Exactly right, SWAMP. I am usually with you (silently) about 90% of the time, but you got this one 100%. As to the notion by other members that Ms. Goddard is a "porn star," I can only say: As far as I know, she has not engaged in any hard-core projects, nor (as far as I know) has she any intention of doing so. I do not recall any soft-core projects with her, either. If posing nude is considered to be pornographic, then please explain to me the "wrongness" of that as opposed to the "rightness" or acceptability of creating a nude scene with Vicky, etc. The type of image is the same, as are the reactions to said image. When Ms. Goddard posed for Playboy (as the 40th Anniversary Playmate), she wrote on her data sheet: "In my heart of hearts: I'm still a small-town girl." No doubt she has matured some since then, but by all accounts I can find, she remains her down-to-earth beliefs and her pleasant personality. This DAZ project is a first step into the 3D unknown. The uncertain reaction of the community, the risk DAZ is taking with so much time and money invested in the project ... Let us not forget the risks that Ms. Goddard is taking. This is a huge step for her as she continues her modeling career. Being photographed naked in a solitary studio; being published in an international magazine; establishing a personal web page; and now, being a point-and-click, life-like doll. For those of you who do not like the TOS, I understand. For those of you who do not like the specifics of the package, okay. For those of you who do not like Ms. Goddard's appearance, are you nuts? :p But, for those of you who do not like taking that first, bold step into the Unknown, then I guess you will just have to make doodles of it from the safety of your computer. When I get home tonight, I will be visiting DAZ to d/l my first ever 3D item. "Hello, Anna-Marie, and welcome to my world. What shall we do today?"

"If you think by paying less than $30.00 allows you to make money off the image and name of a Playboy model..(reality check time here).."
Thats exactly the point I think people are missing in this thread. This is a new type of product One is a apple and the other is a orange lets not get them confused with each other. This is one of the futures for 3D being able to replicate people into 3d. There are going to be restrictions to the useage of the models / texturing and ESPECIALY when there skin is being used for the texturing. The EULA is basicaly saying treat me with the respect i deserve or make allot of changes so nobody will recognise it as me. So far most of the models being used in the realistic textures have been no name amatures and I see very little recognition for the models. This is a big step forward for more realistic type textures . I look forward to seeing more of them .Yes the wording of the EULA could be a bit clearer but this is a new field and its going to take a while to work out all of the details. But lets not confuse the apples with the oranges .

I am sorry but dang you like to whine No, I just don't like stupidity. And this was a stupid choice, a real "let's shoot ourselves in the foot big time in the eyes of the professional 3D community yet again" kind of move. Sorry you see that as whining, but I remain amazed that out of allllll the people in the world we would consider "celebrities", DAZ kicks off this project with a centerfold model.

For those of you who do not like Ms. Goddard's appearance, are you nuts? Nope, just have different taste. The body shape on the promo renders at DAZ looks good, but the textures are nothing special (who needs another caucasian supermodel anyway?) and the face is ugly. At least in the promo renders, it is. Some of the postworked renders didn't look to bad. Together with all the restrictions...no thanks, DAZ. I'll pass.

Joey: I understand your position as to the type of person DAZ selected for this project, but models are more used to this kind of work than, say, actors or sports people. As a first offering, a model is fine. However, if all we get are models, then my excitement will begin to fade. I, too, would like to see different types of people step up for this sort of thing. After all, even my world is not populated with only Playmates, Supermodels, and High School cheerleaders. While I am not a fan of The Rock, his build would have its place in my world, as would, say, Dennis Franz. The trouble is: would either of them want to do this sort of thing? DAZ is probably going to get far more models than anybody else at first because this is what models do. Let us hope that other vocations take notice and also step up.

Well Joey besides being in Playboy she has also done guest appearances in episodes of JAG, Just Shoot Me, and Baywatch. Not to mention she is going to be in the new Austin Powers movie. Her fame for playboy alone make her a world wide celebrity so i am NOT understanding your post at all. Unless you constier nudity to be the same thing as porn , then what the heck are you doing here at rendersosity ?

casamerica: I caught your double meaning. :)

Unless you constier nudity to be the same thing as porn , then what the heck are you doing here at rendersosity ? Ah right, the stock response. Sheesh.

