nicely said ShadowWind, that is exactly what I would like to see too

"I should think anyone would understand I was talking about the number uploaded for that particular day, just as tuttle was" Why did you imagine I was talking about the number uploaded for that day? I wasn't. I just stated the number of images on Bryce pages 1 and 2. This is why the confusion arose as to what "45" meant - your misinterpretation of my intitial post, not our lack of understanding. The "problem" is clearly a combination of the number of members and the number of images each member posts. The more members in total then the more members that will be uploading 3 a day. This is basic common sense. Yes, the total number of members is the biggest contributing factor, but because we cannot - and do not want to - restrict the number of members, why talk about it?

"I have yet to see any over-all statistics from any that are complaining to support their claims that the "multi-posters" are causing a problem." Yawn OK, in response I have just looked in "ALL" galleries for the first 3 pages - 54 images... Of those 54 images, 22 were posted by 8 people. That means the proposed change would reduce 54 images to 40 images. This is a reduction of 26% (almost exactly the same as the Bryce stats I posted). This means that the proposed change would slow the movement of ALL art in the galleries by 26%. "Again I will emphasize, the problem is the sheer number of people posting, not the number of posts per person per day." Then you emphasised wrongly. It may vary, some weeks it might be 15%, some weeks it might be 35%, but it looks like 26% is an average. So how can you dismiss this as irrelevant???

I think that we aught to be allowed to Dload 4 per day... i find myself in the "ZONE" sometimes and im comign up with AWSOME art... then after my thrid.. i just get bummed out cause ill hav eto wait till tommorow to shared with the reast of render.. =( Leave it the way it is.. or add.. but dont take away... thats jus tnot kool. plus your gonna have alot more FAKE accounts... where people make 2-3 user names just to post...

I count as irrelevant the notion that reducing the number of postings will increase the views for those of you who need them as some kind of validation. Unless you change the habits of the viewing audience, or your own graphics to please the multitudes, you aren't going to necessarily increase your own views (which seems to be the goal here) no matter how many restrictions you place on the postings by other people.

dialyn - "you aren't going to necessarily increase your own views" IMO you'll increase the views of everyone who posts sensibly, and to some extent increase comments too. How could this not happen, if the galleries slow down? Just to put it in perspective, in Bryce an image with 400 views after a month will likely have got 150 of them in the first 4hrs, another 150 in the next day and another 100 in the next 30 days. This doesn't mean only 400 people out of 100,000 (or whatever) want to view it, it just means that countless hundreds have missed it as a result of its progress into the archives. And before anyone mentions the "ego" argument, I say if you're truly not bothered how many people to see your art, why post at all? "...increase your own views (which seems to be the goal here)" Yes, that's certainly one of the major goals! Who's denying it? You seem to be implying the only people who are campaigning for change are those with dismal viewings who are peeved that their work is being overlooked and grasp at any straws in their desperation to get noticed. I know that doesn't describe me, nor does it describe dozens of others who are in favour and have posted on this thread. Why not check out Sking's gallery for example - averaging over 1,000 views and 30 comments per image, some with 3000+ views and 60+ comments. Another disgruntled wannabee? Hardly. GODSpeed "im comign up with AWSOME art" Glad to hear it m8! lol!

"I count as irrelevant the notion that reducing the number of postings will increase the views for those of you who need them as some kind of validation." - Dialyn #1 reason I create my images - for my pleasure. #2 reason I create my images - to share those images with others. I don't need views as a form of validation. I have enough self confidence to be happy with what I do. HOWEVER - as stated very well in the math above, if we can slow that huge monster of a gallery down be even 25% then that's 25% longer that a person's image would be exposed to MOST viewers, as it's the first couple pages of the ALL gallery that get the most hits. Wouldn't everyone agree that more exposure as an artist can only be a good thing, whether they are professional or not? Just don't ASSUME I post for comments or views!

Tuttle,
Two things are wrong with this whole poll...

1> We don't have numbers to prove either side of the argument. You and Illusions have both presented snapshots that support both sides of this issue and while I don't doubt their validity as I said, a snapshot does not tell us in the long term whether this will even dent the surface as to better viewing of the galleries.

