Tuttle, the poll is based on the misnomer that this is the issue of whether people who post 3 pics a day are causing the bottleneck. Illusions showed in the spot check, that there is a good possibility that that isn't true. That limiting posts will not solve anything at all. So if that is the case, then why change it? I would revote if I could, but the poll won't let me do that. When I voted, I was under the impression that this was the problem as you presented it, but with the new evidence that has been presented in relation to this issue, it seems that that is not a case. IMO, that makes the poll invalid.

Ecstacy,
A master's gallery is going to do nothing to solve the inflow. If I want to look at a master's gallery, there are plenty of sites to do so. Such a gallery/forum would lead to much more arguments like we see in the Hot20, contests, etc. Why make that distinction? Actually such a gallery is off topic in this thread IMO. There is a critique gallery being discussed in the Ideas Forum at this moment...

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12375&Form.ShowMessage=1223125&Reply=1224440#55

ooops...cross-posted with ShadowWind. Sorry.

"I still think a lot of this has to do more with ego than with art, and this conversation will keep returning no matter what changes are made to the galleries." Amen and a pox on the whole thing. How about a decent search engine for this site instead of the current lame excuse. How about the ability to edit posts in the forums. How about a dozen other things that virtually everyone could agree would be provements. At this rate, people will be debating hanging chads and in the end probably no one will really be happy with the result - even those who started it.

I think there are a number of issues ere that people aren't addressing. Firstly I think that a daily storage limit rather than image limit would be more applicable as the number on poorly compressed images in the gallery is increadable. Limiting the number of images is stunting peoples creativity and will push the creative artists away from r'osity. It would be much better if artists would take the time and effort to optimise their images prior to posting. Also I agree that there are far to many "beta tests" in thee main galleries. If merchants want to show their wares it should not be in the main galleries but in some other area on the site. What is needed is a reethink of what r'osity is about. If there are no artists using the galleries then there will be no customers for the merchants. If there is no trade then there will be no r'osity. end of story. Something has to be done to make people think about they are doing rather than applying some draconian policy which is only going to damage the site and the users of it.

This may seem dumb but I do not know what is my best art. I sometimes work for a month on a model and don't make a really good art rendering of it for a year or two. Other images come to me several in a day and I would really wish I could get up the one I am most interested in only to find that one of the earlier has hit a chord and one more would be excess. The fickleness of the audience keeps variants of images from propagating even when the changes are far from subtle. To be at my most critical I would say one more balloning bulbous breast in whatever image I can pass on but a slightly more conical or ogival or just the right weight will have me examining the magic of genetics and behavior. Just because the great masters painted cadavers does not make them great art nor does the latest product of the plastic surgeons knife inspire my Poser. We should have one breast day and just turn the dials until the subject is exhausted. No limit on variations. You'll still be able to find reality to beat them on any street corner. That said all the other variants will fall in line. White pages and no image showing is annoying but time of day related. I have deleted my images three times. Once I took out all the aircraft after 9-11 and that swept my sites too. Once I took out all the images that did not show or the thumbs did not show. Once I took out all the ladies and weapons. I am ready to proceed.

Let's get to the REAL problem, how about a 2 breast per day limit?(Kidding, I'm kidding, stop the hatemail please...)

I was going to reply again to a few people but to be honest, what's the point. If I were the admins on this site I wouldn't change a thing, no matter what the poll ends up showing. In fact, I actively urge them to scrap this poll completely and LOCK THIS THREAD. That's not to say I don't want the limit changed - I do - but the whinging, hysterical, melodramatic reaction from a small minority just makes the whole thing not worth the bother IMO. I can't believe that something as simple as a poll can be turned into such a bunch of arse. Why can't some people just state their views without resorting to insults and griping and bitching? (and allegations of poll-fixing LOL!!!!) It's like a special needs kindergarten in here. It's clear that the majority of people who voted are in favour of change, but as ever it's the minority who spoil it for the rest, so I'm saying now, 3 images a decade or 333 images a nanosecond - I'm not bothered. Way to go, whatever. But I won't be chucking my toys out of the cot and deleting my gallery, because I'm not 4 years old.