Well, my bottom line is that the texture is too expensive for me to purchase yet another blond. I don't know Anna-Marie Goddard and neither her profession or her personality are of great interest to me when I'm trying to decide whether or not to buy a texture. The professionals can deal with EULA problems....my only issue is how I invest my money for my hobby, and I already have enough pale skins in my collection (I am a pale skin myself so this isn't because I don't appreciate the trend...just that I don't need more). Too much to pay for the fad of the week.

I think there will be more personalities going virtual, but I don't know that it's necessarily going to be a good thing for people already complaining about the lack of creativity and imagination in 3D. Some of us (I'm guilty) seem unable to break out of imitation of each other, movies, television and comics and it is a constant refrain here (where can I get Buffy and Spike, where can I get a Star Trek imitation, where can I get a Matrix coat, where can I find a Stars Wars hairdo). The people who originally came up with Star Trek and the Matrix and Stars Wars were creative...everyone else is just making copies to make up for a lack of originality. And so it seems like an inevitable trend. The Keneau texture will probably be very pricey...and I won't buy him either.

What mainly results is that some of us run out and buy up the latest craze, get bored with our toys, and look for something else to spend our money on the next week. There are worst ways to play. I've no problem with it as long as we don't fool ourselves into thinking we're breaking new ground.

There is a great little hot dog cart up on DAZ now that I am really attracted to. So even though other people will buy it, I'm going to get one too. Just because I can't imagine doing the job better myself. So I'm not prejudiced against the practice. I don't model or do textures so I am dependent on the imagination of others. But I'm not going to fool myself into thinking I'm being particularly creative by buying someone else's creation and playing with someone else's toys. I know the real originality is elsewhere and not in me.

And there are some very original people here. I don't know that they are using Anna-Marie Goddard textures. I don't know that they aren't. It doesn't much matter to me because, frankly, pin-ups bore me and that seems to be the main reason for getting this texture. You have the money to toss at her, more power to you. I don't. That's okay too. Different strokes for different folks.

Oh well. It's a holiday weekend for me. Hope you all have a good one. I'm getting off this thread now.

I still fail to see the point of the celeb image if one has to either remove any reasonable trace of the likeness in order to "safely" use the product for many purposes. I too love the idea of "CelebriClones" in theory but the devil is in the details and the EULA. If you render your CelebriClone in evening gown and mink stole does the fact that the real celeb is an adamant anti-fur activist mean it's demeaning, distressing and tort worthy? If an image of the CelebriClone kissing someone of another race upsets their parents do you get sued? CelebriClone eating a hamburger conflicts with the real celeb's Hindu faith or PETA affiliation - do lawyers come knocking? Too many questions. Ms Godard is lovely and the CelebriPeal and Playboy connection will probably make some money for DAZ and strain the world's P2P bandwidth as well but after the dust settles and the inevitable cease and desist orders go out to violators, I still wonder whether the name value is worth it. Heck, even Ron J. would probably have a special EULA, prohibiting renders of him with a hedgehog in the picture.

Ratteler, The right to control the use of her likeness is owned by Ms. Goddard, the copyright to the texture/morph set is owned by DAZ. So depending on the circumstances the answer to your question "Who will sue" is either DAZ, Ms. Goddard or possibly both. This from the EULA... "Failure to obtain such permission will result in the User being held liable for any and all damages and costs and all other legal remedies available to Anna-Marie Goddard under applicable state, federal and international law. Failure to comply with these restrictions shall constitute a breach of this License Agreement by User and entitle DAZ 3D to all Remedies under the terms of this License Agreement and all other remedies available under applicable state, federal and international law." As to you piracy scenario, the penalties are a great deal more severe than $10,000. This from the text of the DMCA... "Sec. 1204. Criminal offenses and penalties (a) IN GENERAL- Any person who violates section 1201 or 1202 willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain--(1) shall be fined not more than $500,000 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, for the first offense; and `(2) shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, for any subsequent offense." As far as "Model Laws" all the states have protections in place however they fall under different sections of state law. They will be atlernately listed as "Right to Privacy, Right of Publicity, or Unfair Competition". If a person can prove that their likeness falls under trademark additional federal protection can be provided under the Lanham Act.

