Just as I hit the Post Reply button, what do I see two post above mine...thanks Tammy ;o) Still going to have a sleep... Cheers

What is "macro" as a genre????

I believe that someone above mentioned a "mythological" category, and I'm of the opinion that it's definitely needed, there are many who do mythological images ... my latest of Bastet for instance, does not necessarily fit into the "spiritual/religious" category, although some may argue that point, but it certainly does not belong in fantasy. This has GOT to be a very difficult list to create and refine, but I think it's a wonderful beginning and can only get better over time. Thanks!

Hmmm what about the pictures that WERE in one of the merged categories? Are they reassigned or will we have to do that by ourselves?

bevchiron, thank you! It was doubtful I'd use it since I didn't know what it was but I was curious. I'm a budget analyst. Macro to me is something I use in spreadsheets.

Macro is a photographic genre dialyn, close up shots taken with a macro lens.

Definitely different from what I was thinking. :)

Hmmm, wonder if we should name Macro/Close-ups? The images in a genre that were merged into another genre were automatically moved. You do not have to recategorize. :) mythology added.

Not to sound too shortsighted, but I hope now that there is a mythological section that Creatures won't be merged into it, or it will defeat the purpose that was mentioned above. just my 2c again. I think I need more change. ANyone have change for a buck?

Sorry, I'm all out of doe. <<>> Bad on me.

we had not planned on merging creatures into mythology.

Ack! I'd gotten most of my images sorted into Illustration, only to find the new Story category today. Gack. Uh. Heck with it, they'll stay put. :)

Thanks Tammy and you all are doing a great job in sorting this out...

It's definitely a cool idea. I wasted several hours this morning going through the categories, and I love being able to see all apps in a single genre.

I just read through and saw that some are looking for a 'Pure Poser' gallery. This makes no sense. That's like someone asking specifically for a 'No. 2 Pencil' gallery pecause all they use is a No. 2 pencil for drawing and tough luck to anyone using a No.2 and an HB pencil. Besides, the only 'pure' Poser image is one rendered with Poser straight out of the box. The moment you download a prop, character or texture and use it, you no longer have a 'pure' Poser. Especially since other 3D and 2D apps were used to make props and textures. In other words, mixed media. Poser is the tool you use to create an image. Do you want to showcase your image or the software? That's why I think the galleries should not be based on the software used but focus on the artwork and talent of the community. As long as we have the capability to search for the type of images we prefer, there should be no problems.

remo, that's not quite true. I get your point but I don't think it's a valid comparison. ONE of the ideas of the galleries is to show what you can do with a program. If newcomers go into the Poser gallery, they may think that all those heavily postworked Poser images were made with only Poser, and they would therefore think they had no idea of how to use the program, since their renderings didn't look that way. On the other hand, I can be amazed to see some of the pictures that are created solely INSIDE Poser. And that's the point. Not whether you have downloaded Victoria and some clothes for her or not, but whether you have RENDERED the image like that or not. I render my images in Poser, mainly becourse I'm too lazy/impatient to bring them to another program, but also becourse I like the Poser 4 renderer. Believe it or not. I DO often postwork my images to some extent, mainly in Photoshop, and for the most parts it is things like retouching a joint or altering the lights. I suck with Poser's lights. But I suck with the lights in ANY program L so rendering it somewhere else wouldn't help anyway. I am one of those who would welcome a "pure" category. Not just for Poser but a general Pure category. Use it to show what you can do INSIDE that particular program.

This may be a silly idea, but what if the artist just wrote, "100% pure; no postwork." Or whatever. When I look at graphics, I'm looking at what interests me first and what it was done with second. But that's just me.

Dialyn, a lot of people DO that :o) But you can't use that as a search criteria, and that's the point. As well as you might want to look at only faerie pictures, you might also want to look at "pure" pictures. Ah well, no big issue. But since we ARE making wishes.... :o)

Dialyn, Remo - even if we had a keyword search capability there would still be NO way for people to sort for Pure Poser because it includes the term Poser and would just result in a list of ALL images. I don't know why people are campaigning so hard against such a gallery. It is beginning to look like maybe they fear such a category or just don't want people to have it for some selfish reason - they have never made any sensible argument, just no, no, no because they don't want it... WHY? Why not have a category that actually helps many people find what they want to find and to exclude things they don't care to see. Does having such a category harm anybody or restrict anybody in any way? - Then why are some so vocal against it????

