exactly antevark. It doesn't seem logical to remove a system that's already working And it doesn't seem logical to keep one that isn't.

Which system isn't working? In your words, Grim, "I think this is news to a lot - if not most - of us." And why are you spending so much energy arguing with me when you should be out campaigning for a new PS gallery?

Cambert, when Gim sed "I think this is news to a lot - if not most - of us, " he was talking about the mod crisis. DO NOT TRY TO TWIST OUR WORDS. And we are arguing for a new PS gallery, u just seem to be the only person who violently opposed for some reason, now. Don't brush the argument aside. First you completly misunderstand the qustion, then u change the subject. Answer us why ur so opposed to this, and answer our arguments with a counter-argument, NOT a change of subject.

Excuse the misspellings I'm just very angry right now.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12357&Form.ShowMessage=1120701&Reply=1122776#89

Remo posted what seems like a sensible suggestion for everyone (not just the Photoshop users but for other software users who also don't have galleries of their own). Probably wouldn't satisfy everyone, but there is some common sense in the idea that makes it worth at least thinking about. Or not. Up to you.

Wow, thanks dialyn. I read through the entire thread and was surprised to see my name refered to. I'm glad you like the idea. Think about it people. Why have a gallery devoted to the tools you use? Sould it not be your work and your talent that is showcased in the gallery? Only while working within Poser, Bryce and other 3D apps do you have a 3D environment. When all is said and done and rendered, the end result is a 2D bitmapped image. Thus, my reasoning for one all inclusive gallery. I use Poser, Bryce AND Photoshop. Mostly together but sometimes seperately. They are a means to an end. The end result is what I want people to see. Just my opinion, Peace

Antevark, I'm going to post this in parts because it's pretty long.

I understood that Grim was referring to the 'mod crisis'. As I pointed out, that was his phrase. I don't believe there is a mod crisis, just that the site is short-staffed. The melodrama wasn't mine. I wasn't twisting his words, just quoting them in the context of a question of my own - which has yet to be answered. The simple fact is that I don't get which system Grim thinks isn't working. When
he answers that, I'll be able to address his point.

My post #52 was intended to answer that question, but if you want it spelled out, no I wouldn't be happier with just one 3D gallery. Nor is there any logical equivalence between the number of 3D and 2D galleries.
The simple truth is that this is primarily a 3D site; like it or lump it, that's what it is. It's absurd to suggest that there's any equivalence between the many thousands of 3D images posted and the (comparative) trickle of 2D. The galleries, the forums, the history and the culture of the place are geared toward 3D. That's what it grew out of (the dreaded Poser, which still reigns supreme) and what it remains.
There's more to it, though, than just the history of the site. There's the issue of the prevailing approach. Although R'osity is notionally an art site, I'd argue that most of the time it isn't - it's a software site. Leaving aside the Poser soft porn (another discussion entirely), most of the people who are pushing the limits of the software seem to be doing that for technical reasons, not artistic ones. A case in point: look at the Bryce forum and the fake HDRI work. A number of people are making images that you would swear were photographs. It's genuinely remarkable work. What they're exploring, though, is the technology, not (by and large) artistic expression, at least in the way I would understand it. Look at the Art Theory Forum, created for people to discuss technicalities of composition, the stuff of how art works. That rarely happens, it's mostly about 'the definition of art'. The 2D gallery is where I go to see the highest concentration of artistic talent; where the images originate from ideas, not software specifications. For the record, I'll say that Grim is part of that artistic talent. Against that background, I think you have a good point, but you're making it on the wrong site. There are other sites that are about digital art in general; this one is really about 3D apps in particular.

I will also say that I am not "violently opposed" to a Photoshop gallery. I just don't see the need and I think you're going the wrong way about getting one - I'll come back to that in a moment. If anyone is taking any stance "violently", I'd point out that I'm the one writing long explanations of what I think. You're the one getting so angry that you can barely type. Let's keep the temperature down and see if we can actually achieve something, even if we can't end up agreeing with each other. In the interest of reasoned debate, I'll summarise the arguments I've already made, and add to them. I don't think you've made a strong enough case for a PS gallery because:

• Grim's initial post in this thread refers to other 2D apps as "lesser" and calls them a "hindrance". When you're asking for a favour, it's best to be polite. Maybe the people you're asking this favour of might actually like and use those other 2D apps? If so, you've already shot yourselves in the foot. Also, Grim's post refers repeatedly to forums not galleries, which confuses the issue.
• Many of the members here don't seem to use 2D apps anyway. They just post straight 3D renders. Most of the others use it for post-work on 3D renders - just smoothing out the algorithms. Few of us use it as a primary creative tool, so the constituency for the gallery would be very small. That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a gallery, but it does mean that the pressure to create one won't ever be very strong.
• Following on from the point above, few people have joined this thread and asked for the gallery. Certainly not enough to be considered the equivalent of a parade with banners.
• You and Grim seem to think that other 2D apps asking for their own galleries is part of the solution; I think it's part of the problem. The PTB don't have the resources for a number of new galleries, so they're unlikely to agree to a precedent that might lead to that situation. Even if you're only asking for one gallery, the people who make the decision need to take a longer-term view. Re-read posts 4 and 5 in this thread.
• There are other options available to the PTB which don't involve that kind of precedent, e.g. splitting off digital 2D and traditional materials. And yet, there's no big pressure for them to go even that far.
• One of the mods has already volunteered to add to his own workload by creating a backroom gallery. To institute a full gallery would also involve work by coders, who have long task-lists, and other mods. If I were the PTB, I know which I'd go with.
• A backroom gallery would measure the amount of interest in a PS gallery.

