Tue, Dec 3, 1:29 PM CST

Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL



Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum

Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom

Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Dec 03 8:59 am)



Subject: Pretentious much???


Pharie82 ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 1:10 PM ยท edited Mon, 02 December 2024 at 5:42 AM

One of my images was recently accepted to 3dartists.com. They are a very selective website of the best 3d artwork from around the world. Once my image was posted, I started getting all these comments about how Poser work isn't really art. It was shocking and disapointing to me just how pretentious some of these people were. If you're intrested to read what these people were/are saying: http://raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/ag-ap.php?aid=525 This topic sparked a rather interesting discussion on another board about wheather or not using Poser as your main medium is "cheating". What do you think?


Kristta ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 1:19 PM

I firmly don't care how a piece of art is created. I couldn't care less. If it's pleasing to my eye then I consider it to be art. People pay thousands of dollars for a "print" by some artists and to me that is a bit silly. But still, doesn't matter how you get there, if it looks good, it's art. Just my opinion though. Kristta PS. There are a couple of sites that treat Poser that way and have members who just trash us Poser users.


SeanMartin ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 1:46 PM

I just posted my comments about those who like to bitch slap Poser as being a toy program. HTH.

docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider


RawArt ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 1:49 PM

Imagine that...artists are pretentious, who would have thought LOL (ok...sarcasm mode off) Welcome to the world of art though. I had the same bashing by my peers (and "friends") when I ventured away from traditional media (oil paints) and started exploring "Computer assisted art" (as they called it....mind you I never had a computer actually 'assist" me in anything, i usually have to fight it to get what I want LOL). Artists have always believed that what they do is art, and if someone does something different (or uses different tools) then it is no longer art. Which is a ridiculous notion, but it has always been around. I think deep down it is a fear that if someone can do something as nice or nicer than they can, and has a "better" way of getting the result, then they may be seen as less of an artist because of it. But in the end, it is always the artist and not the tools that makes the art....and anyone who thinks different is speaking through their own over inflated ego. Rawn


hauksdottir ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 2:01 PM ยท edited Thu, 11 November 2004 at 2:03 PM

Does it matter whether you make your ink with a plate held over a candle to collect the lampblack or whether you buy incre de chine from the most prestigious art store on the planet?

Does it matter whether you dig for genuine ultramarine in the french muds and spend days grinding it into pigment or whether you let the fine folks at Windsor&Newton expend the elbow grease?

Does it matter whether you shove those polygons into place yourself or whether you buy a mesh where some mathematical genius has already wrestled with fall-off zones or weighted joints?

I have made my own inks and ground my own pigments... but that doesn't make my art more less less "art" than anything anybody else creates. The only thing which matters is the intent of the artist and whether the piece speaks to us.
BTW, congratulations upon being selected!

Carolly

Message edited on: 11/11/2004 14:03


Lawndart ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 2:05 PM

Nice image... It looks like there were a bunch of people that liked the image and didn't care that it was Poser but how the art was created. THAT is the most important thing. When you look at those comments keep in mind that a lot of these people are still living off there parents and working with stolen software. Not that living off your parents is bad. Unless of course your 50. ;) I used to be a snob and think that if I didn't create every stinking object in a scene that it wasn't my work. Then I graduated from graphics school and went out into the real world. I was forced to put my huge ego aside and get some work done in a timely manner. That is when I started to grow up and realize that using objects created by others allowed me to get some work done as opposed to working one scene for 2 months in an art class. Be patient, compasionate and look at them with love in your heart. It sure makes it easier. If that doesn't work for you then imagine them banging on hollow logs by a camp fire wondering why it hurts when they stick there finger in the flames. LOL Cheers, Joe P.S. Again... Nice image.


Penguinisto ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 2:59 PM

Bah - I meant to reinforce what was written, not refute it. Don't pay any attention to that TJ Miller asshole... he goofs up sometimes :) /P


nickedshield ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 3:06 PM

No wonder 'artists ' starve.

I must remember to remember what it was I had to remember.


maxxxmodelz ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 3:42 PM

"I have made my own inks and ground my own pigments... but that doesn't make my art more less less "art" than anything anybody else creates. The only thing which matters is the intent of the artist and whether the piece speaks to us." This is an argument that's made quite often when defending the use of Poser in 3D, and I've pondered it myself quite a bit. I still can't seem to make the connection between a painter making his own tools from scratch, and someone using Poser. Rather, in 3D terms, I would liken it more to a painter having someone paint the base coat or choosing the kinds of brushes and pigments to use, and then the painter using that template as a starting point for his creation. In my opinion, the comparison of a painter who grinds his own pigments from scratch is more like comparing a 3D artist who actually WROTE the application he uses.