2> This whole gallery limit thing was not announced in the galleries. Many people don't go the front page. It should have been placed on every gallery header so that people are aware that they are about to get a change from the 15-20 people pushing for change if it comes to that.

Please stop speaking for many of us when you are claiming what you want. While I don't want to speak for Sking, if he's getting 1000 or so views, then I doubt his reasons for this thread are that he wants more views. That was certainly not my reason and after hearing both sides of the coin, I'm not convinced it will do that anyway. Probably like many of us, who you seem to keep grouping into your argument as wanting more views, I want an easier way to look through the galleries and enjoy the fine art presented here. To be able to participate in other people's joys and sorrows is as rewarding as the views of our own work in my opinion. Just ranting on about how limiting artists just so that you will personally have more views is IMO, just as dialyn said, egotistical at best. There are ways to get more views if that is your desire, but they don't involve limiting others.

At this point, I think they should just leave it the way it is (3 a day) until such time as the logistics can be displayed and worked out about what is the best solution to the viewing problem of those that look at our works and not focus on artists who are just in this for more views...

It amazes me as well that the ones who truly deserve more views of their work, aren't the ones in here arguing for the change...

Just went to the change machine, for more pennies,
ShadowWind

I'm wondering why anyone would select "ALL" to view the galleries. It seems a lot of thought went into breaking the galleries down into topics and genres so this discussion wouldn't happen (I know, that's not the only reason) and make gallery viewing more enjoyable. I was surprised when I took a good look at the number of gallery topics there are. Did you know there's one called "Imagine"?

DragonTales said,
Oh, and I don't think changing the posting rules would even affect anybody but the poser and bryce galleries because anyone who does work for 3d max, or cinema 4d, etc, usually only posts once a week.

Actually this more involves the Photography, 2D, Fractal and Mixed Medium gallery than probably all the other galleries as it seems to be more prevalent in there. I don't notice that many 3 a day posters in the Poser gallery...

I don't need views as a form of validation. I have enough self confidence to be happy with what I do.

Well then, should it matter if you get 5 views or 500? I'm sorry, but I've yet to get this theory. By posting and then complaining about not enough exposure, you are negating the point. If you want lots of views, and lots of exposure there is nothing wrong with that, but when one wants to limits others to get those views that they say they don't need, then it's time to think if there is a way to a solution that helps all...

Well, I for one select "ALL" to view galleries because I do get bored just viewing one category at a time such as the Poser gallery and try to look at "all" varieties of ART such as 2D, Cinema4D, Mixed Medium, Maya, Bryce, etc. 7 images a week is fair and allows the artist to put more thought into their creation other than putting any ole thing up there :)

rockets, I pick ALL because I enjoy images from all different mediums. I am often amazed at what people can do with just a simple colored pencil as I am with a 3D renderer. Treasures don't always just come from out of the programs that we use ourselves. I think by looking at other mediums and styles, we learn so much and how to be more diverse in our art. It's inspirational, not to mention fun...Just thought I'd mention why I look at the ALL list, rather than a specific gallery...

PS: Imagine is a software program...

I select "all" as well because my interests are not limited to just one category. By limiting what I'm viewing, I may miss a great photograph, or some really cool fractal image. Perhaps there's an image in one of the other galleries that while I may not know the software, I can still enjoy the imagery. If I sort out that stuff, it's very easy to miss some good stuff. As for responding to the debate about views and comments and that whole business. I think I can safely say that no matter how much we all go round and round, neither one is going to satisfy the other. I would say post the poll on all the gallery pages, as said above, and let the majority decide.

Rockets - "I'm wondering why anyone would select "ALL" to view the galleries." Because some people enjoy all types of artwork. ShadowWind - "It amazes me as well that the ones who truly deserve more views of their work, aren't the ones in here arguing for the change..." Without naming names, what exactly is stopping these "more deserving" people from getting views? Or are they just "more deserving" IYHO...? DragonTales said "I don't need views as a form of validation. I have enough self confidence to be happy with what I do." & ShadowWind replied "Well then, should it matter if you get 5 views or 500?" ShadowWind - I genuinely don't get your point! Renderosity is all about people viewing images! It's just crazy to say that because a person isn't paranoid about their images then it doesn't matter if they get 5 or 500 views! Of course it matters - they want people to see their artwork, the more the better! There doesn't have to be some personality deficiency present, or mad ego trip, in order for someone to enjoy showing their work to others!

