I am waiting on a render to finish so I wandered off to see what's new when I noticed this message above the poser gallery:

"This gallery is primarily for images rendered within Poser itself. Images of Poser figures rendered in other applications are still welcome, but what's the challenge in that? See how well you can do using it's basic rendering tools!"

Now...first off I been online for..well forever..and I know words can easely be misunderstood when you cant see the face they are coming from.
So...I'm happy..I'm smiling..the sun is shining..life is good :)

On to the question..

I am an artist..on and off the screen...I use many 'tools' to finally achieve the artwork I want to make.
Making a challenge to do art in poser is fine but its gallery should not be bound by the limits of the application.
A gallery is to display art...period.
Now..due to the many applications I can see why there are galleries for each application...but I for one use more then one application to make my work..I like to make my meshes in cinema4D...pose the characters in poser and build the scene and render it in bryce..then there is postwork in photoshop...why?..because non of the applications on their own can do what I want for final result.
Poser has limits..so why stick to poser if it cant do what you want?..because its a challenge?..I dont think so...I make art..and I do so in all the freedom I can get my hands on..with all the tools I have at my disposal.
Making fine art on canvas with a huge brush would be a challenge but also a tad stupid wouldnt it? :P
So...to make this long and boring story even longer...where am I suppose to display my work?...in poser gallery? cus it has victoria in it?..or in bryce gallery because I rendered it in bryce?

I think you're looking at it a little wrong... Poser's limitations don't suit you, so it doesn't suit you. Some people don't like water colors, some don't like inks. If you render in Bryce, then that's great and I'd argue that your picture is suitable for both galleries. And like you said, I'm smiling as I say this. I don't mean you're wrong, just offering a different point of view.

If you're worried about all the different tools you used, try the Mixed Medium gallery. :)

Well the real question ofcourse was where to put my artwork. I just dont get the 'challenge' thing..if I wanted a challenge I would enter the poser monthly challenge contest. It seems odd to put a restriction up like that..would be the same as an offline gallery would say you can display your work here but you can only use oilpaint.

Well, you know, you're focusing on something that most of the rest of us rather ignore. You find a lot of mixed medium in the Poser gallery because it gets more traffic. I don't think it is a restriction that actually restricts anyone...it is sort of a guideline but no one comes and kicks out graphics because they aren't 100% Poser.

I think the intent refers to limitation of Poser like true reflections (prior to Poser 5). People have made images with mirrors or polished floors, but worked within Poser to acheive their reflections, rather than going to Bryce for their final render. I see plenty of renders in the Poser gallery with Bryce terrain and skies, or rendered elsewhere to get volumetric lights, etc. No problem. it's still art. No harm, no foul. I think someone once said there are two types of Poser users: the artists, and the engineers. It was liekly an engineer who made that stipulation }-)

Yeah, and this type of discussion seems to come up about every three months. Postwork, different apps, etc.

In all frankness, there is no prohibition. It says "Poser figures rendered in other applications are still welcome". Of course, it seems to scoff at you for doing so but, hey, to heck with them.

As to the other suggestion above, I would guess, by strict guidelines alone, 75% of what appears in the galleries should be in the Mixed Medium Gallery since multiple apps were used to create the final product (BTW, making THAT the biggest gallery here instead of Poser)

  ![turkey.gif](http://www.chuck-n-michelle.net/images/turkey.gif)   Sure, you can strive to fly with the eagles but turkeys don't get sucked into jet engines.

I've seen graphics in the Poser gallery that said they were made 100% in Bryce. Made me go, "huh" but they are still there. Oh well. As you say, no harm. I'd add a category for hobbyist, though. I'm not an artist and I'm not an engineer. Needs to be a category for the non-artistic and non-technical types (yes, I know there are people who would like to kick my kind out but we are still there nonetheless).

If a picture has Poser figures in it, then at least some of the work had to be done in Poser, so is it really important what program is used to render it. I don't think I can create the realistic outdoor scene I can in Vue 4, so I like to export to view. Although P5 Firefly Rendering Engine is excellent, I still have trouble with Poser's antiquated lights, the lights in Vue often time can light even an indoor scene much better than Poser's. Poser lacks point lights, which is still a big disapointment to me. The gallery is a place where Poser artists can display their best work, if their best work requires multiple apps I don't think renders outside of Poser should be frowned upon.

It's not frowning on them. It's simply saying that if you can do it 100% in Poser, then, hey, go for it. I dont do much postwork myself because I like what I get using just Poser, but thats just me. I like seeing what I can get out of just the application instead of saying, gee, I have to go here to do this or that. Its all in the experimenting. But if you cant, its no big deal.

I say, put it wherever you want. :-)

I like the suggestion that the submissions to the Poser gallery be images that only make use of Poser. This makes the newcomer aware of what can be done strictly in Poser. It becomes overwhelming when you see a great piece, and don't know how much of it's greatness comes out of Poser. Overwhelming because as a newcomer you wonder "Wow--does this mean I'm going to have to learn all this OTHER software as well in order to make as great an image as this one??" Still, I'm grateful for all the Poser gallery posters who ignore the suggestion.

I pay the opening words no mind-- sometimes I've actually done something with no-post, but usually my object is the best i can do-- that means with all my tools. The only problem I have with posting rendered in Bryce or Vue or Carrara or Max, is if they don't tell us. I don't want to think some effect is possible in Poser that is not. Just please tell us if you rendered elsewhere or you posted a background--which is what I usually do, since I'm sick of the pixelation Poser throws on everything, Including the cyclorama! Emily

I do render in Poser, because I have nothing else to render in, but I often do generally minor postwork in Paint Shop Pro because ... well, just because, so I'm never sure at what point my minor postwork becomes enough to qualify my graphic as a mixed medium graphic. I was happiest in the beginner's forum because that had to do with my lack of experience and I didn't have to make the software decision. I feel, often, I should have stayed there.

to me, it is whatever is the FOCAL point of the picture. (and, yes, i do post to the other galleries, when i am not using a poser figure as the "theme" of the picture.)i generally produce a better render, if i use bryce...crisper, with much better lighting. still, other times, i want the look that poser's renderer gives me...sometimes it just "works". with this new vicki 3, i find that trying to render her in bryce washes out the eyes. does anyone have a clue to give me on how to avoid that.... these are eye cuts from renders of the same character. the two sets of eyes on the top are from bryce renders. the two on the bottom are from poser. does anyone have a clue as to why bryce fades vicki3's eyes that way? my older vickis have worked fine.

The main thing in my mind is that if you really want critical technical comments, then people should be told what programs you are working with up front. At least for me, I don't bother to make technical comments on many renders that interest me aesthetically when I am not sure what "equiptment" the artist was working with. I may want to say "terrific that you were able to do that in poser" or ask "how did you do that in poser?" but if I am not sure that it was done in poser I will not comment. I might want to say an artist might change such and such, but personally I can't bring myself to do that if I am not sure that change that might be possible with a particular set of programs is possible with the mystery programs that the artist used. So for me the division of galleries according to programs is not to restrict anyone, but to start to provide information that facilitates helpful suggestions in a community that is working with computer programs. If that were not the case then why not just have galleries for flowers, people, architecture, etc.?