Tools : ย 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.


hauksdottir ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 5:17 PM

maxxxmodelz, In the typical studio system, the "master" got the commission and made the cartoon to his client's specs. He probably did most of the underlying drawing from sketches made on site. (If you look at the pencil drawings Hans Holbien the Elder made of the members of Henry VIII's court, you can see a remarkable freshness and liveliness.) The assistants ground the pigments and then slowly graduated to painting backgrounds, fabric, hands, and wings while the "master" went along and finished up the faces. Who got the credit? Yeah, the guy who got the commission and who did the final touches. The other dozen helpers are ignored, despite doing 95% of the painting. Does that make the piece less a masterpiece? Nope. From the mind of the artist, it speaks to us. Carolly


elizabyte ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 5:24 PM

The fact is, REAL 3D professionals don't turn up their nose at any tool that can be used to get the job done, get the results they need. My husband is on a very professional Maya mailing list (a couple of them, actually) because he's a programmer who works with that program. Just the other day someone asked how they could do something quickly and inexpensively and someone suggested using Poser for the project, and it's not the first time people have talked about using Poser or pre-made models for various purposes. The thing is, only clueless wannabes who have no idea what real professionalism is feel the need to make the kind of negative and hurtful comments that were made there. Personally, I avoid places that are full of people like that. Elitism is bad enough, but clueless eltism... Ugh. bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis


Kristta ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 7:26 PM

Wanted to repost about some of the best art I've seen and where I've seen it. I saw the most beautiful rose in the world once. It was part of a tattoo on someone's back. I saw the most vibrant colors swashed together in some graffitti art on the side of a train once. I've seen wonderful paintings at a museum near here. I've seen the biggest most gorgeous tree on the Gulf Coast. I think all the above is art. If it warms your heart or makes you think or reminds you of places you've been, then it's art. How it came to be, that just doesn't matter. Kristta


Marque ( ) posted Thu, 11 November 2004 at 7:44 PM

Once a week....sheesh. Marque


rowan_crisp ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 7:54 AM

Some people think that Thomas Kinkade is art. I would much prefer Prog's renders to Kinkade. Go fig. RC (with very small apologies to fans of Kinkade)


Kelderek ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 8:25 AM

This discussion comes up so often in various forums that it's getting tiresome...

There are two kinds of people debating this: artists and modellers.
Unfortunately, some modellers think they are artists just because they model. That's wrong.
Some people think they are artists just because they... well, think so! Equally wrong.

The truth is: It doesn't matter one bit how a piece of art was made just as long as it speaks to the person looking at it. Period.

A modeller who thinks he is more of an artists just because he can bend vertices better than somebody else is just pathetic. I'll watch good Poser art over bad Maya art any day. In the end, the result speaks for itself. Discussing the merits of the tool used to achieve the result is a technical discussion, not an art discussion. Never confuse those two.


Poppi ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 8:26 AM

first off...congrats...getting accepted there is a huge honor. i think poser is looked down upon for a number of reasons: 1. we see variations on about 5 models all over the web...this is what is considered poser "art". look at our gallery and honestly tell me that all the vicki's in all the temples don't resemble one another. 2. poser has been notorious for having a poor render engine. i don't have p5, but i do see that it is an improvement over p4's renderer. however, it really doesn't have the same render capabilities as other packages. using a tool, one should try to use the best at their disposal. 3. people who use higher end packs often DO have poser in their software library....as a tool. however, it is fun to make your own stuff. i think if poser had an actual modelling app built in (it never will 'cause that would cut out all the third party money it generates)that you would see a much greater acceptance. just my couple of pence :*) again....CONGRATS


Finister ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 8:30 AM

True art is not synthesized through the brain. The brain can only imitate what it has sensed. 99% of what has and will be called ART is the brain imitating what it has sensed. Tell me something, show me something that your brain created without any help of outside stimuli. Who cares what someone else calls your work as long as you enjoy it? Do you need someone else's recognition? If someone enjoys it, they enjoy it in their own unique way which really has nothing to do with you. I guarantee that within 100 years no one here will give a damn what is or isn't art. What matters then?


LillianH ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 8:49 AM

I just wanted to pipe in that I understand all too well the difficulties in being recognized as an artist while using Poser. I ran across this while promoting artists to some of the leading magazines in the industry, and at Siggraph. However, I am doing my part to shift that perspective. This past year, I was able to get the very first Poser image into 3DWorld Magazine! It was ToxicAngel's "My Freedom" image. (I didn't tell them it was Poser until it was accepted ;-) Now, they have chosen to highlight this image in their very own promotional layout! It is slowly shifting as artists incorporate many tools to produce high quality work. It also helps when artists know the secrets of lighting, texturing, and perspective. But, there still does remain the mind set that I see as similar in nature to the difference between the Jaguar car owners and the Toyota car owners. Both are cars, both get you to the same place, but the Jaguar owners don't want to be at the same car show as the Toyota owners ;-) Just my insight from the trenches. Keep learning, try new things and create from your heart...it is the soul of the image that makes great art, not the software! Best regards, Lillian

Lillian Hawkins
Marketing Manager
By serving each other, we are free.