I wrote a long letter regarding this subject and when I tried to post it it did not take. So here is the readers digest version, if it aint broke dont fix it. I like things the way they are. I respect everyone's views, and valid points have been made on both sides of the issue. IMHO I am against almost everything that limits personal personal freedom. Thanks, Tommy

I've kept quiet until now, but my vote is to keep things the way they are. Often I do more than one a day and in defense of others that also do more than one it would be a shame to limit the artist flow and beauty of the work they share. So having said this if as a group we decide to limit the posts that will be ok also, I suppose. However, my Psychiatrist would be the first to tell you I don't do well with change.....

I still think a lot of this has to do more with ego than with art, and this conversation will keep returning no matter what changes are made to the galleries. well, from this standpoint....twould seem to me those who are insistent that they MUST post 3 a day are looking for alot more "ego stroking" than those of us who post 1 a week. I think most are uploading what is, for them, that day, the best they could do. To suggest anything else is snobbery. i was a member here for 8 months before i had the courage to post ANYTHING to the gallery. why? because i felt my skills were not "up to snuff" by some of the standards others were setting back then. but, most newbies don't do that, these days. often, i wonder if the rush to the gallery is just a forethought to the rush to the marketplace. and, just because i disagree with someone's opinion on a certain, given topic does not make me a whiner. for all of you who bandy that term about...think of it....those on the other side of the argument may be viewing you as "whiners", too. the community is not going to fall into catastrophy over this issue...so i see no need to threaten to run away and leave the playground, takin' your toys and all...well, makes me wonder who it really is whose ego needs stroking. yes, i like page views, and comments. anyone who says they don't would just be plain lying. the clue fairy told me that WE ALL DO. otherwise, we'd just print out all our renders and hang 'em in the bathroom, or something. i mean, why post if you don't want your work to be seen? am i the only one who likes to view "all" galleries when i surf, here? how many fractals do i have to thumb through before seeing a render in an app i can relate to? another option would be to be able to select multiple app galleries, and view at the same time. as it is, now, it is amazingly hard to wade through all the submissions in a given day. and, since my interests do not only lie with poser, i find myself having to view separately, or not at all.

There have been a lot of great opinions on this subject and a lot of them very good thoughts. My thoughts are this.. I do consider that when I have 14 or so pages of art up..I may need to do some spring cleaning, but that's up to me. I do this because I worry about Renderosity's space, not because of the quality of my work.. The quality of my work has been improving through the encouragement and the helpful suggestions of my piers here in this artist community. True there are some entering at a more elementary level of art, but that does not decrease it's potential to grow into what the upper crusts consider art. I mean For God Sakes they're sitting behind a desk on their robust arses with no idea how to draw a straight line. Not all..but probably the deciding factor behind those who'll take down our works if this comes to fruition. I'm sort of guilty of that myself.. I don't like prison art or graffitti but that's not to say it isn't art to the beholder.. After all didn't they give an actual gallery time to elephant dung and call it art? So Flake off people.. and just let us do our own spring cleaning.. once a month..or so.

Hi Elfenone, although I'm not really of a mind to contribute further here, I feel I must put you straight and say that this issue has absolutely nothing to do with the removal of gallery images or limiting the size of anybody's gallery in any way at all. Nothing will be deleted, galleries will not be limited, and nobody said they would be.

ROFLMAO, technically that's six Tuttle, you must remove 4 of them at once...Seriously, I'm all for modifying the user options for people to browse certain galleries and screen out others. Also a beta testing gallery would help, if people would use it. But if the servers aren't overloaded I see no reason to further limit posts. Less images will not translate directly to more comments/viewings for the ones that are posted...

What contributes to comments viewings is not the number of images but the quality of them and how many people (for whatever reason) are interested in your art. Changing things will only restrict creativity as people will post to satisfy others tastes and experimentation and going out on a limb will die. Surely art is about pushing the boundries and not about satisfying critics.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable, instead of hurting the users by reducing uploads per day to 1, to rather design a better gallery display system that makes the clutter (which, come on, really isn't as drastically horrible as a lot of people are making it out to be) seem less bothersome?