Is it possible for the mods / admins to let us know how many have voted already... <:]

Illusions - "tuttle's example points only points out that he doesn't have any idea what the real problem is! You can't come to his conclusion by looking at 2 or 3 pages...you can't come to his conclusion by guessing or assuming or estimating." That's right, Illusions! My data pales in comparison to the comprehensive stats you've presented. Oh! My mistake! You haven't even tried to present any, you just dig yourself deeper into an already prodigious hole. Man, if I'd written that post I'd be on my back with my legs in the air like a beetle, cringing with horror. You can't try and tell me what my statements mean. I made them. I know what they mean. You got it wrong. Face up to it. It happens to the best of us. Comments like "but who can say how many more will be uploading 3 a day" and "You have to cull data from every gallery for multiple days and break it out by gallery...otherwise it's invalid" show an ignorance of basic mathematics, statistical techniques and the extrapolation of trends. Just to give you a hint - unless you have proof of substantial variation in a dataset then extrapolation from a small portion of data is a perfectly valid way to demonstrate the behaviour of the whole set. If you wish to argue stats and trends with me, if you think you can present a reasoned case as to where I might have so far gone wrong, please feel free, but I'll guarantee you'll not get far! lol! If you just want to bluster and dig, dig, dig then that's fine too! "According to that post, your last words on the matter were 25 posts ago...guess not hmmm?" Your shoulders must be aching from all that digging...

Tuttle,
Without naming names, what exactly is stopping these "more deserving" people from getting views? Or are they just "more deserving" IYHO...?

Touche! "truly deserving" was the wrong phrase to use and I apologize for that. What I meant was that artists who do fantastic work, that would hang in any gallery, are many times ignored completely because they lack 2 things, a sexy thumbnail or people who know their names because they don't have time or are too new to have a following. Neither of these things has to do with the gallery limit. They don't get views because of these two things. Fortunately, at some point, they pick a thumbnail or manage to get one picture that does well that throws them into the fray and from there on, they generally do fairly well. The point I'm trying to make is that you don't see those people in here complaining that they are only getting 70 views for an image, while I see people with 100's of views complaining about the number of views they get.

ShadowWind - I genuinely don't get your point! Renderosity is all about people viewing images! It's just crazy to say that because a person isn't paranoid about their images then it doesn't matter if they get 5 or 500
views!

I get completely that people want to be seen. We all want to be seen. I never said that it didn't matter that an artist get 5 or 500 views. I'd like to see everyone get lots of views. What I find confusing is why argue that you need more views, if you don't get validation from it? What number is enough to say that an image was successful? If what dragontales says is true, then it should not matter the number and thus what is the point of pushing for more views? If people want views, they should just want views. There is nothing wrong with that, but they should also consider the feelings of others on this matter and try to come up with a solution that the community can live with, rather than making arbitrary limits based on views that they say doesn't matter to them, but does apparently.

ShadowWind - "What I meant was that artists who do fantastic work, that would hang in any gallery, are many times ignored completely because they lack 2 things, a sexy thumbnail or people who know their names because they don't have time or are too new to have a following." I'll go along with that. Many a good piece has been missed because it happens to be surrounded by less accomplished T&A - mostly in the Poser gallery. "...complaining..." OK, maybe some people are, but that's up to them. Being totally honest, I am not complaining. Would I like more views? Yes. Do I think I would get more views if this change went through? Yes. Will I gave a rat's ass if the change doesn't go through? Not in the slightest. So I hope this clarifies my position. I sort of agree with your point, but please don't make the mistake of thinking because someone wants change they're necessarily complaining or whining about what they've got already. "There is nothing wrong with that, but they should also consider the feelings of others on this matter..." Yes, people should consider the feelings of others in a general sense, but in a poll I don't believe that should be a primary consideration. I don't think either of us will convince the other here, so suffice it to say I understand your point fully in this instance, I just don't agree! ;)

