As looking through them again it appealed maybe a bit too sexualy orientated.

So, would you be offended by those poses ??

i think its fine they arnt touching eachothers privates

I'm not, I see nothing wrong with them, infact They are downright tastefull, and I admire Royo's work.

Not offensive to me at all. Dunno about others, but like she said, they're not touching anything private, so I wouldn't think it'd be against TOS. Those poses are awesome, by the way.

Lovely. Now, how about some equally awesome Mike/Mike poses? After all, we wouldn't want to have to call you a sexist pig, would we? :-)

well - galactron - those are not poses from Royo-images - it's just trying to copy this Fantasy-style. I wouldn't tell where I got the preview-images from or - JoeyAristophanes - you'll call me a sexist pig ;o) Hmmm - Mike/Mike poses - OK - noticed ...

I think those are beautiful, sensual and evocative poses, but no, I don't think they violate the TOS.

Take the hair off the green-skinned one and you could always say the human was posing with a statue and push the TOS to the limit ;D

Hey, Eric, just doing my part in the interest of sexual equality. :-)

I don't see anything there that would violate TOS. Kev.

The TOS says: No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing and JewelDragon says: i think its fine they arnt touching eachothers privates And these two thoughts are filling me with the rebellious urge to have a Vicki sitting in an ornate throne carved in the exact shape of a marble Mike.

Schlabber, None of those poses so far break TOS. And your work, as usual, is excellent grin I really like the top middle and bottom right poses. I second the motion for m/m poses. Ummm ...and 3 person poses if you're feeling adventurous Lyrra

Beautiful, sensuous, and mildly erotic. Using them will guarantee at least 500 hits from the adolescent boy crowd, without violating the TOS. I do agree about the m/m poses. Not just sensual stuff, but buddy or other interaction. Other than one "Buddy" pose set, I've seen nothing really (except for some gay porn poses, and those would DEFINITLY violate the TOS - grin). Are these going to be part of your second for-sale package?

They don't remind me of Royo at all, but it looks like a borderline case of something that could get Renderosity in trouble with local legal authorities, so I'd take it to Renderotica to be safe. Why risk violating whatever obscenity laws they have in Tennessee just to prove a point? There are still plenty of places you can post these, no questions asked.

If these are a violation of TOSs then I'm going to the museum and paint clothes on all those vulger paintings in there! ;D (isn't Tennessee where they make cows wear pants?)

Oh..those are lovely.

I think the problem is.... ART is subjective. The TOS is a response to parents who do not want their kids to come here and see T&A and has nothing to do with art. The current ToS has to do with parents not art. I have 5 computers networked throughout the house and not ONCE has my visiting nephews or nieces (4yrs to 17yrs) gone out on the internet without an adult supervising. Why? because my husband and I take the time to control their internet experience so their parents (our siblings) don't kill us! We know the rules, they know the rules and the rules are enforced in our home just as they are at their homes. But now that I vented my frustration with fools who need to be babysat....... [not very pc am I?] I think the poses and character templates are inventive, remind me of BallRoom Dancing, and worthy to be shown; and dead glad they are not NVIATs! Renderosity's ToS folks should tell parents to guard their own children... OOOppps started ranting again. Sorry; NOT!

Schlabber, you've done it again! Where and when can these be found?

They're fantastic Schlabber

Schlabber- well done- most excellent- keep it up cruzan- dead on- your one hundred percent correct- cheers :) geo

The top right picture could be debated because you can't tell where the green woman's head is, or what she's doing back there ... ;-) These are erotic, not pornographic. You can tell what is going on but it's not blatant. There's also tenderness implied, not just lust and/or power.

They're dancing right? ;) Nice job.

Dancing!! Yes....that's exactly what I thought when I saw them!! I figured that woman in the top picture was just checking for "cooties"! :) Seriously....I think they're fine. I've certainly seen things a lot more provocative than these. Love the textures btw! :)

Now - to answer bit by bit: mateo_sancarlos: Yes, sure - Royo normally doesn't do Woman-Woman-images. For the borderline-case: That's why I'm asking here :o) - 'cause this isn't really Renderotica-content (well, of course too - but as this is supposed to be in a pose-pack I would like to have it here at Renderosity) cruzan: You're right. I tried to be as carefull as it was possible by posting this. If I would have children I would do it the same way you do. Kattman: It'll be part of the Fantasy-pose-package 3 (1+2 are done so far but not released) - but as this will be a product I won't advertise here

They're a nice start, Eric, but they're not quite on the same "Let's get down, hootchie mama! Show me them Headlights o' Love!" level as the V/V poses. :)

lol - Joey :o) I didn't want to make Gay-poses (grin) And it goes quickly there when I try to do the same with Mike then with Vicky ;o) and then - well, V3 is somehow looking better than Michael 2 ... Is this because I'm male (giggle) ??

oh - before I forget it - the first name's Egon ;o) Well - for my artist name - the real name is even more strange ...

V3 better looking than M2? Definitely open for debate. :)

they look like they could do some really cool dreamscape poses

o hun i like them all very nice