If you can convince me that none of these are problems, you'll have my full support.

Finally, to return to the issue of how to go about getting a PS gallery. You said that you are arguing for a gallery - that wasn't my point. What I said was that you should be campaigning for one, and that's different. Campaigns involve strategy. Can I suggest a few tactics?

• Identify the people in the 2D gallery who use PS as a primary creative tool. IM them, making your case for a gallery clearly and ask for their support. Be polite; don't demand. Don't be rude about other apps. If they decline, say 'thanks for your time' and leave it at that. Keep a list of who you've contacted so that you don't accidentally do it twice.
• Identify forums where people use PS for post-work. IM the moderators of the forums and ask if they would mind you posting a request for support. If they say, no, it's off-topic, thank them and leave it at that.
• IM the moderator of the Virtual Tavern and do the same.
• Post a request for support in the OT forum. Everything's off-topic there - that's the point of the place. And it gets read by more people than this forum.
• Accept Retrocity's kind offer of a backroom gallery. Offer to help.
• Post another request to this forum (or to 'Forum News & Team Contact'). Ask for an undertaking that, if the backroom gallery is a success, the PTB promise that it will be promoted to a top-level gallery. Be clear about the purpose of the gallery - is it a critique gallery? a 'finished work' gallery? Propose some guidelines saying what you think constitutes a 'Photoshop' image. Be clear and realistic about the time-frame you think you'll need to demonstrate success.

If you can prove the demand for the gallery, you'll probably get one. But you will need to prove it because the gallery has been requested and denied before. If you get it, I'll happily come here and declare that you were right and I was wrong. In the meantime, I hope you'll take this post how it's intended - constructive if not necessarily supportive. Peace :-) cam

I think a gentle approach always works best. I didn't like the implication that only Photoshop users can create art and so only users of Photoshop deserve a category of their own. It's not true. It's not fair. It's not the way to get support. I know it made some people angry that a Hobbyist category was developed. I like to point out that people have, for a long time, asked for something for those of us who are not beginners and yet don't consider ourselves artists. We didn't always refer to it as "hobbyist" but it was out there as an idea, but as a request and not a demand. I was as surprised as anyone when it appeared. It is not Poser only. It does, I hope, hold a promise of acceptance for those of us who are not professional artists and yet have moved beyond the basics of whatever software we use. If Poser dominates the category, it is probably because so many people use Poser here to begin with, not because the category itself excludes anyone. Inclusiveness here is important. Most of us use more than one software. It's a fact of life. Some of us place less importance on software pride than being able to create something without being chastised for not using the "right" software. Making fun of Poser is not the way to get what you want. Making fun of Paint Shop Pro is not the way to get what you want. Being respectful of the rights of others is very important. I have said, over and over again, that it is possible to make art with 2D software, and I have a great respect for the people who do. I just think that software doesn't have to be Photoshop. I also think the 3D artists would be lost without the contributions of those who work in 2D...the textures, the postwork, the backgrounds....there is a lot that is done in 2d before and after a 3D graphic is created. And, as remo pointed out, most of 3D graphcis end up being 2D at the end of the game anyway. I think we are in the middle of an evolution. I don't disagree with everything that was said. I think I would have been more supportive if it hadn't been implied that I was somehow a second class citizen for using Poser and Paint Shop Pro. You may not like what I do with the software I have...that's fine...but don't imply that I don't have a right to post just because I don't use the same software you do. I wouldn't have made that accusation of you. We don't have to agree about the important or unimportance of software exclusivity. I think there are ways to get additional attention for the 2D artists....positive ways, ways that show off what Photoshop can do, what Paint Shop Pro can do, etc. without denigrating anyone else. I honestly hope those solutions are explored.

cambert, I agree with a lot of what you just said with the exception of one point: "The simple truth is that this is primarily a 3D site" NOT True. It's true that this site STARTED OUT as a 3D art site. I believe it was the Poser Forum before it was Renderosity. But this site grew and the charter has changed. If you don't agree, just scroll to the top of the page. There it reads "Online Graphic Artist's Community". That description pretty much says it all. There is no distinction made between 3D/2D. This site is open to ALL artists. Darn! I just spent another 2 cents worth. I can't seem to hold on to my money these days. :o) Peace

I agree, remo. 3D, 2D, photography, animation - it's all potentially art. It makes a difference if you think about it that way. :)