Last post here! It doesn't validate me as an artist, it's just a little gratification to know that others appreciate my work as well. Sort of like icing on the cake. Oh, and I do have to say that the new "Favorite Artists" lists does help one keep up with others works, as well as keep one's followers/fans (what would they be called?) keyed into when one posts. However, even with that, I found two more artists today (not new ones) that I had never seen before, mainly because I just don't have time to wade thru so many images. It just so happened they were on the first couple of pages at the moment. No matter what the percentage, and I'd wager to say that the number IS somewhere close to 25 percent, a few less images a day would help somewhat. After all, this is a community for all, not just the ones that have nothing else to do but post art all day. It should be somewhat more balanced. That's all I wish! ~Fin

Attached Link: http://dragonworld.b0x.com/index.html

There should be a max of 5 a day and 21 per week (at least) otherwise it's too restrictive.

And what personal attacks would those be, Illusions? If you are offended by an image of a guy digging a hole I apologise unreservedly. I didn't realise it would affect you in this way. Or perhaps you should be more "thickskinned", as you earlier advised screwdryver. And what lack of facts? The way I see it it was me who presented all the facts. Where are the facts you presented? All the figures I posted are verifiable and come from looking at 90 images in total in several galleries. Yes, 90 isn't much compared to the total, but it's 90 more than you looked at. I haven't contradicted myself and I don't find myself floundering. I stated my case and I stand by every single word of it. I took the trouble to look in the galleries and gather evidence. You just said it was all complete rubbish but have produced no evidence of your own. You misread other people's posts, flame them and when it's pointed out that you have made an error, you blame them for your own lack of comprehension. Anyway, you evidently disagree, so again I invite you to be constructive and present an argument to back up your views, including the comprehensive statistics you crave, rather than popping up now and again and simply dismissing the contributions of others as rubbish, irrelevancies and "psychic readings". I'll be very interested to see the quality of evidence you produce.

Well, I liked the idea that with each member limited to one upload at a time, I would have a chance to view a greater variety of pictures from a broader selection of artists. Oh, and thank you mods, for throwing this open to discussion. If this thread gets many more posts, perhaps you should contact the Guinness Book of Records to see if it's eligible for entry? Shanna very tired now, and suffering from eyestrain, having just read this entire thread in one go:-)

"...having just read this entire thread in one go:-)" Holy crap!

"...as well as keep one's followers/fans (what would they be called?)" Disciples?

Personally, I like the idea of an upload limit. It's not about censorship. As many already in this thread have pointed out, with a limit, you are more opt to upload the best quality that you can, but it's not saying that you HAVE to do this. I use to upload images but quit. Why? Because very few viewings and CCs; reason being, that the image gets kicked pack to 2nd,3rd,4th,15th page so quickly that folks don't get a chance to look. Unless you are in one of the "clicks" here, you don't get much feedback or anything. I look at the Poser gallery only because there are SO many images. Even with just going there, I only look at the images when the thumbnail really catches my eye. I'm sure alot of folks do this. Anyhow, I think the 1/day idea is great. For those that complain that they like to make multiple images and upload them all the same time, well..keep making them multiple and upload 1/day. That'll give you more time to work on future pieces and improving quality. That's how I use to do it. Just my 2 cents

I would like to see it 1 per day or LESS! Unless I'm browsing the Poser gallery daily, I'm going to miss hundreds of potentially great pictures, as I don't have the time to go through 25 - 50 pages of art daily. There is a lot of great content here, almost too much. And for those who wish to post more than one, why not combine the images into a single picture?

Go slow. Make it 2 per day and give it awhile.