We had multiple people come to us with a suggestion to improve the site. The suggestion was to cut down the number of pictures uploaded to the galleries. The idea was that fewer pictures would be easier for people to see all of what had been uploaded, people would be choosier on what they uploaded and pictures would be prominently displayed for a longer period. Instead of arbitrarily saying, "Sure" or "No way," the owners decided to get everyone's opinions on such a radical change. There are good reasons for and against the issue, so this thread was set up to allow the Pro and Con arguments to get as much air time as they wanted. Not only do we want everyone's opinions, we want those opinions as informed as possible. If you have other suggestions on site improvements, please feel free to e-mail or IM us. We really do listen to people. (Else this thread and the corresponding poll wouldn't be here.) Cheers! Cres

Well then OK.. where'd I get that impression? My head must be completely clouded with allergy meds.. I'm going back to bed.

People really do love to submit to monopoly but in spite of it they must be weaned from the one supplier idea.

Calvin Coolidge once said, "Why don't we buy just one airplane and let the pilots take turns flying it?" A very practical and pragmatic man with good ideas for saving money. If you put up only one image it also saves on restoration cost in 100 years when all these artists are gone.

I agree with Poppi .. funny she started me thinking of the galleries as they were when I first found them .. let me tell ya THAT was brutal s .. the comments had no frills and were definite critiques.. in fact I do not remember reading an all "great" string of comments on any image .. always there were suggestions for improvements .. some valid .. some not I guess . I was to chicken to post a thing for more than a year .. by the time I did the tone of the gallery had changed a tad, things were not so harsh and I was relieved .. but then it all seemed to swing the other way .. folks were scared to comment at all unless it was totally positive .. works that did not have a lot of thought put into them began to show up frequently .. then the #s began to increase dramatically. I have never understood the need to post anything in a rush , and images for me take a long time. But I know others feel different about it and I can respect that .. what I think is that the 3/day, 7/week limit is a good way to perhaps add a bit of balance?. Personally I would be happy with a 1/ week upload limit .. but like I said I can understand that others can work faster than me. At any rate I think this poll a positive step and I am glad Renderosity set it up.

To be honest I realy wonder how people manage to post three images a day and also be very sure about the artistic need to do so. Anyway if there is any technical reason for limiting the amount of posting, let it be so, do'nt ask, just explain and handle it. Any other reason will be source for endles discusion. On the other hand we all may consider why we participate in RO. No offence I thing its one of the finnest communities and as an artist it gives enough space to show my work and get feedback, but if i go through the imagecomments, and also when look at feedback other artist get, then i realy don't know where it's leading to. Mostly we say "Wow" to eachother and "have a nice day" and that's it. I will ask US to be a litle more critic about the things we see. The poll? doesn't matter what we vote, just pick one, just consider your work (including myself), count to ten, look again at your render and if you'r sertain and realy feel the need, then go for it and show us what's in your mind.

Leave it as it is. That's my two bits.

one a day (tho to be honest i like the limit of 3-4 per week). and no nudity in the thumbnails. and some waffles and a massage too. snickers

I beg to differ Shadow its not off topic it about the gallery upload . And this is the "perfect" platform for just such a topic IMO. As far as the top 20 goes I rarely visit and wonder why its there to begin with. If anything I veiw it as a tool for newbies to learn what can be done with the apps being used to create the art veiwed there. Not that its the top in the galleries but that its who's popular. Ive seen way to many images by passed by the top 20 that blow up when posted elsewhere and actualy bring in revenue. But back to the uploads- Bottlenecks? I dont see how a Pro gallery would interfere with this- They want to limit uploads shadow of images I dont see where anyone reasonable in the least would protest this, but matbe make us a little more competitive and do better and newbies would see this and give more thought to what there putting up there and look alittle harder at there work before posting.... But as you said this is totaly of the subject in your opinion....

