female knowing that it was going to be mediocre, and when I loaded it up, it was just that. There were already a bunch of poorly ranked vendors on RenderHub to begin with, and now they figured out that they could exploit the system by caking on heavy layers of AI to save their products.
those mofos were unable to make a decent body... if you are gonna lie with ai faces, please bitch, make ai bodies too...
@creepuk I just noticed those in the requests and was about to say the same thing. It’s not just misleading—it deliberately deceptive. Take Quinnie Azkadina, for example: the images are clearly AI-generated, not DAZ, yet that’s never disclosed anywhere or give any DAZ renderd promo. It seems aimed to scam people who aren’t familiar with what DAZ can actually do. And you can check their other items too-low quality garbage created with Facegen.
As for RenderHub, you already know exactly how they operate—their “policy” practically enables scams and deception, and the only time they bother to act like they care is when they’ve been exposed.
What’s even more concerning is that Renderosity seems to be heading down the same path. I recently came across two products by hameleon using AI-generated promo images, which completely defeats the purpose—you have no idea what the product will actually look like in DAZ. Maybe one or two AI images could be excused, but when every single promo is AI-generated, it crosses the line from misleading into outright deception. And now they’re even adding AI-generated videos into the mix, which takes the whole thing to another level of scam altogether.
Disclaimer: this rant was generated with the help of AI.
Which is fine if its to make the hair sor something look more realistic, but not the actual product they are selling, thats just some catfishing bullshit 😀
FeSoul has been doing it on the faces for his hair promos, which is fine, another used called it out on the daz forums and the posts were deleted, so Daz are going down the same path. Low effort bullshit.
I do agree that you can't mask your product with AI and believe you're rapport isn't going to dive off a cliff.
@creepuk You can present to most profound, astute critiques of Daz3D and Richard the android will still find a way to delete it.
I'm not against AI as a whole, but I'm definitely against using AI in product images. It's one thing to edit rendered images with AI if you're going to post the images for fun, but to use those images when you're trying to sell something just feels wrong. But, as the saying goes, there's a sucker born every minute, and unfortunately there are enough people out there who are willing to take said sucker's money and see nothing wrong with it. It's just a shame that the people running the websites don't see a problem with it either.
Caveat venditor. Start making a list of the unscrupulous vendors. Let them be hoisted by their own petard.
Dreamlight seems a pretty bad offender with AI.
The impression it gives me, it just smacks of laziness. :0/
Dreamlight. Powerage, too. BUT...as I see it, they're using it to explore the combination of AI and 3D in a more positive sense. And to make a profit. Personally, I don't have a problem with that.
The problem is those who use AI for sloppy, lazy, or underhanded reasons. And ultimately that can be solved by the marketplace. Caveat Emptor. Caveat Venditor. If I don't like it, I don't buy it. If they trick me, "fool me twice, shame on me".
Look at it this way...if you discovered that Stonemason's extraordinary sets were entirely produced by AI, would you mind? I wouldn't. Not if it's well deployed.
But as AI advances, it is inevitable that the results will get better and better. Relatively soon, we won't need vendors. We'll be able to produce our own models and textures as needed with some text prompts.
If the concern is 'purity', I get it. As someone who has spent years honing his artistic skills, there is a diminishment to discover that an extraordinary image was merely produced by some text prompts. Despite that, the image can still lift and excite one's spirit. But I don't feel the same way regarding 3D. How deftly someone extrudes and bevels vectors and polygons along a curve to exactly reproduce a chair or face certainly can be impressive; it is craftsmanship. Until an algorithm replaces that craftsmanship, and then even a noob can do it simply. But so what if a noob immediately starts producing models on the level of Stonemason? Should we reject them for lack of purity? And yet here we are not modeling at all, just nabbing pre-made models. The gall to bitch about how they were produced.
If the concern is the so-called theft of Intellectual Property (IP) used to generate checkpoints, LoRAs and such, well then that too is richly ironic coming from a site that relies entirely on IP.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
