Nice touch -- AI use or not, making a choice
RandWulf
Posts: 229
in The Commons
Renderosity has a nice addition to their product pages -- telling you whether AI was used in the product creation or not. It gives people a choice as to whether they choose to use a product made with AI, or completey made by an artist/creator.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2026 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Agreed it's an excellent feature
Daz products are not allowed to use AI.
Does this include promotional material?
As far as I know it applies to everything.
Then it seems likely that we're in the situation where some PAs don't follow the rules and your QAs don't catch everything. And keeping the topic on topic, I will repeat that Rendo's answer to the AI question is a Very Good Answer.
Since product QA allows so many product errors to be released, it isn't really surprising to me if they don't notice AI use. Maybe they need an AI QA spotter to find AI use. Get humans out of that loop.
AI is notoriously bad at spotting AI (more so in written text but also in images) since it is trained on things that are made by humans, so anything made by humans can potentially look like something that's part of its data set—false positives abound. (and my use of the em-dash there is from my keyboard shortcut—I am not AI
). Still, it might be useful for it to flag something for human consideration. Human could then ask PA (who are also human... mostly—a few dragons, cats and other species here and there) for clarification.
One thing that has annoyed me at Rendo is excessive gen-AI on some promo images (like most of the images for a certain product). But so long as it's not on the product itself, I guess it can be allowed for an 'example'. image.
I love using the em-dash because it mimics my speech pattern, but I've stopped using it because ai has muddied the waters. The pose sets that repeatedly use ai for promos are suspect to me because I cannot rely on the product's being accurately represented. But I do appreciate Renderosity putting a label on those items that use ai in modeling or promotions.
Especially from the one with a raptile name.... though they're Pose products and acceptable to me, the poses on the chars in promos are not 100% accurate (not accurately generated...)
Besides, identifying AI images should be easier than identifying "AI text" as the former have obvious "generated characteristics" while the latter can be further polished by human beings... but purely AI generated Text can be easily identified most of the time, like some product descriptions in this store...
Their policy has already lead me to blacklist several vendors for using AI, including one I was very sorry to see. I appreciate knowing however, and dropped them with regret.
Wouldn't it be important to know for what that - unsually not really intelligent - AI was used for, when making a product? I mean, nearly everybody uses auto correction for texts - email, social media posts, whatever (I don't, obviously) - or a route planning app in the car, diverse filters when taking pictures with a smartphone etc. etc. etc.
So I think marking products being made with the help of AI is great, but it would better to know for what the AI was used. Some automatic routine being used to fit some textures in a wall in a 3d house wouldn't bother me at all. In germany we have a saying: "The Devils is in the details" meaning that using too global judgement isn't always the best approach.
I wouldn't have a problem with PA's using AI ( but I would prefer to be made aware of it ), if the AI did a competent job. All too often AI generated elements are simply highlighted by meaningless or incomplete text, messed up textures. If a PA can't be bothered to at least check and fix the AI errors, when I can't be bothered to give them any money.
This. I'm not against a product using some AI if it's competently done, but contrary to the way it's used now, "AI" isn't really very intelligent and can only spit back out the information that's been fed into it. The more complex the task, the less likely it is to handle it well. As an example, Photoshop's content aware fill can be an incredibly useful tool because it works using only the images that the artist supplies, and acheives it's limited task more quickly than a human artist could.. By comparison, the latest statistics are that 95% of all AI initiatives fail to acheive their goals and a whopping 85% end up producing a negative loss, the most recent big example being Starbucks' recent scrapping of their much ballyhooed their multi-million dollar Nomaad Go AI Inventory tool, which they had spent years developing and had rolled out over 11,000 stores, when it became embarassingly obvious that it could neither maintain accurate counts or tell the difference between different types of milk as well as plain old human employees could.
...what we used to refer to as the GIGO ("garbage in - garbage out") principle. It applies to AI as well.
AI usage has become a bit of a witch-hunt
I posted some of my 3d art (which ya'll have seen in the gallery here) on an art site and I was accused of that being AI art ...their justification for that was because my avatar on that site was an AI rendition of me at work.
It seems that there are many accusations of AI are made out of simply not knowing what other technologies can do, and it can get nasty.
We are not allowed to use ai for products. That is a simple clear rule at daz. That means not in the product and not in the promos.
if daz uses it in the store for design elements or in newsletters for design elements, thats up to them. But as long as the products are clean then thats what matters.
My reasoning for avoiding AI is very simple. I do not wish to be involved in any way with the theft of original artwork (which includes 3d) or written work. The only way I can ensure that is by not using AI myself, and not knowingly purchasing or downloading other's AI items. That I don't like the weight the planet is bearing from AI is something that came after my original reason.
@Lorraine I agree.
@RawArt We're at the point where people are going to assume a lot of what they see is AI or AI infected and not care about the truth of it. And re: rules: People lie, people cheat. It's part of the human condition. Not to mention, AI tools are becoming ubiquitous. It's becoming harder to avoid them when they're built into more and more software packages.
I don't think a long-winded explanation is appropriate, so I'll just tell you a story that's both somewhat funny and somewhat pathetic.
