3D Models
3D Print Models
3D Scans
Animation & MoCap
Textures
Materials
Skin Textures
2D Game Assets
Sound Effects
Brushes & Tools
Reference Photos
Stock Images
HDR Images
3ds Max
Maya
Blender
Unreal Engine
Unity
ZBrush
Cinema 4D
LightWave
Marmoset
SketchUp
FBX
DAE
DXF
GLBAI Content Policy and Guidelines | Feedback Requested
414Thread Activity
the joker of spadesFri, Mar 28
COMIXIANTThu, Mar 27
the joker of spadesThu, Mar 27
COMIXIANTWed, Mar 26
MoogeeWed, Mar 26
GhatanothoaMon, Mar 24
RenderHub recently published a page outlining our AI Content Policy and Guidelines.
We tried to make it as clear as possible, but we would love to hear your thoughts!
Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns. General feedback is also welcome.
You can find the new page here:
https://www.renderhub.com/info/ai-content-policy
We tried to make it as clear as possible, but we would love to hear your thoughts!
Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns. General feedback is also welcome.
You can find the new page here:
https://www.renderhub.com/info/ai-content-policy
! REPORT
Another "NO AI!" Contest inbound? lol
(I kinda have 1 idea for such a contest, but my rig would hate me for it LOL)
I guess my gray area would probably be when it comes to in-render imagery - like a painting on a wall or some sort of poster in a scene. Like, it uses AI imagery but it's not really an AI image.
I'll also use (haven't done this in a while, probably should again) video game screenshots to depict ballgames or "movie" cutscenes on TV.
I try not to use real pictures in 3D renders - the picture shouldn't look more "real" than the "real life" of the rendered image.
(I kinda have 1 idea for such a contest, but my rig would hate me for it LOL)
I guess my gray area would probably be when it comes to in-render imagery - like a painting on a wall or some sort of poster in a scene. Like, it uses AI imagery but it's not really an AI image.
I'll also use (haven't done this in a while, probably should again) video game screenshots to depict ballgames or "movie" cutscenes on TV.
I try not to use real pictures in 3D renders - the picture shouldn't look more "real" than the "real life" of the rendered image.
REPLY
! REPORT
You covered inbound pretty well but there is an outbound gap, perhaps it's covered elsewhere.
Can gallery images, marketplace images, contest images, avatars, banners, or marketplace items (free and/or paid) downloaded or scraped from RenderHub be used in an AI library? Does the license for an item purchased from RenderHub allow use in an AI library? Optionally, Can a vendor opt in to an AI license?
Can gallery images, marketplace images, contest images, avatars, banners, or marketplace items (free and/or paid) downloaded or scraped from RenderHub be used in an AI library? Does the license for an item purchased from RenderHub allow use in an AI library? Optionally, Can a vendor opt in to an AI license?
REPLY
! REPORT
Seems weird that you would say AI images are not allowed in avatars and banners.
REPLY
! REPORT
MKDAWUSS
Karma: 46,482
Mon, Mar 17And its use in the forums is a bit mixed - posts aren't allowed, but images are if used in certain contexts. I get AI generated spambot posts, which IMO would just fall under spambot stuff; however, one could easily use AI text in much the same way one can use an AI image - to highlight a point or make some commentary on today's AI. I'm also under the impression that people will use AI as some sort of translator in the event they're communicating in a language they're a bit rough with.
I do agree that not allowing AI images in avatars is a bit weird, especially when the current policy allows it for promotional material. Promo material has more of an impact on this place than a forum avatar.
I do agree that not allowing AI images in avatars is a bit weird, especially when the current policy allows it for promotional material. Promo material has more of an impact on this place than a forum avatar.
The only bit I don't like is allowing people to use A.I. in promotional material.
I've see two now who do it, and nether of them point out out that A.I. was involved. That to me is unfair since it devalues the work of much better creators who don't require the use of A.I. to make their products look good. It is also a form of false advertising since showing a character that is for sale and not disclosing the fact that the promo was animated with A.I, would naturally have the purchaser believe that the realistic morphs they;'re seeing in the promo are due to the quality of the product, when in fact it is nothing of the sort.
So personally I wouldn't allow it, but if you really must then surely there should at least be a requirement to disclose the use of A.I in any promotional material, and failure to disclose it should result in a ban and removal of any and all product/s they sold without disclosure.
REPLY
! REPORT
MKDAWUSS
Karma: 46,482
Mon, Mar 17Yeah, allowing it for promotional material but not for forum avatars is a bit... weird. The former has more of an impact on the site than the latter.
COMIXIANT
I think a sensible way to implement it would be to require the following:
- All A.I. generated or assisted promotional images must clearly show the text "A.I. was used in the generation of this image".