Questor ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 9:00 AM

While not a lot of "art" from Poser has made it into 3DWorld - not a lot of so-called art is worth the bother however, that magazine has always been poser friendly. They don't demean the program, they don't slam the users of that program they don't ban art from that program, but neither will they display nekkid big titted broads rendered from stock materials. Often though people will submit pictures credited as rendered in Max, Maya, Lightwave" and don't often bother with "I made it in poser" because poser was the smallest part of the creation process. With Poser being such a cripplingly limited application it's rather difficult NOT to use something else when you're attempting to do professional or quality work. That's not to knock your achievement Lillian, but I've seen work from Gevidal in there (Bryce isn't exactly high end) and a couple other people using "cheap" software, and 3DWorld Magazine has been more than aware of Poser since issue 1. In fact they've been accused on several occassions of being Poser centric. Go figure.


Questor ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 9:06 AM

Just one further comment regarding 3DWorld and Poser. They held a competition some time back to create a prop in Poser which they would then distribute on the cd. They had literally hundreds of submissions. Next time you talk to the Editor at 3DWorld Mag, ask him what the most common poser submission is. His answer will most likely be the same as it was during that competition. Pornography. They had so many sex toys and bondage bits submitted they wondered what the hell they'd opened the flood gates to. They can't print most of the poser submissions they get, during the competition they couldn't distribute most of the items they got. I find that rather sad. That alone says far more about poser and it's users than anything else. Think about it. Poser users want respect, yet what is the single most common application of Poser?


LillianH ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 9:53 AM

"They had so many sex toys and bondage bits submitted they wondered what the hell they'd opened the flood gates to." YIKES! Ahhhh...there is always more to the story. Thanks for sharing the bits of background. It is very enlightening to say the least. (Could be another reason those Jaguar owners are bit leary...they're afraid of what's waiting to pop out of the trunk of those Toyotas while at the show ;-) Runs and ducks... Lillian (I'm being silly :)

Lillian Hawkins
Marketing Manager
By serving each other, we are free.


Questor ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 10:11 AM

Speaking of car shows and things popping out of the trunk. If you get five minutes check out the new Toyota vehicles at the Tokyo car show. Pop out of the trunk? These things have stuff popping out all over the place. Three Toyota vehicles have display wardrobes, clothes hangers and display boxes built into them, another has a mobile disco that comes out of the side... Funny how things said in jest come about, neh? No wonder Jaguar owners are nervous. The thing in front might be a Toyota but you really don't know what's going to pop out of it. :)


Kelderek ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 10:30 AM ยท edited Fri, 12 November 2004 at 10:32 AM

Yikes!! Pornography!! Oh, yes. If a tool such as poser is used for pornography, then it can't be used for art, right?

Just as logical as stating that photographers Ansel Adams and Richard Avedon were not artists because Playboy also used cameras to shoot porn...

Kelderek's Law:
"As a thread about Poser art grown longer, the probability of pornograhy being referenced in the discussion approaches 1"

Message edited on: 11/12/2004 10:32


Questor ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 11:11 AM

Strangely enough Kelderek, regardless of your incredible observational capabilities, nobody said Poser couldn't be used for art. In fact I don't see that statement anywhere here. Pornography was mentioned because that is the overwhelming style of imagery submitted to several magazines of which 3DWorld is one and the grounding source of many people's impression of the software. Thank you for your frothing, try again later.


Pharie82 ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 12:22 PM

Since you guys brought up 3D World Mag, incidentally, they are going to publish the same image accepted by 3dartists.com in an upcoming issue. Since that image was accepted and posted there, I have gotten more requests for publication of that particular image than ever before. I'm grateful for the exposure, but I do have more than just that one piece, ya know? I totally understand how some people can get turned off to Poser. So much of what comes out of it is cloned looking. In that sense, if I submitted a painting to a publication or gallery that looked almost exactly like a Luis Royo painting, it would be automatically rejected as a rip-off. That's why I try to use Poser only as a base or template, if you will, and 70-80% of my work is done in Photoshop. I am currently trying to learn Maya. It drives me crazy when I'm trying to create this image and I can't find a model of something I need for it.