thank you, laurie....i am glad someone remembers, and, has roots back in those more critical days. before we even had "the STORE". and, when you finally did post...ya had the worry of someone like, err..Grey...screaming that you stole whatever you were showing off. and, thus, habits come about. i took extreme care with anything i posted...when i finally got up my own nerve. and, i realized that making my own morphs and textures was not so bad....at least, if pulled down in a witch hunt, i could prove they were mine...original. and, thus, Frankenpoppi was born. i still carry the standards/scars from those old days. but, in so many ways, they were interesting and very alive. thank you so much for chiming in. your name is better known than mine. your latest textures are the most wonderful clothing textures i have seen to date. but, even as wonderful as your textures are, i hate to see 12 or 15 images showcasing the fantasy gown and textures. Pop...Pop...Poppi!!! and, ya know what? i really miss those old days.

.

In my case personal vote for that places him an upload per day, this allows that we see but you work, personally for a question of time I am limited to see anything but that 144 works, the slowness of my server, and in certain occasions the great saturation of the page makes that the images take a lot of time in lowering, he would see this way 144 authors and not at 20, I believe that also this makes that we have but time to create. Rodolfo Ciminelli

{Turtle - I know it's easy to miss posts buried deep in this thread, but to post immediately after Crescent warns people about the TOS, with your opinon that most people on Rendo are "dumb and stupid" seems odd to say the least. I think you're confusing freedom with unregulated chaos. Nobody is suggesting crazy things like seperate galleries for religions or smokers (eh?) but I will be suggesting a separate gallery for grouchy old woman without a bra.} I was trying to be funny!!! Not get TOS. I think your remarks to a lot of people are worse than my dumb and stupid, ones. I was just trying to point out that why change something when it works Great just like it is. **** I think we over looking the fact that when people look at Gallery Post for Poser, That shows neat products in Marketplace. I go buy them. Not ever because of product-Showcase. When I see how my fellow Artist use a product that has a much bigger impact than. The maker of the products renders. (Post) I love Ren and the very fact I can have my big gallery and post 3 times a day. Since my gallery is here, I always buy what I can in Marketplace. This is good business for the owners and I dont have to have an outside site. I agree 90% of the comments are always good. I dont know how you change that; it seems to be the trend. Maybe another gallery called critics have a ball. Then if you survive that. Have a Master gallery. But who would judge? We all like different things. And this is what makes the Whole Rendo so unique and special. This is a wonderful site-business, forums, and one stop shop. :O)

OK, I just did a quick test. I went to page 15, 18, and 24 of All Galleries,All Types. These are all from today and I have my page set at 18 thumbs per page. Guess what folks, all you theories about how the shear numbers of uploads giving your work so little time to be viewed and commented on is baloney and you are kidding yourselves with all your nonsence and loft ideas of when a person should feel qualified to post their work here. If you look at the number of members here, cut it by 2/3, you still don't come close to how few members actally post at all. Most people who come here come as viewers and most of them are here for nudes. Oddly enough, if you look at the pages I mention at the settings I mention, you will find people are managing to wade through and look at all the poser nudes. Work that excells also have a lot of hits. Those with seductive or interesting thumbnails get alot of hits. Do the test, then talk. This isn't going to change if we are only allowed one upload a year. If your not getting enough hits to satisfy you, a) improve your work, b) improve your thumbnails, c) if all else fails and you need to see those numbers, start doing poser nudes and show the T&A in the thumbnail. What ever is decided with this poll and all the opinions, the viewers are the same people. The same people and types of art are going to get the hits and the others will still wonder what's wrong with renderosity. Get a clue. I don't care how many post an artist uploads a day. The 3 per day is fine as I said before. I leaves room for diversity in creative process. Considering the number of members 500-600 uploads in a day is a small number relative to membership. as a side issue from this thread - just because it took you a year to get up the nerve to post your work here doesn't mean that formula works for everyone. Some people read the entire manual and a few reference books before they touch a new program, others dive in. It's human nature to be in different places on any spectrum and neither makes a better or worse artist. Stop trying to put rules on what an artist is, that's not what this thread is about.

whowww .. hold on there g .. I was not really suggesting anything .. just kind of pondering history .. I would not want to go back to the days when newbies were too scared to post (like I was, and like Poppi was..) I was just saying that that seemed to be the start of the huge gallery influx. I like that folks are comfortable enough to post here and that it is not as harsh an environment as it was .. mind a happy medium would be great.. maybe well worded and thoughtful critique if the artist wants it, specifically requests it. Look the fact is that the gallery is so big one can not keep up. I use to comment on images frequently .. now I do not even try to keep up and I know I miss a lot of images that I would enjoy. I would like to se a slow down so that I have a chance to see every thing.. but again that's just my opinion.