When AI-generated images first became popular, the works of a painter with a distinctive style were used to feed AI, resulting in most AI images adopting that style for the next few years. The artist's unique style became the kind of AI-generated image that everyone grew tired of...
Friends! A good weekend to you all. Hopefully you're getting some respite from the sweltering heat.
This is turning out to be a summer of discontent, and here in the Daz Forums the topic of contention has been about generative AI in 3D art, specificially in Daz products, and more generally as it touches other parts of our lives. The AI genie is out. The AI horse has bolted the barn. Change of this sort and scale is discombobulating and upsetting.
It appears that everyone has a staked out some sort of polarized view about generative AI. As a dumb engineer with rudimentary "art" cred, I don't have anything new to contribute. But I do want to ask you, friends, to keep the disucssion civil.
Now, seeing that we all come from different walks of life, different cultures -- even different parts of the world -- we can quibble about the meaning of civility. But the Daz mods have made it clear. Case in point (from another heated AI discussion in the Daz Forum) ...
When this thread started, I was hopeful that we could talk about generative AI in a productive way. It did in the first few posts. Then, somewhere down the line, the views took a moralizing turn, even cynical. Let's keep in mind that everyone's experience of generative AI varies. As such, the truth is up for grabs. If it helps, please re-read that old fable about the Blind Men and the Elephant.
That's all I've got. Stay cool, physically and metaphorically.
Cheers!
@csaa Since this is your first visit to this thread, what are you even talking about? This is not a discussion of generative AI. This is praise for a feature introduced on Renderosity. There is some deviation from the core due to Daz people having their views on AI in Daz products. And that's really it.
I was originally opposed to AI generated imagery, and while a lot of it is not great, I'm finding more uses for it. However, I agree with the idea that no AI should be used in product promos. These promos should focus on what the buyer is getting, not AI image enhancements. I've seem some product promos elsewhere where more of the images were AI than not. Nope, won't buy.
An alternative for stores like Daz might be to require several promo images with each submission with zero postwork of any kind, in addition to other promo images. That way, everyone can see what the native renders look like, which would allow the talented PA's work to shine.
+1
Thank you. That was exactly my point when I started this topic -- I like the notification on Renderosity as to the AI status and content, which then allows you to decide whether you want the product or not an act accordingly.
we could avoid the witch hunts - at least in this corner of the web - by labelling AI products and be transparent about it. so I'd be all for this feature, that Renderosity and Renderhub both already have.
The thing is, where does "AI Products" start?
Isn't using scripted enhancement procedures in GIMP/Photoshop/etc not already "use of AI"? Using a spellchecker on a products description - AI or not? Using AI to make a background, using only material - pottery, paintings etc - that has been made by me, by hand - photographed and then transferred into a useable format (.jpg/.png/etc) by using a script and then used to train the AI so it uses only these things in it's differrent attempts to generate a background picture, fitting my description of my idea, to produce something that can be sold to be used by others - AI?
Details usually matter. Imho they matter quite a lot, when talking about AI, as many people don't even recognize how much AI they already have been using for totally mundane things for quite a few years already.
Yes, products that are to be sold should be marked when AI was used for their production. But also the type of AI processes that were used should be mentioned, as using AI not automatically means "art was stolen to make this"
And coming up with a short list of what was done by AI for a product probably could be done with AI quite easily
exactly...AI is being built into so many graphic filters now, so even if you apply an effect filter over your artwork, it now can be labeled as "an ai image" so all the work you did is now written off as simply AI
There are no built-in AI filters in GIMP.
The LibreOffice spell checker uses no AI.
It is quite easy to avoid AI in a finished product. For now. But I'm sure most open source products, like GIMP and LibreOffice will always include non-AI options.
And I find your example that starts "if I train an AI" and asking if that's AI laughable. Of course it is. You said as much.
I will answer based on the topic, stay on topic, and not discuss other parts. Of course, Firstly, since it's not allowed here, there's no need to indicate it.
As for the other store, I'm not familiar with the detailed regulations. I've seen two kinds of signs. The first is "AI was used in the creation of this product." and the second is "AI was used in the creation of this product and its promotional content." These products are mostly easy to identify. At first glance, they are very exquisite and amazing, but upon closer inspection (it's easy to find that they are actually very rough, and the styles are very similar. So, the so-called "AI was used in the creation of this product" probably means that artificial intelligence was used to directly generate 3D models.
Clear labeling is good because customers have the right to choose, regardless of their purpose. But that's not enough. What if the product only uses AI images as textures? Or only uses AI to optimize the number of polygons? Or uses AI-generated models but re-topologizes them? Or even only uses them for early 2D creative brainstorming? Which one will make consumers think "I don't want to buy it"? This needs to be written in more detail. For example, there are dozens of vegetarian meals on airplanes, each with its own reasons, so it's impossible to generalize.
I have an example. If, using a currently and openly available AI LLM, I tell it to access my computer, open Daz Studio, and accessing character model A, clothing set B, pose C, lighting set D, and generate a scene and render it and generate a gallery or promo image? What category should that fall into? This is possible to do in today's world.
Also, how could that possibly be detected or enforced against an absolute No AI rule? I don't want AI used with promo's in particular.
I think is that it's much better to try and compromise with helping create positive incentives and culture with being open about where and when AI is used. That is really the only way to try and control it.