- All A.I. generated or assisted promotional videos must clearly show the text "A.I. was used in the generation of this video".
Additionally:
- In the case of videos, the message needs to be clearly visible throughout the entire length of the video.
- Notice should be given that failure to disclose the use of A.I.in a marketplace is a fraudulent activity.
Everything I just wrote is designed purely to stop other creators from being devauled, and the marketplace users from being screwed. It all seems perfectly fair considering the problem these types pose to the rest of us. They would never get away wth it on any website of mine, and I would like to think that RenderHub would never stand for it, either.
The implementation I just suggested is fail-safe in that anyone looking at a promotional image or video that used A.I. is guaranteed to be made a ware of the fact that it is. Not everyone reads descriptions, so it's important that these notices are clearly on each individual image and video that used A.I. anywhere in its production.
Karma: 1,439
Tue, Mar 18I think a sensible way to implement it would be to require the following:
- All A.I. generated or assisted promotional images must clearly show the text "A.I. was used in the generation of this image".
- All A.I. generated or assisted promotional videos must clearly show the text "A.I. was used in the generation of this video".
Additionally:
- In the case of videos, the message needs to be clearly visible throughout the entire length of the video.
- Notice should be given that failure to disclose the use of A.I.in a marketplace is a fraudulent activity.
Everything I just wrote is designed purely to stop other creators from being devauled, and the marketplace users from being screwed. It all seems perfectly fair considering the problem these types pose to the rest of us. They would never get away wth it on any website of mine, and I would like to think that RenderHub would never stand for it, either.
The implementation I just suggested is fail-safe in that anyone looking at a promotional image or video that used A.I. is guaranteed to be made a ware of the fact that it is. Not everyone reads descriptions, so it's important that these notices are clearly on each individual image and video that used A.I. anywhere in its production.
RenderHub
Admin: 35,243
Wed, Mar 19Thanks for the feedback, I like the idea of the "A.I. was used" flag, we will be implementing this shortly.
COMIXIANT
Cheers RenderHub, really pleased to hear it and it's definitely needed!
Karma: 1,439
Wed, Mar 19Cheers RenderHub, really pleased to hear it and it's definitely needed!
RenderHub Admin 1
Admin: 13,572
Thu, Mar 20During product submission, vendors are now required to disclose if AI has been used in the promo images or video.
The disclosure now appears prominently on the product page, like here:
https://www.renderhub.com/lisson4321/jommy-proline-morphs-for-genesis-8-1-female
Thank you for the feedback, and feel free to comment further.
The disclosure now appears prominently on the product page, like here:
https://www.renderhub.com/lisson4321/jommy-proline-morphs-for-genesis-8-1-female
Thank you for the feedback, and feel free to comment further.
COMIXIANT
Great to see (and that's a perfect example of a what I was talking about), but it's far too easy to miss, whereas having a policy whereby the notice is visible on every promotional image (and visible throughout the length of every promotional video), would be 100% unmissable to the viewer.
Persoanlly, I'm really pleased you've done something to address it. It's not the fact that it's being used, it's the dishonesty in not being clear to people that it was. Personally I would require the notice be part of any image or video that uses A.I, because that's the only way to make the notice impossible to miss.
I would still keep that tag system in place though, regardless of whether you require it on the image.
Karma: 1,439
Thu, Mar 20Great to see (and that's a perfect example of a what I was talking about), but it's far too easy to miss, whereas having a policy whereby the notice is visible on every promotional image (and visible throughout the length of every promotional video), would be 100% unmissable to the viewer.
Persoanlly, I'm really pleased you've done something to address it. It's not the fact that it's being used, it's the dishonesty in not being clear to people that it was. Personally I would require the notice be part of any image or video that uses A.I, because that's the only way to make the notice impossible to miss.
I would still keep that tag system in place though, regardless of whether you require it on the image.
COMIXIANT
Just wanted to update and point out that I really wish you'd remove the tag system. I'm sincerely very grateful that you took steps to fix the problem, but actually, the tag system will create more problems while not fully addressing the one it was meant to.
The first problem, as already hghlighted is that it can be missed. The second problem is that it acts as a blanket-notice to the entire product, because doing it that way means that the images that don't use A.I are also being collectively labelled. For example the link you gave, sure, he uses A.I. in the video, but at the same time, he's still a good artist and is producing characters that look good even without it, yet the rest of his promotional material is being blanket-labelled by the use of the tag.