There is no federal law protecting anyone's likeness Sorry, not true. Remember when Pepsi was using film clips from dead stars like Humphrey Bogart. They got slapped pretty hard for that by the stars' estates on the theory that a star's likeness is his commodity in trade.

Attached Link: http://www.unc.edu/courses/pre2000fall/law357c/cyberprojects/spring01/ROP/resources.html

Sorry for any confusion I may have caused with the Ron Jeremy joke. It was only a dumb joke. In no way did I mean to imply that Ms. Goddard is a porn person, nor would I seriously suggest that DAZ use porn stars for texture models. Just throwing some levity into a fascinating and important discussion.

Attached Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/integrity/Links/Articles/winick.html

"nor would I seriously suggest that DAZ use porn stars for texture models" Porn star Vickys (female) without genitals would surely disrupt the time-space matrix somehow. I vote for the classic Christy Canyon and please no Randy West!

Having a family of lawyers I wanted to stay as far from the field as possible. Hence being an artist. now, depending on what I depict in a image that I create, physical traditional media or digitally, I'm subjected to legal issues etc. Recently I was reading an article where someone went and painted a picture in oil of a house. the owners of the house had signs up saying no paintings or pictures, because they used the images and photos for finantual gain and to keep up the lighthouse. so a legal battle insued. It hadn't be resolved at the writing of the article, I never found out what happened. Still scary. can't even paint a picture anymore these days with out a lawyer. I'm going back under the covers now.

Ah.. Come on Daz. Fess up. You guys just wanted to take pictures of Anna-Marie in the nude. You don't care how many models you sell.

It's one of those weird legal situations where death actually give you more protection under the law. Sorry, I have to disagree. Take footage of JLo in "The Cell" and use it in an ad and see how far you get. :)

That'll teach me to reply without reading the thread first :) I yanked my last comment because during the period where I too was "the kind of man that read Playboy" AMG was one of the few that gave me the warm and fuzzies, so I'll honour that memory and keep it clean :) But I digress... The new Sims expansion "Superstar" has both Marilyn Monroe and Christina Agulara, amongst others, in it, (not met them yet :) so I imagine they had to haggle with managers and estate lawyers too. In fact there was an entire article in Wired (cover story) about the boom in digitising sports stars, for use in computer games. Something that could never have been envisaged a few years ago. I think somebody has already put Jean Reno into a game, can't remember which one though. I still reckon though that, "the law is an ass" OK so AMG has family who may be offended, but then so do the models who's body and texture V2 & V3 are based on. I guess their lawyers just aren't as good, right? :) Now we know why Mike looks the way he does... :P later jb

"Take footage of JLo in "The Cell" and use it in an ad and see how far you get." I think people would just laugh at you then, least I would. Armchair lawyers. It really all points back to the EULA and what you agree to when you purchase the item.

Even if you ripped the meshes from the Sims or NBA whatever, they'd be too lores to have much appeal. Poser is a whole 'nother animal. While some prefer faeries and fantasy, the fun of 3D for many others is making it as real as possible and you can't get much more real than a real person. The market is definitely there but many lawyers will make mucho dinero in the process. I imagine that as with the VCR and the internet, the adult entertainment industry will be on the forefront here. I may be wrong but I doubt many big name "mainstream" folks are going to open their digital selves up to the myriad of potential uses a Poser type program permits, even with the EULAs. Now acting as your "virtual guide" to Yahoo, 3D beer ads, etc. would be different - more control and probably more money. Maybe Metacreations wasn't crazy after all, just premature. The rest of us will have to make do with lesser luminaries ala Dina Vanoni It will be interesting...

personally I like the AMG set and the EULA looks quite reasonable to me. As I want to use her morphs to make more realistic faces and bodies and will be using them in combination with other textures and morphs, not to mention modifying the texture itself... I have absolutely nothing to worry about regarding the EULA, and I'm glad for DAZ's clarification on the issue. My characters using the set won't look like her and won't be represented as being her either.