Maybe if we had a pro gallery it would be judged by the community. Instead of voting it into the top 20 we could vote it into the pro gallery . And it would stay in the pro gallery instead of being slowly illiminated off like the top 20. They were talking about prints being invite only here at rosity. Maybe the same people who invite for prints could detirmine the pro gallery...but that would be an option to vote on...I would hope. And I have to agree with Poppi, I miss the old days too.

Cool :-).. and good point.

I vote against fixing anything that isn't broken. Ditto on Mlevans and Rockets' comments. To the rest of you guys - please understand that there are lots of us who post more than once a day - please don't limit us just cause you post only once a week or once a month. Thanks. Little girl tugs her mother's fingers, "Look up mommy, it's the tallest message thread in the world :)!"

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12375&Form.ShowMessage=1223125

About the discussion re: the tone and tenor of public comments. I have a simple, hopefully useful protocol. In public comments, visible to the entire community, I praise what I like about an image (I often go through an artist's entire gallery to find what I think is his/her best work.) I reserve critical comments for private e-mail or IM. This, hopefully, reinforces what's good (and what the artist does well) and points out areas of improvement without causing embarrassment. It is not true that the only useful, teachable moment is a negative one. That's a thin veil over someone's sadismus. This isn't boot camp, or an addict's intervention. No one here has been given a riding crop and a license to "discipline" bad artists. Nevertheless, a well-phrased suggestion for improvement in private can work wonders without provoking a defensive response. The "Ooooh, excellent!" comment isn't as useful, perhaps, but it is affirming. It's good to have some roses among the brickbats. And to those who go about bashing, armed with their self-righteous aesthetic certainty about "art," remember, as ye give, ye shall receive! :-)

Having just read through ALL this thread (phew!) I've got one more suggestion to add... First off, I'd like to say that personally I don't mind skimming the thumbnails and if I miss an image, the world won't come to an end. The abilities to mark favourite artists and to go to artists galleries are a great help. However, I have fast bandwidth access and I can understand that I might feel differently about this if I was limited to modem speeds. I DO think we need some metrics from the admins to add a bit of light to the heat in this discussion. I suspect that the problem with flooding the galleries is caused by numbers of artsist rather than multiple posts from "offending" artists. But suppose I'm wrong? For those who'd like to limit the number of uploads how about this suggestion... Why not have a filter to let members selectively stop images by other member names? I'm not suggesting I'd use such a filter myself but if you really don't like your bandwidth being gobbled up by someone's thumbnails whom you categorise as an abuser, then block 'em. This can't be criticised as a form of central censorship, only self censorship. If on the other hand, it's the number of artists that are the problem this won't help - but then that would undermine a lot of the arguments that have been made previously :-) P.S. I also like the idea of a "voted" gallery but only if the other galleries continue as they are now.

Ecstacy,
There are several reasons for arguing against a pro or master's gallery (and no it's not on topic as it doesn't relate to the upload gallery limits). However, you've been here long enough to know that competitions where one artist is deemed better than the others always ends up in major arguments. Heck, we can't even take a poll without a major war breaking out.

1> Rosity is a store first and foremost, unlike the other gfx sites. Being that they are a store, there is some degree of customer relations that have to be maintained. You, and many others sell in the store. Do you really intend to diss your customers by creating a master's gallery that they may not be "qualified" to someone's standard to display in? To me, that would be a public relations nightmare for Rosity and would do nothing but hurt sales.