Nothing wrong with tossing around ideas. This seems to be a good time to do it since things are changing around anyway. :)

Ronstuff, I'm not campaigning against it. I don't care. I do 100% rendering in Poser but I'm not sticking my graphics in the 100% pure gallery because I happen to think the subject of my graphics is more important (to me, not to anyone else) than the purity issue. To you it is visa versa...how you do the graphics obviously have a higher priority that what your graphic is about. It doesn't matter to me...there's no right and no wrong to it....just a difference of opinion. I can disagree with you without having anything in my mind other then trying to think through the pros and cons of the issues involved. It's meaningless because I don't have a vote and what I think has zero impact on what the administrator's decide to do. And that's fine with me. And whether you believe me or not doesn't matter to me in the least. As soon as I send this message, you're gone out of my mind. I'm done. This is a molehill and I'm not watching it turn into a flaming mountain when there is no reason for it to do so. Do what you want. Life is too short to get mad about something like this. And I refuse to get angry about it. Poof....I'm gone. Have a lovely life.

ron.. ask yourself this what is important. the program or the art? if you answer the program.... then you are really thinking Snob. Kai

Ronstuff, I am not against anything, either. I don't fear anything and my motives are not selfish. And I am not campaigning against it. I just like things to make sense to me. I would rather see ONE gallery based on the talent of the artists in the community with options for the artist to include the tool(s) they used in the description. To me, the art is more important, NOT the tools I used to make it. The tools should not be the main focus. Like dialyn said, we have different perspectives. And like dialyn, I'm done with this subject as well. Peace

Kai - The answer is BOTH. There are valid reasons for galleries in a community like this which are about art - there are also valid reasons for galleries which feature technique and skill, and yes, even the software. This is as much a technical community as it is an artistic one. The problem seems to be that the ARTISTS are the snobs who don't see anything except what their narrow definition of whatever they THINK "Art" is. There are many categories in the genre list which I will never use, but I don't feel the need to tell other people that those categories are useless. My question, again is, why do people with your mentality try to tell me what is useful and what is not just because your needs or desires differ from mine?. I really want to know. What are you afraid of? What's the big deal? Why do YOUR needs superceede MINE? What's wrong with co-existence? All I want is ONE little category to help me find the kind of image I wish to view (and I am NOT alone in this). Why does this threaten YOU (and aparently some others as well) to the point that you resort to insult to make your point? Peace? Looks more like "Hit and run" to me. Keep smilin' :-)

'Why does this threaten YOU (and aparently some others as well) to the point that you resort to insult to make your point?' erm... I'm not insulting anyone

"... then you are really thinking Snob" No insult intended, I'm sure...

no Ron.. None at all I can get insulting if you want tho? if so, just IM me and we'll go for it :) but I meant Snob as Program Snob Eg - Max is better than XX cos it costs so much type snob please.. check the Context before accusing someone of insulting you :) you may get a suprise :)

Oh thankyou! Before going to put my cuckoo clock under the new 'object' category, I thought I'd to stop by to say my BIG THANK YOU to everyone who's working to make this place better! I appreciate it very much, and this possibility of sorting picture by genre and keep the sorting by software... I think it a big improvement... Thank you again!

I'm not fighting against your idea at all of searching out Pure Poser images. I just don't agree that a gallery is how to do it, for reasons mentioned above. Also dialyn's point about not putting a 100% Poser image in a gallery labeled Pure Poser is valid, because it's almost like punishing the artists on views by banishing them to this gallery. By having a searchable flag, they can still stay in the main gallery, which is their right to do, and bu checking that flag, those that want to seek out Pure Poser images can find them as well without the nonpure Poser images showing up. Thus picking up more views instead of less. Course how difficult or whether Rosity would do that only tammy and gang could say. I'm just suggesting a method by which everyone could be happy, including the other galleries that have the same problem since a pure flag would work for them too.

I'm out of change now, so I better go...
ShadowWind

PS: I misquoted dialyn's reason for not posting in the Pure Poser gallery. My bad and I apologize. However, I think deep down there will be a lot of people that will feel that way. I still remember the argument about Product Showcase...

"I find it so strange that this whole community, galleries, forums, marketplace.. all of it is focused on Poser,....." "As far as the argument for "Pure Bryce" or "Pure Vue" - I don't see why they would want it, they ALREADY HAVE the Poser gallery to call their own." B.S. I for one almost never post anything in the Poser gallery, even when the main subject of the picture is a Poser figure. I always use Bryce to set up my scenes, because while it takes me anywhere from 40 to 200 hours to build a scene in Bryce, building the same scene in Poser would be literally Impossible. There is no way in HELL I'd EVER try to build a really complex scene in Poser, it simply is NOT suited to it. IF "everybody" was using the Poser gallery as you insist, the Bryce and other galleries wouldn't have the tens of thousands of pictures that are in them. I agree with what was said above: if you want "Pure" Poser, then that means absolutely NO objects, textures or anything else made in ANY other program and imported to Poser in any way, or face it - it just is NOT "Pure". You say there is not snobbery, but your tone of looking down on everyone who does not do it exactly the way you do is crystal clear. If you want to have your "pure" classification as one of the sort criteria, I see nothing wrong with it, but don't be putting down others just because they don't follow your lead.