As I pointed out in the other thread, that's exactlky correct. As long as the final character doesn't look like, or claim to represent her, there really is no issue. If you want to really use her exact character for anything, that's where you could get sticky, but in general, how many of us ever use any product as is? I do wish all of the characters facial components were available seperately. I'd like more versatility in being able to mix and match them.

Ok, pointy ears and wings are enough modification ? What I do not understand: when I can't use her as she is right out of the box what's then the point in making a digital clone? Maybe I missed something in this thread or haven't understand everything (I am german, sorry, and blonde too LOL). .

This is what is written on the DAZ3d site... You may not distribute, sell, or otherwise make available to any third party via any means whatsoever, public or private, any rendered output which is demeaning, pornographic, illegal, slanderous, libelous, or otherwise damaging to the public image of, vocation of Anna-Marie Goddard or her immediate relatives for any purpose whatsoever. that is fairly vague but given how her own site looks, and the Renderosity TOS, its unlikely you're going to break that rule posting artwork here second rule... You may not use the product for any commercial endeavor in any manner which implies its endorsement or association with any product, service, or entity without prior written consent of Anna-Marie Goddard, her attorney(s), or other legal business representation. that means you can't use Anna-Marie to promote your commercial products in a way that constitutes a commercial endorsement. Well, DUH, I figured that one without needing a TOS. the vast majority of images posted at R'osity don't have a problem using Anna-Marie. Now as I produce erotica I would most likely have to be more careful... but since I am NOT using her actual likeness, only her morphs to help create more realistic and different likenesses to achieve better realism... I don't have any problem either. btw, I never use ANY package as I buy them, I always change and tweak them, make additional morphs for them, etc.

I think the most exciting thing here is the technology, rather than this particular application. Clearly, in terms of realism, full body scanning is the way to go for 3D characters. I can understand DAZ going with the celebrity angle in terms of making a splash and recouping their investment in the process. That of course means more restrictions on use and a celebrity tax on the resulting product. I hope that in the future, they continue to use the technology but provide a mix of characters, including some that will be less restrictive and hopefully less expensive because they are based on non-celebrities.

I saw something on the beeb at the weekend, apparently the French are spending the year digitising a selection of the nation. Full body scans. Seems that the last time they did this was 30 years ago, and body shapes have changed since then. So the fashion industry is paying to build a new database so they that they can make clothes that will fit more people. Now that would be a thing to get access to eh? later jb

Now that would make for interesting discussion.

dag, just a passing comment/thought but I'd of love/(d) a digital clone of Dita Von Teese!