2> By declaring that these are the masters and these aren't, you are basically stripping any artist not deemed worthy to viewing Siberia. As someone mentioned earlier, how would new artists be able to climb through the ranks? Especially if they never get viewed. Honestly, I know a lot of artists that I consider very original, creative, and IMO masters, but they are usually not on the radar when it comes to honors here. We all have different opinions as to what constitutes a master, so...

3> Another argument, one that seems to be most prevalent in competitions, is the techniques used to create an image and that would also cause much contention for such a gallery. Is an image that was completely modeled, but maybe not quite as slick as a perfect pre-bought render be considered masters? Would a handpainted image be considered a masterful work against the perfect render? Is the image a photo manipulation or truly created from scratch? Is a master at a renderer that does no postwork, more valid than one that does? Is the image original or is it another Vicky in a temple, no matter how well constructed the scene is? All these dynamics of the Rosity gallery make it difficult to create such a gallery without pissing off a lot of people. I am not saying that anyone's art, regardless of the technique, is less worthy of being called art. I am merely pointing out the reason competitions usually end badly and why this probably would too.

So why make the distinction, to stroke some egos? We all learn from the mix here and I think it would be a shame to create a class distinction pitting what someone deems the haves and the have nots against eachother.

And that is the reason I would argue the Master's Gallery Ecstacy.

ShadowWind

PS: After reading your comment again Ecstacy, is this about a Master's Gallery or about a place for merchants to put their pics so that they can get more revenue? I'm not understanding why the word revenue was brought into this. So a master is one who brings in money for the site??

I don't believe that Rendo is primarily a store, although I might be wrong. I see it as first a community, second a store that supports that community. As for masters' gallery, I don't see anything wrong in it, and I'd certainly try to get into it if it did exist, but I'm certainly not going to campaign for one (not after all this, anyway). But ShadowWind, I can't agree with your comment "where one artist is deemed better than the others always ends up in major arguments". Perhaps it's because I'm used to the Bryce forum and its monthly challenges, and the occasional cover issue competition, but I find the complete opposite. When somebody wins a comp or gets a magazine cover or a feature, multiple threads spring up congratulating that person. Are you really saying there are that many people who are bitter when they don't win, or when others are placed above them? Hell, I submitted 7 images to raph.com and all were rejected - the best I got was 30% acceptance. Rochr submitted a piece and got in straight away so I posted a thread of congratulation to which loads of people joined in. And I reckon that's the way most people here are, so I really don't share the view that something like a masters' gallery would cause significant problems amongst the real artists. What I WOULD campaign for, however, is something that the people who complain about "egotists" have never mentioned, strangely enough - and that is the optional removal of viewing figures on images. If you want to talk about ego-stroking then this is the ultimate. Personally, if the option existed to remove view information then I'd be the first to use it. The only reason viewing figures are displayed is for people to say "Whoa! Look how great I'm doing! Look at me everyone!" So for those who complain about egos (not targetting just you, ShadowWind) how about tackling the real egotism and getting a viewing figure removal option installed?

...it could even be done so people could see figures on their own images but nobody elses. I reckon something like this would show who the REAL egotists are.

"but nobody elses" = "but nobody elses who has the non-display option set"

I think admin has to set a comfortable level for what the system can handle (available disk space and admin speed in processing incoming) personally I would like 8 uploads a day if the site can handle it. Why not be able to build a store in a day?

Let us see...(Math Lesson)...right now its at 3 per day x 7 days so that will be 21 images per week and that will be cut down to 1 image per day x 7 days? or is that 7 images in one day? I guess it doesn't matter since its 7 images per week. I may be repeating someone's thread, but that is my question. Also, who is this going to benefit? The admins (the landlords) or the members (the tenants)?

7 a week, 3 in a day. This has nothing to do with site bandwidth or space.

In my opinion what's important is diversity. If we looks at last 30 days posting: Poser 5268 fractals 2202 Bryce 1743 photo 1525 terragen 991 All others under 500. More than 1/2 pictures posted is Poser stuff or fractal. I like poser and fractal but sometimes it's too much ;-] philippe

Tuttle,
First of all, I did push awhile back to get rid of the view count limits, but I was too radical and so it pretty much went nowhere. I didn't have the time or the status to really push for it and it was basically something that was a thought.