I think we all have done a good job working together, providing feedback and making changes. Please be respectful of others opinions. I see the Pure Poser Gallery issue getting heated. This thread is about the genres and not the pure poser. Please take the pure poser issue to community improvement forum for discussion. thanks tammy

Right, Tammy, I didn't mean to start a debate but I would still respectfully request that some thought be given to a mechanism for locating "poser renders without postwork" - I regret ever using the word "Pure" as it seems to strike a nerve with some people.

Yikes, this will take a long time... ! sigh I did three... and also went back to make sure I could see my "animals" in the Vue gallery... well.. okay.. will work on it little by little... wish there was a way to do them all at once! Lyne

Thanks ron. I think this is something that we could put on our list and discuss. I am not talking about launching a pure poser gallery but how to search for those. thanks Lyne, if you have lots of images yes it could take a while, but will be worth getting them categorized since members will be able to find those images of interest. thanks tammy

I click edit next to the picture. I go in, and scroll down, and change the genre to one appropriate. Later, I go back to the galleries, and search for that genre. I search through the entire depth of the genre list, and it's not there. I've tried deleting my temp files, hitting refresh, even waiting a day or two. Can someone help?

Maybe it's a little silly, but did you hit 'upload before leaving? (if I dare suggest such a simple thing, it's just because I tried adding genres to mine four times before realizing it)

I did. Every time. Nada.

When I have to edit things for my gallery, I right click on the Edit link and open it in a new window. I do my changes, hit upload, and then close the window. This way, I still have my entire gallery showing instead of being bumped to the main gallery. Cheers!

Valandar, if the pictures are more than 14 days (?) old, they do not currently show up in the categories. They're working on it. At least that's how I understood it :o)

Some graphics that don't show up as "What's new" kind of sort of show up if you hit "Most Viewed" or one of the other tabs. ernyoka1 is right, though, I think they are working on it so you can see older graphics. They date from your first upload of the graphic...not when you change categories.

The What's new section on all areas only shows the last 30 days uploaded. Your upload date stays the same as when you uploaded and just moves the image to the appropriate genre. We may open the what's new up once we get all the options for the gallery available but right now it is too much on the database. You are listed when i check for poser/humor - most viewed, most commented, etc. You don't show up in the what's new because the upload was Aug 6th, 2002. thanks tammy

I have some pictures that are undersea scenes, but there is no suitable category for them (nautical is about 'boats' after all), nor for that matter is there any category for subterranean scenes. ALso, I'm not too sure about the Nature/Landscape category. What if one (as I have) makes landscapes that contain a good number of buildngs? That's certainly not a "nature" pic, and I don't think it should be forced into the "architecture" category when it's really a landscape [with] buildings. If nature and landscape were separate, there'd be no confusion, IMHO.

I'd also like to see a "Undersea" catagory, as I do quite a bit of fantasy/underwater rendering. The fantasy realm is quite large, how about a "High Fantasy" catagory? Those having to do with other worlds and races.

I have renamed nautical to be Sea/Undersea. I think there would be confusion if I separated nature and landscape....maybe we need to think harder for a category that could in corporate buildings? What about City? or Buildings? Would any of these fit? Judith at this time we are asking for all fantasy images to go into fantasy. This could change over time as the genres grow. thanks tammy

Would building be confused with architecture? Would City be appropriate for villages, small towns, cottages? I've not a clue what the answer is. I'm glad I don't have your job.

yeah, you are right, dialyn. i need to think more on this one.

How about somthing along this line as a concept? Some people like to do landscapes that are focused on the 'nature' side, and others like to do ones that have a lot more structures, but are still really landscapes - like several of mine. 2 categories ought to do it: Landscape/Nature Landscape/Buildings ( I do realize, however, that we need to exercise good sense here and not get too carried away asking for genres.)

I think there must be another term we can use. We are trying not to list genres with the same name. Anyone have any ideas?

When I try to sort by "Random" in the Story genre, it says there are 15 graphics but shows none of them. Is this a blip? Because my graphics aren't "new" and don't have comments, there aren't very many ways to view them, so it was disappointing to find the Random sort didn't work.