OOOOOOOO ...... Dita would be AWESOME !!!!!!!!!!!!!! :o) Thomas

Very interesting topic... "are demeaning, pornographic, illegal, slanderous, libelous, or otherwise damaging, potentially harmful to the public image of, vocation of, or overall psychological well-being of Anna-Marie Goddard" So, have we heard back? Can I make any render I want or am I restricted by the EULA? Could the typical "nude Vikcy in temple" image be "potentially harmful to the... psychological well-being of Anna-Marie Goddard"?? This is really mind-boggling. DAZ offers a model for sale, but we can't use it to make renders, we can't use it to make commercial artwork. And some people are just glad to be able to make pictures with a Playmate of their own. Why don't they come out and say: "We make Poser products for your own personal enjoyment... if you catch our drift." {"Anna-Marie Goddard drinks pepsi and you should too"} And what about, Anna-Marie used the new V3 bikini, and Neftis Hair, both for sale in the Marketplace? Is that a "commercial" render? {Now we have the even uglier concept! What happens when a pirate get a hold of the texture nd morph set?} To see the answer to this question, just take a look on any p2p network... I'm sure it's out there by now. And if you're a "serious" pirate, you probably have a well-funded lawyer to handle issues like this. He can keep the case tied up in court long enough for you to make plenty of money (or until AMG or DAZ is out-spent and drops the case). And the comment about how sports games use the athlete's likenesses? 1) It's called "licensing"- for a fee, the athlete is included in the game. This, in turn, increases the value of the game since it has a "real athlete" in it. Think about it: which would you rather buy... "Sport Car Racing" or "NASCAR 2003 Sports Racing; now includes all the 2002-2003 drivers on the circuit!". 2) You can't make renders, images, etc from likenesses in games: the meshes are too lo-res and can't be separated out of the game. {Ah.. Come on Daz. Fess up. You guys just wanted to take pictures of Anna-Marie in the nude. You don't care how many models you sell. } Someone wants to take pictures of an ex-Playboy Playmate? Nah, I don't buy this theory. And getting off the subject a little... If AMG was a Playmate back in 1994 (when she was 24), then she is now almost 34. Um, why did DAZ choose a 34-year old model to base their character on? Not that there's anything wrong with 34-year old models, but were all the 18 year-old models not available? What about all the 20-something models? And here's something to consider: Vicky 3 is based on ex-Playmate Natalie Abramov. They hired her, brought her into their studio, and took pictures of her to use as their new Vicky character. Did DAZ "blur" the likeness enough so she wouldn't complain about her likness being used in people's renders?

If Abramov was a Playmate, it was in a foreign edition. "Did DAZ "blur" the likeness enough so she wouldn't complain about her likness being used in people's renders?" It may not have been as big an issue for her as it apparently is for AMG. As to "why a 34-year-old," well, why not? Some people in other threads are wanting a bit of variety in the packages offered: different skin tones, older people, larger people, animals, etc. Perhaps DAZ went with her to give us the chance to have a mid-thirties character right out of the box - even if she is still a white model. Too bad DAZ is having so many problems, or I would be all over this by now.

Hi Guys! (and Girls!) Dan Farr of Daz mentioned I was going to stop by the forum, and so here I am. It took me a while to read through (almost) all your messages; my God this has brought out a lot of you to talk about this! Well, anyway, all the points Dan brought up are right. But, you obviously still have concerns and questions, and I think one of the problems is that we on our end don't know yet what to expect; what all is going to come out of this. Therefor as a "public persona", I do have to protect myself of course for the worst case scenario, and Daz has been wonderful in assisting me with that as well. I think as worried as many of you are regarding the EULA, it is only to protect myself from something that I absolutely cannot and should not agree with which many of you say you understand already. I think you all are nice people that really won't want to do something bad or take advantage of me. As long as it all stays in good taste and you're making something nice and pretty, I'm all for it. If somebody has made something great out of my morph and published it here on the forum or somewhere else, will I sue right away? Of course not! I'm from Holland, we're not as sue happy there as people here. I in fact would love to see it, so I'd appreciate you show me the images you've made. If you want to show of your art of me on a website to promote yourself or something, cool and fine, I'd just appreciate a banner link back to my site (www.annamariegoddard.com). The only few things that I'm worried about though is that first of all the biggest thing; don't make something demeaning, degrading, awful or pornographic (no explicit wide open leg shots) with my name attached to that. (If you're not sure if something is too explicit or anything else, just email me the image amg@annamariegoddard.com and I'll let you know, and please respect my answer). So, that's the most important thing to me; don't use my name with it. If there's something that you want to do commercially with your art and want to use my name, we can talk about it and probably come to an agreement, no big deal. So, don't let this hold you back or think I'll be suing right away as I won't, unless again it is something that is absolutely, positively not tolerable (and I think your gut will tell you if it is). As long as it's not commercially sold, it's nice and cool, then you can use my name with it, I don't have a problem with that. It is and stays a morph made of me, so it is not actually me as I am in a photograph or video, so it's all cool. So, if we can all stay in these boundaries of doing something nice with the morph, go right ahead! It is me, but it isn't, you get my drift. If you use some parts of me, and parts of "Victoria", go right ahead. I don't think at that point you'd want to name it "Anna-Marie" anyway, right? If the image doesn't look like me anymore, but let's say it has my breasts, my mouth and my navel and you sell it, will I sue you? No. Bottom line, don't worry, we are not looking to sue anybody (and Daz won't either), just respect me, be creative with me in a nice way, ask me if you're not sure about something, work out a deal with me if you have a great idea to make me the next Lara Croft and you do want to use my name, and if we can all stay cool, there are really no worries. I'm actually pretty easy going ;-) xoxoAnnaMarie p.s. DAZ is working on a revised EULA that reflects this/my position.