Again, I cannot stress it enough. It's not the use of A.I. that is the problem, it's just the lack of disclosure. But since disclosure is image (or in this case video) dependant, then surely the simple requirement to display the notice on the actual media that uses it, would be the better option in every case. It cannot be missed, and doesn't blanket-cover everything else in the way that a tag does.
If you're wondering how to implement it, it's dead easy, since all you would need to do is simply require it as part of RenderHub's product submission ToS. It's much better than a tag system, is unmissable in use, and requires nothing more than an update to the ToS.
So I personally don't like the tag system and I hope you change it. But either way, thanks for looking into the problem.
Karma: 1,439
Fri, Mar 21Just wanted to update and point out that I really wish you'd remove the tag system. I'm sincerely very grateful that you took steps to fix the problem, but actually, the tag system will create more problems while not fully addressing the one it was meant to.
The first problem, as already hghlighted is that it can be missed. The second problem is that it acts as a blanket-notice to the entire product, because doing it that way means that the images that don't use A.I are also being collectively labelled. For example the link you gave, sure, he uses A.I. in the video, but at the same time, he's still a good artist and is producing characters that look good even without it, yet the rest of his promotional material is being blanket-labelled by the use of the tag.
Again, I cannot stress it enough. It's not the use of A.I. that is the problem, it's just the lack of disclosure. But since disclosure is image (or in this case video) dependant, then surely the simple requirement to display the notice on the actual media that uses it, would be the better option in every case. It cannot be missed, and doesn't blanket-cover everything else in the way that a tag does.
If you're wondering how to implement it, it's dead easy, since all you would need to do is simply require it as part of RenderHub's product submission ToS. It's much better than a tag system, is unmissable in use, and requires nothing more than an update to the ToS.
So I personally don't like the tag system and I hope you change it. But either way, thanks for looking into the problem.
If AI images are permitted in forum posts I assume animations made with non AI software (Reallusion, Blender etc) but makes use of AI generated music or vocals
are permitted .
for example the characters are animated with Reallusion Cartoon animator, however the song they are singing is AI Generated
are permitted .
for example the characters are animated with Reallusion Cartoon animator, however the song they are singing is AI Generated
REPLY
! REPORT
Does AI generated also mean AI enhanced - i.e. is enhanced also covered by generated? I'm asking because not long ago a few images appeared in the gallery that were " only " enhanced, but still looked like the usual AI generated crap.
Otherwise, I think the rules are clear and simple - although I don't like the rule that allows AI-generated content for marketplace promo images.
Otherwise, I think the rules are clear and simple - although I don't like the rule that allows AI-generated content for marketplace promo images.
REPLY
! REPORT
Indeed the ban on AI account avatars seem pointless and arbitrary as it is no more deceptive than using a service like this to create an Avatar
https://avatarmaker.com/male/
Also the term "substantially created with AI"
is so poorly defined as to be effectively useless.
what percentage of AI can be involved before a product is considered substantially created with AI??
Here are some is a Hypothetical examples:
If were to use this AI tool to create animation from a prompt, the FBX it exports would not be usable for Daz figures unless…
I imported it (and the Daz figure) into Maya, Motion builder or Reallusion Iclone where there a manual remapping process is involved before I could output BVH File compatible with G8-G9 and convert that to a .duf before selling it in the marketplace.
REPLY
! REPORT
deathd
Karma: 1,490
Tue, Mar 18Agreed mostly. Is using "AI denoiser" allowed? One of my biggest annoyances is people that use the "AI denoiser" in DS promos, it can hide flaws in texture maps. It often comes out looking like one of those ancient PS painterly filters lol. My promo images are always raw renders, no "AI denoising" at all, so people can actually see what they are getting. Only postwork I do is cropping, composition and levels adjustments.
ArtbyMel
Karma: 10,012
Tue, Mar 18I agree. I think more clarification in that area would be a good idea. So many people are now refining their own images using AI, so that should be mentioned.
Lately, I've been posting my renders relit with IC Light V2. It's based on AI, but as you can see, it's a relighting. I almost always include the originals they're based on, so you can see the change is only in the lighting.
REPLY
! REPORT
COMIXIANT
Love your G9 Itziar character, and will definitely buy as soon as I have my download issues sorted!
Karma: 1,439
Fri, Mar 21Love your G9 Itziar character, and will definitely buy as soon as I have my download issues sorted!
I think a sizeable controversy surrounding AI could be lifted if those submitting it would be required to state their submission is AI generated. I think AI enhanced work should be allowed in galleries under grounds of it being marked somehow as AI, although I've seen enough examples of such features being disrespected on a regular basis(DeviantArt comes to mind). And it makes logical sense - marking things as AI allow for filtering them out, and thus it makes them less seen. This would incentevize some less rule abiding people to make false claims, so there'd be a bigger need for moderation.