I just want to say that at PoserPros they already have a 1 picture a day rule there and no one gets any more views there or any more comments (I know i sure don't)I'd say that people there get less views and comments because less people go there because there is less to see. And people probably don't post there because they don't like being restricted as such. I did my first 2 part picture series, went there to post it and found I couldn't do it as separate posts and was pretty upset about it, so I was thinking about just deleting the whole thing until it was pointed out there seems to be a loophole that you can reply to your post in the gallery and attach a picture and therefore get your 2 pictures in, still that wasn't the way I wanted to post them. If people have the imigination and the time to do more than 1 picture a day or 7 a week or 30 a week, as long as there's space on the server and the admins don't care, they should be able to post all they want. The amount of time it takes to do them or where they were done, or the quality of them should not matter. It doesn't matter to me if the picture next to mine is good or bad, people will still look at what they want and not at others, and they will still comment the same regardless. I find that when I have time to browse the galleries and the many pictures on them they are a great source of inspiration good or bad, it seems wrong to limit that.

7 a week still basically equals out to 1 a day so you just eat up all your posting capabilities faster and can't post the rest of the week. obviously you missed my point: "If people have the imigination and the time to do more than 1 picture a day or 7 a week or 30 a week, as long as there's space on the server and the admins don't care, they should be able to post all they want. The amount of time it takes to do them or where they were done, or the quality of them should not matter. It doesn't matter to me if the picture next to mine is good or bad, people will still look at what they want and not at others, and they will still comment the same regardless. I find that when I have time to browse the galleries and the many pictures on them they are a great source of inspiration good or bad, it seems wrong to limit that."

I'm saying the limit is a bad idea, what if i decided to do trilogies with every picture, I'd only be able to post 2 a week and have 1 left over for a teaser. The more pictures you get in here, the more people want to come and see what's going on, this new limit would kill that because a lot of the posting here is all the same people posting multiple pictures day after day, and for a lot of them it is more than 7 a week. This new rule idea is like telling them if they do more than 7 pictures a week they have too much of an imigination, and therefore need to limit themselves to a number that other people seem to think they can keep up with, that they are too creative for the rest of the general populace, and therefore their art is no longer art but clutter. I think that stinks.

This place has always had massive trffic and always will, In more places than just the Art Gallerys, yet i don't here anyone complaining about the what they consider good or bad in the Free Stuff sections and imposing limits on the amount of uploads there and I'd definately say there is just as much or more traffic there than in the Gallerys slowing the site down and taking up space on the servers. i think a customizable view all gallery is a good idea too. I'm just making my point like you are. Think about this, what if Tolkien had been limited to 3 books in his entire life. He wrote The Hobbit, Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and then.....well someone said he couldn't publish another book, but he did write it but it got lost and could never be found, and he forgot to make a penname to publish it as someone else and then A Kender stole it and lost it to a Dwarf who had to fight a group of trolls and the book was the only thing he had to catch on fire to fight the trolls! We'd have missed a literary classic!! (yes, there's some worldreality swapping there, but it's all in fun :) and i think i'm making a point here, but maybe i'm just rambling) And just think what if they did find THE SILMARILLION and published it years later after they decided to raise the ban. We'd have all been lost!! (I still get lost in that one anyway)

Please change the format and make each page of thumbnails 100 images long. With my dial-up connection, I'll go make a fresh pot of coffee, then come back and punch up what catches my attention.

One of the Yahoo Groups I've visited has at least one page with 77 thumbs of uploaded photos. It can be done. I don't know the mechanics, but it works.

Niobrara

Wow, you know I have not checked the galleries this much since well since I don't know when. Perhaps we could shelve this discussion and then bring it back out in about 2 months? That way I can read through 350+ posts checking galleries of people and finding some really amazing art.

Of course, we'd need to impose a limit on the number of opinions/arguments you could present and if you've presented something here, you wouldn't be allowed to play again as that would interfere with the finding of new galleries. And just for giggles you would be required to submit any argurment/opinion/drivel to a board to be approved for further debate. Board chosen at random preferable living active members but we must give all equally fair chances to be on this board, so we'll just use a phone book, location TBD. This would in turn cause a new debate to be born to debate the debate more galleries to look at then... its all the strategery I say.