Thanks for responding AnnaMarie. I look forward to the revised EULA. I'm still unclear for commercial use and maybe this will be cleared up in a revised EULA, if I use the 'clone' Daz package in a picture that I sell commercially, do I have to give credit to AnnaMarie and Daz or either? If I create a poster to sell using the 'clone' package and title it Sally, but it uses the AnnaMarie 'clone' package with no modifications out of the box so to speak, would I have to ask for permission even if the titled artpeice has no indication of 'who' the picture is of? No disrespect but the AnnaMarie web site is a pay site, and as an artist I do not want to have to be an advocate for a site as such and be attached to that site just because I did a picture. Many Freestuff items and 3d models require that they not be used for commercial use, but credit given, or a site link, banner etc. I can understand this as giving credit and pointing to the source. As a purchased payed for product there is nothing that says that this kind of procedure can not be done, though generally in the community for commercially bought products its frowned on. For me I think I have to stay away from this product because of these kinds of issues. A real shame. I like the quality of the 'clone' product and the effort that went into it and the textures. The hair on the back of my neck just wont go down. maybe I'm just being paranoid and overly protective of my rights as an artist. goes back to the corner to rock back and forth :)

wow, thank you Ms. Goddard for taking the time out and post. You are lovely and your Digital Clone is really fantastic, at first with the EULA, I'd wondered if I should have purchased it, but from this thread a good deal has been cleared up. :)

You have to protect your name and image so all that is perfectly understandable. I think what most are concerned about is the use of the textures alone, perhaps without the morphs and the EULA covering that. I personally think that your and Daz's main concern, and the reason for the restrictive EULA is specifically images that portray the figure as you with all the morphs and textures, etc, etc, and the EULA they created is necessary in that respect. Most build on the morphs and textures anyway and the characters don't end up looking like the original character. So now that everyone knows that the EULA isn't going to restrict the use of the package when it isn't used to look like you for commercial purposes or if only part of it is used, the situation should be fine.
I'm thankful the discussion was brought up and Daz and Annamarie have responded as the textures alone are worth the sale price.

AnnaMarie, Thanks for sharing your perspective on this issue. It demonstrates a certain generosity (not to mention bravery) of spirit to wade into this discussion about the use of your digital "clone." As a clone--err twin, myself, I understand the strange psychological condition of viewing/speaking of someone/something that is both like and unlike you. So I applaud your bravery. So thanks again. And thus, I hope your appearance ends this round of the "Clone Wars." Sorry! Couldn't resist. thanks, --lb

Attached Link: http://www.renderotica.com/portal/modules.php?op=modload&name=Forum&file=viewtopic&topic=1788&forum

Hmmmm, well Anna-Marie, I also thank you for taking the time to speak to us...and you may not be aware of this or maybe you are, and I am going to try to be as careful as I can when wording this so not to offend anyone: Let's say this using myself as an example, if it were myself and I was conserned about this and ruining my reputation or hurting my family - I WOULD NOT DO IT.....why, because we all have to know this IS going to get out, and used by someone who WILL try to damage you or your rep. If I was a public personality, I would know this....that is why I get confused. If you are worried why would you do this? You know that there are people out there that are going to mishandle this? No disrepect intended but I want to say...DUH....I am sorry really I don't want to hurt you or what you represent but sometimes I just wonder what is in people's brains. Humbely yours....Sharen