REPLY
! REPORT
I have no problem with those who use AI, I'm simply not interested and I don't need it, I prefer to spend hours in postwork, I wouldn't feel that image of mine, I think that those who use it should be honest and say that they use it... but honestly, this is one of the few places that is not inundated with thousands of AI images, maybe it's better to continue like this
REPLY
! REPORT
I definitely disagree with the following rule:
User Avatars and Banner Images : AI-generated account avatars or banner/hero images are not allowed.
It's an overstated rule and it doesn't makes much sense.
User Avatars and Banner Images : AI-generated account avatars or banner/hero images are not allowed.
It's an overstated rule and it doesn't makes much sense.
REPLY
! REPORT
I think it should OK to use AI for postwork in the same way an artist can state that they used, say, Daz Studio and Photoshop. Adobe has already incorporated AI into Photoshop allowing users many of the tools available with DALL-E and Midjourney. I get the point of saying no to AI generated only - there could be a tsunami of stuff from people who have no idea of how to use prompts.
One thing I would like to see is when people do post work on an image that when they post it to also post the image they started with pre-postwork. I think it helps a lot of artists realise that if, for example, Studio isn't giving them the vision they have in their head, that there are other tools they an use to get closer to it. Whether they are using Photoshop, Gimp or AI so long as they can state what they used that's all the should really matter.
At the end of the day AI is here to stay, its capabilities are only going to increase along with the demand for work created with it. Personally I think it makes sense for all artists to learn how to use it - even it you don't intend to actually use it in your work. Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
One thing I would like to see is when people do post work on an image that when they post it to also post the image they started with pre-postwork. I think it helps a lot of artists realise that if, for example, Studio isn't giving them the vision they have in their head, that there are other tools they an use to get closer to it. Whether they are using Photoshop, Gimp or AI so long as they can state what they used that's all the should really matter.
At the end of the day AI is here to stay, its capabilities are only going to increase along with the demand for work created with it. Personally I think it makes sense for all artists to learn how to use it - even it you don't intend to actually use it in your work. Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
REPLY
! REPORT
COMIXIANT
Sounds fair in theory, but personally I'd be hesitant to show a postworked render alongside the pre-postworked version.
- REASON 1 - People will realise how little effort I put into the actual render, and see how shoddy it looks in the raw.
- REASON 2 -:I use a custom-developed grain-processing network that I developed for DaVinci Resolve Studio.
The latter is quite a concern, because if I were to show a before and after, it would take A.I a whole microsecond to reverse-engineer my potwork processess by subtracting my shoddy render from the finished image. And even without A.I, it wouldn't take a seasoned postworker very long to figure-out how a lot of the processes were done.
And anyway, A.I. generated images aren't (anywhere near) the same sort of thing as doing your own postwork on your own render.
Karma: 1,439
Wed, Mar 26Sounds fair in theory, but personally I'd be hesitant to show a postworked render alongside the pre-postworked version.
- REASON 1 - People will realise how little effort I put into the actual render, and see how shoddy it looks in the raw.
- REASON 2 -:I use a custom-developed grain-processing network that I developed for DaVinci Resolve Studio.
The latter is quite a concern, because if I were to show a before and after, it would take A.I a whole microsecond to reverse-engineer my potwork processess by subtracting my shoddy render from the finished image. And even without A.I, it wouldn't take a seasoned postworker very long to figure-out how a lot of the processes were done.
And anyway, A.I. generated images aren't (anywhere near) the same sort of thing as doing your own postwork on your own render.
the joker of spades
Karma: 21,208
Thu, Mar 27In your opinion is it the same to do a postwork manually and to have it done by a software? Obviously those who do not use AI, do not even use Adobe's with Photoshop, simply, in my opinion, that is no longer my job and I do not feel it is mine, what is the point of spending hours creating and setting up a scene and then having a software do the work? At that point use AI directly, manual postwork requires time and commitment and does not always give good results.
COMIXIANT
I don't know if that question was for Moogee, or me, but just in case it was me, I get far more enjoyment out of postworking my renders than I get out of rendering them in the first place. So for me, and in my opinion, postworking is an art in itself!
It's not something I would ever leave to an automated plugin, or A.I.
Karma: 1,439
Thu, Mar 27I don't know if that question was for Moogee, or me, but just in case it was me, I get far more enjoyment out of postworking my renders than I get out of rendering them in the first place. So for me, and in my opinion, postworking is an art in itself!
It's not something I would ever leave to an automated plugin, or A.I.
the joker of spades
Karma: 21,208
Fri, Mar 28Sorry, it was a reply to the comment above yours, I think the same as you