Yes, I do realize that I am not really adding anything constructive to this discussion, but after 370 posts does it really matter? Several very valid points have been made on both sides, review the whole thread its kinda fun but remember to blink and take potty breaks - trust me on this, I've got quite a mess here and I can't close my eyes! I've cast my vote 7perW (1per would have been nice). Anyone offended by me or my comments should contact my mom its all her fault, oh and please ask her why she forgot my birthday this year.

In parting I'd just like to say 'if this limit discussion is because of bandwidth issues the-'

Cheers,
E

Derty - "what if i decided to do trilogies with every picture..." I disagree though I'm not trying to change your view, but have you never considered a 3-frame single image? Several people in Bryce have done this. And just to clarify, under the proposed rules you'd be able to post TWO 3-image trilogies and one single image every week. And another point (stop yawning!!!! ;)) - a trilogy very rarely remains a trilogy as people are loading images all the time, so your 3 images tend to get spaced out anyway unless you have an ultra-fast connection. "Think about this, what if Tolkien had been limited to 3 books in his entire life." I think the proposed change would be more like telling Tolkien that all authors were limited to 3 books a month. He would have said "So what, my books take far longer than a month to write" whereas Barbara Cartland would probably have crapped her pants at the thought of stifling her "creativity". ;) But to be honest, I think we'd all be better off without "The Silmarillion" anyway!! ;)) If you abolished the limit entirely, think what would happen. People would be uploading dozens at a time, especially in fractal and Poser, and this would utterly ruin the galleries. Many people come to Rendo having galleries of their own containing 100's or 1000's of images. It's clear we need a limit, it's just a question of deciding what it should be.

Derty - "what if i decided to do trilogies with every picture..."Yes, I do realize People would be have erm.. Postalectamy's, As well as Postenlargement's Did ayone ever find that darn key to the Universe?? No!! I am not sitting on it?? What was the question again??Oh!!Oh Yea!! People,Me,You,They,Them.HeSheIt.Oooo another terrible mental personality.well!!back to the barn rerrrr..Poststapleguno.Postuhpenutbutterandjellyum.Poststinkymortumas.PostC++.PostJavaSyndrome. PostAnimaniattic.cheese-post. Derty - "what if i decided to do trilogies with every picture..."Yes, I do realize People would be have erm.. Postalectamy's, As well as Postenlargement's

"rerrrr..Poststapleguno.Postuhpenutbutterandjellyum.Poststinkymortumas.PostC++.PostJavaSyndrome. PostAnimaniattic.cheese-post." Nobody said that reading 371 posts all at once wouldn't have some sort of effect on the mind... ;)

"I've made my vote on the poll. I presented my thoughts on the issue rationally and suggested alternatives. I have not bullied anyone, attempted to monopolize the thread, viciously taken shots, or shoved my opinion down anyone's throat as some have done. Unlike some, I have not stated in multiple posts that the only thing I care about is me, or people viewing my work, nor have I based my opinion on what is happening only in the gallery I post in." I am sincerely impressed. Congratulations. Without a hint of repetition or ire, you have proved your worth in this discussion time and time again. Your selfless promotion of the greater good is exemplary and your step-by-step analysis of the facts is humbling in its care and precision. When combined with your tact, your surefire diplomacy and your natural reserve, this is all too much for me. I feel so small. Please accept my sincere apololgies for my outrageous behaviour. Everything you write is true, so all that remains for me to say is Bravo! Bravissimo! and Braviss!!!! And with tears in my eyes, I find that this too is my last word in discussion with you on this matter.

Being interested in every type of genre posted on this site, I used to view What's New every day. This was by far the best way to get to see the broadest spectrum of images and artists contributing to Renderosity. Alas! it is no longer possible to survey the huge amount of stuff being posted unless I dedicate all the time I spend visiting this site to just catching up on the galleries. As I am not content to give just 5seconds to contemplating an image and dashing off a quick comment I have lost interest in keeping up with galleries (and therefore newcomers) that don't have a more immediate interest for me, thereby restricting my appreciation of the broader spectrum of software and subjects. I am certain that I am missing many good things and the chance to make new friends. Though guilty of posting as many as three images a day in the past I have come to the Personal conclusion that it was selfish and greedy to be bunging onto the site every bit of work I created, thereby clogging up the galleries and diluting the quality levels of their contents. Nobody! and I mean NOBODY! on this site can create or needs to post more than one decent image per day. Ideas and content should take precedence over technical facility or forget calling oneself an Artist. One a day is more than enough, the rest is a gratuitous use of the facility.