A master's gallery, to me, is kinda like private cliques in high school where the jocks ruled the school and anyone else, no matter what accomplishments they made, got stuffed in a locker. I don't see this being any different. I know so many artists overlooked for AoM, that I have to wonder what kind of judging there would be for such a gallery. Just from Ecstasy's comments about revenue, sounds to me like some kinda showcase for the store and elite translates to who can buy the most products. Before I get lynched, I buy as much from the store as anyone, maybe more, and I'm not saying there is anything wrong with it, but even I would not consider myself any kind of master artist because I can put together scenes fairly well.

What I would support would be a showcase gallery where each artist could have one new pic a week or month, their best one, that would serve as something that is representative of their art. It would not be voted on, just allowed. This would give all a fair shot of being looked at, would strive for people to be better (but at their own pace and without the frustration), and to maybe lighten the load of finding new artists for the viewers. Such images could also be included on the front page (in rotation) or the latest 7 or something. Now, I can't see how anybody who's not trying to separate their work from the masses would have difficulty with that concept, but I am always surprised...

Okay, maybe one objection. How about only 1 image total and then you can change it once in awhile if you come up with something you think is better.

Another 2c...
ShadowWind

To come back into this - I could look at a lot more images if there was a size limit of 300 Kb say. Still I'd prefer 3 a day total. As to this subtext argument of critiques, I find that after several months when I re-visit an image I know/understand it and know whats wrong/right. Masters/Pro Gallery; just another name for the top 20 unless - caution art term coming - it's juried. Thats what happens to me in the real world, it get juried and excepted or rejected - my friends don't vote. just a couple of thoughts, dragonfly

Bandwidth problem, unlikely but possible. I started posting Poser renders about a year ago. I joined because it would give me the opportunity to maybe make new friends with the same interest as I. It gave me the opportunity to share what I have accomplished with family and friends. Everyone who wants to view what I have done knows how to search for my work or have added me to their favorite artist list. I have never really thought of the possibility that the pictures were getting lost with maybe a few others uploading three pictures a day. Speaking from experience if you want your work to be viewed more, then you should get your own web site. I had originallook.com for seven years with an average of six thousand hits a day. Just people who wanted to see what I have done. It became so big for me that I decided to drop it because I just didn't have the time. The more picture a person uploads the better it is for Renderosity, because they have to come up with new ideas. That means they have to buy more products to accomplish what they want to do. I think it should stay the same.

ShadowWind - I reckon the view count thing might be a go-er, purely because if it's a matter of personal choice I can't see anybody having a good reason to object to it (although I'm sure someone would think of something). At the very least it would be very interesting to see which of the most vociferous protesters against the "ego" is walking the walk rather than talking the talk. To be honest I'm not that bothered about a masters gallery. I already submit to a judged site so I'm not fussed about Rendo having the same feature. The idea itself appeals to me purely because it's a challenge and keeps me on my toes (theoretically). Post a substandard work to a judged gallery and you won't get "great render" comments, you'll just get no image. IMO there are few better motivators that someone who knows art saying that your image isn't just lousy, it isn't even fit to be on the site. That does focus the mind in a wonderful way. (Unfortunately not all judges know about art, but that's another story...) A showcase gallery sounds like an idea, maybe with one new image a month allowed and a maximum of 6 in the gallery, but with unlimited changes (you can change any image as many times as you want without waiting a month). Maybe even with auto-submit after 6 months, so if you leave your stuff in it goes round and round for ever on a 6-monthly cycle, giving everyone the chance to see everything in the gallery. The Hot 20... If you'd have asked me 12 months ago about the Hot 20 I'd have said get rid of it, it's a total waste of time. But now, because I simply don't have time to trawl all the images, even just in Bryce, I do look at the Hot 20 because it will show me some of the better images I have missed. Sure, not all pics in the Hot 20 should be there, but it's a good way to catch up on what's generally some of the more accomplished works.