Hi guys,
in the company I work for (that produce goods, not services or CG) we have to add a label to our graphic elements that indicates that the image is AI generated or modified (obviously when AI is used).
So, thinking to what is posted here or in any other image gallery, in case the rendered image is used a base for AI detailing or retouching, do you know if the same regulation must be applied?
Curious to hear others’ thoughts on this. My take is that applying AI disclosure rules to CGI product renders misses the actual spirit of the legislation.
-
Intent vs. Reality: These rules are meant to curb deception, misinformation, and “deepfakes” mimicking real-world events. Renders are already synthetic visualizations of items that may not even exist yet; adding AI upscaling or touch-ups is totally different from faking a real photo - which in itself what a product render or Achviz image is already trying to do.
-
The “What is AI?” Problem: AI is baked into standard tools now (denoising, content-aware fill, upscaling). If I use V-Ray’s AI denoiser or Photoshop to extend a background by 5%, does that make it an “AI image”?
-
The Real Distinction: It shouldn’t be about whether AI touched the workflow, but whether AI materially created the content or could deceive viewers into thinking it’s a real photo.
That said, I totally get why some companies just slap a blanket disclosure on everything as it saves them from trying to define where the line is.
There are legal distinctions between what is considered an assistive or standard part of the editing process. It does get complicated - if you used an AI generated model inside of your image this would have to be declared - but if you used an AI generated texture somewhere, does it need to be? I don’t think anybody knows the answers yet.