I want to thank all members who voted in the poll and provided feedback on this issue in this thread. The team will be discussing and making a final decision. We will bring this back to forum news within a week. thanks tammy

why should people wanna see all uploaded pics, some control freak issue, lol, i enjoy many diffrent styles of pics evn unfinished ones can be intresting seeing how a pic evolves etc. what bothers me about the one a day is if u finished a scene and made a couple of similar good renders of it u be forced to choose one wait a day and choose another what if u like to ask the vieuwers wich they prefer? 7 a week is better as my creativity comes in bursts and not driply one a day like some :p keep upload as open as ure equipent allows and add some filters for the purists like maybe first upload of the day filter so they can safely vieuw all one a days. I like this comunity allot so hope all this restrictions wont dry it up. happy rendering to all

Honestly, the shear number of poser uploads is ridiculus. Many poser users need to spend more time developing a more original well thought-out clean image. With a program like poser, it is often far too easy to just crank out generic scenes and not put enough thought or time into it. Sometimes it is difficult to sort through all the gibberish to find the really good images - those created in other programs as well as poser. On a site note: Although renderosity discourages overly sexual images, this site still has many problems with untasteful portrayals of "soft porn". There is a difference between the artistic representation of feminine asthetics and crude cheaply produced eroticism. I feel it is sad and often a waste of talent.

Not so say poser users are te only problem - I hope that did not come across too strongly. Both of the problems I have addressed are found in almost all of the gallery sections.

"Not so say poser users are the only problem..." But Poser displays this problem more than other galleries purely because the ease of which Poser renders can be created. You can import everything from the people (obviously), props, textures and clothing to actual poses, expressions and light arrangements. Digital painting by numbers, without the problems of painting over the line. And there's nothing wrong with that, if it flicks your bean, but it does make for somewhat speedy image production. There was a brief discussion in the Bryce forum about a certain awesome Poser artist who barely got any comments, IMO because he did not do T&A or anything recognisably "Poser". I think he averages about 1 comment for every 100+ views. Unfortunately, the mention of Poser, and to a large degree Bryce, will prevent your work from being considered for a lot of galleries, no matter how good it is. It's just a reputation that's grown up around the software over the years and now it's impossible to break. The bottom line is, if you want your stuff to be taken seriously (not that I do - yet) don't under any circumstances mention you use these two programs to create it!

Just wanted to let all know that we have not forgot about this .... will respond in a couple of weeks. thanks tammy

Just some ideas: Make it possible to post 'Projects' this could save up the number of images on the frontpage of the galleries. What do i mean with Projects? well, one could set up a project in which his WiPs are all located and where he can upload multiple versions and angles from one work. This way his work gets more organised and allows him to show more diversity of his image without flooding the frontpage. Since you have to select one of the image as 'cover' for the project. One image that you think is the best from teh project and which can be shown in the gallery-index. Or of course one could also select 'random' to have a random image represent the project. another option could be that you may post more (3 would be fine) images a day, but that only one of them gets shown on the index, decreasing the 'flooding' by a third... Of course this image can be set random or static just as in my 'project'-suggestion. My vote would be to keep it the same with some size restrictions (maybe use the PHP-graphics library to have it automatically scaled down if too big ?) and if the outcome of this poll is that we are limited to only one a day or even worse, one a week (in which case I would probably leave this community for another) then there should be a special 'master class' section for those whiners who think their images gets drowned and a 'normal/novice' section for the ones that don't care...

"Just wanted to let all know that we have not forgot about this .... will respond in a couple of weeks." Are you sure you haven't forgotten about this???

Can we at least have the results of the poll? I have an image of all the mods and admins huddling together in a cupboard, gritting their teeth and shaking their heads, the horror of having to resurrect this topic being simply too much to contemplate. Nevertheless, we haven't forgotten... ;] - TafkaT