It's nice for a change to hear from the real person involved on this specific issue. I don't think it matters how nice a person or a company is however, the language of "legalese" is ALWAYS going to sound cold, impersonal, and a bit threatening. Obvious from their responses, neither DAZ nor Ms. Goddard are like that at all. Stepping away from the the strictly personal issue and back to the legalese thing... in reading all these posts, five (giver or take) words kept recurring to me over and over... THE PEOPLE VS. LARRY FLINT :) and lastly just want to say if DAZ wants to make a nekkid faerie model I'll be glad to pose(r) for them lol And honestly I don't give a rat's patootie what you do with the images, as long as I get my check. $o) The one and only inimitable THORNE, with tongue in cheek as always =};-}>

what a joke. why buy a texture if you cannot 'use' it? no offense, but im not so overly impressed with this product to shell out $30-40 for it then have to consult a nonstandard and insanely restrictive EULA every time i think of using it. the texture doesnt look much different than the standard V2 or V3 texture, as for the face morph - it bears a likeness, but someone could create one quite easily anyways, given the poser toolset, with no legal restrictions on its use. now im going to step on some toes - but its never stopped me before and ill say what i think. the only selling point for this texture/character is the fact that its a likeness of someone semi-famous - a media wet dream. its a branding ploy - the only thing selling this product is the name. and since you can only use the images you create for personal use, and not commercially or in anything suggestive (or anything not 'pretty', lol), what purpose does it serve? if you want to wank off to images of anne-marie goddard, your money is much better spent picking up her latest spread in playboy or penthouse - at least youll get a better likeness. as for the whole 'damage to reputation' issue? please. i think its conceited and rediculous to think that the likeness between this vicky 3 texture and character and the actual annemarie are so strong that people are going to mistake them for one another... and that any 'damage to reputation' will result to her pristine reputation from suggestive poser images created with it -- lets face it - its not like were talking about the digital likeness of the pope here. cheers, -gabriel

Exactly ! Sharen

did read the tread but at first i'll think the texture is much to expensive there are better textures all over the marketplace here. But if their is a Faerie from thorne I'll buy it LOL I'm from Holland a real Dutch girl and that means that I can't spend that much money for something I think it's not so special. Ang

From several later threats on AMG, I've got the feeling that owners of this package are having some problems bringing the out "true" likeness of AMG in their renders. It still requires some amount of tweaking on the user's part. Cris Palomino did a great job on her, but Cris is a postwork god. the texture doesnt look much different than the standard V2 or V3 texture After all the postwork, you wouldn't even recognize the original texture half of the time. as for the face morph - it bears a likeness, but someone could create one quite easily anyways, given the poser toolset. I've seen some amazing face morphs done by some members of this community. I had my CC ready but I found myself going pass the AMG package and bought the Demon Dogs and the Gargoyle Hound...

Hallo Dolfijntjes, Engeltje Hoe gaat it? ~Waiving at dofijntjes~ I ben niet van Holland, maar I kan een beetje Netherlands spreken :) JV

"I found myself going pass the AMG package and bought the Demon Dogs and the Gargoyle Hound..." thats hilarious, in an ironic sort of way. certainly a blow to someones ego :)

I bought the Demon Dogs, the Gargoyles, the Hounds, and the Hot Dog Cart. I think I still came out less than the AMG texture. I'm a happy camper. :)

I bought the Demon Dogs, the Gargoyles, the Hounds, and the Hot Dog Cart. A Hot Dog Cart, Dialyn? I am not even gonna attempt to ask whatcha gonna do with it. Um , Either you got your Dogs crossed, or you are one "interesting" individual Bahahaha!!

I am going to go get the Gargoyles, I think they are done very nicely....I didn't see the hot dog cart, but I think Mike can do that one for me....Sharen