lucstef ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 12:46 PM

Questor, I admit that most of the Poser work is on the edge of pornography, but I have some thoughts on it. Consider what a Max, Maya, or Lightwave user could do if he/she can quickly build a realistic mesh (and I mean "realistic", not some pipes held together with a faulty bone mesh)... Do you remember Stahlberg's images? I think they were the sexiest images I've ever seen...and he didn't used Poser for sure!!! So, given the difficulties to build a realistic human mesh in a 3D modeller, it's normal to see Poser as a "porn toy", and we know well, sex sells. I don't think then that all the "porn gadget" received by 3DMags were built directly in Poser, too :-D That said, just watch at the main subject of past artists: it was the human body. Goya's paintings, with their overweighted models, are on the same level as Picasso's ones; Michelangelo could be called a pornographer with today's standards; in the Systin Chapel are painted children too. The Reinassance palaces are filled with nude figures, and the Greek main decoration is the female body. I know, there's almost nothing that can made these images and statues a real "sexy image", not with actual standards, but I read many pamphlets about how sexy these images could have been to the viewers of the time. So, you can have a realistic human figure, you have a standard about sex and its appearances, and you are very likely to see a "sexy" image done with Poser. But as I said, just imagine what a Maya user could do if he can build a human mesh quickly... I want respect for what I do, not for what others do with the same program I'm using; or I can smack down a Lightwave user for what Stahlberg had done with it...


Kelderek ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 1:07 PM

"Thank you for your frothing, try again later."

No problem, I wiped my mouth from the froth before you even posted your reply, LOL

I never said anyone in this thread claimed that Poser couldn't be used for art. But you must admit that the entire thread is about the use of Poser as an artist tool, right? And we must admit that the use of Poser for pornography has a tendency to be adressed everytime this pointless "is Poser art or not" question is discussed. It must be a reason for it and I seriously doubt that it's brought up as a defense of Poser every time... I think my observation still holds ground.

I don't think that many people in this thread or in this forum thinks that Poser can't be used for art, but we were not discussing this forum, we were discussing what was claimed at another site.


Rubbermatt ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 1:54 PM

"The fact is, REAL 3D professionals don't turn up their nose at any tool that can be used to get the job done, get the results they need........The thing is, only clueless wannabes who have no idea what real professionalism is feel the need to make the kind of negative and hurtful comments that were made there. " Odds are the ones that bark loudest are the ones most likely to have an illegal version of some high end software residing on their hard drive A little something to bear in mind the next time you see some pointless elitist snobbery


Questor ( ) posted Fri, 12 November 2004 at 6:16 PM

Kelderek: True, but the other site didn't say Poser couldn't make art either (or at least hadn't when I last read the thread - barring the drooling praise of poser from the support mob). Technically though, it can't. :) The very limitations of poser preclude any "real" art coming out of it without postwork to correct the very functional errors created by the program's limitations. So, in a technical sense "Poser cannot create art", that's not to say someone using it can't, but I would suggest that the employment of other applications to compensate for the failings in Poser would be essential. As regards your observation how porn always pops up in a thread about poser art. You're right, it does, frequently as a further put down. And normally, some wet wally will trot out the old masters and some famous names to help themselves feel better. I almost die laughing everytime I see someone compare Poser to Michaelangelo etc. Doesn't make it any better, but at least it's consistent. smirk Unfortunately, as you're probably aware, poser has a nasty reputation for cookie cutter, and fantasy porn. If the users of the software and the various people making images from it can get themselves away from that and reduce the quantity of that material they might have a stronger stance to beat down the "elitists" with. Unfortunately with so many site galleries and so many store items geared simply towards sexual fantasy it's going to be a hard slog to gain credibility for an application that is perfectly useful in a work pipeline. Rubbermatt: Sorry old chap, I happen to disagree with you. I would suggest that those who bark the loudest are those who spent frightening amounts of money on their applications only to have someone come along with less and prove their money wasted. I don't much like the image that started this discussion but I can admire the technical aspects of it. Starting from a poser base and using photoshop to create that shows talent, certainly a lot more than I've got. From a newcomer, using a cheap low end package... That's gotta smart when you splashed out thousands of dollars and can't do it.


lucstef ( ) posted Sat, 13 November 2004 at 6:38 AM

Questor:

"The very limitations of poser preclude any "real" art coming out of it without postwork to correct the very functional errors created by the program's limitations"

But this is true for EVERY 3D program, either a modeller or a renderer or a texturizer.

Noone who is considered a good 3D artist in every art site uses a single app to make his/her images, AFAIK there's always some postwork involved in Photoshop, at least; don't even think about those that pose the figure in Poser and bring it in another workspace, either for a simple render or for adding the ambient around.

Do you really think that an image done in Photoshop alone is "instant art", only because the artist used Photoshop alone???
Returning to the Michelangelo's example, do you really think that the simple use of a scalpel made him an instant artist? Or it was his skill in using it???
Yes, you can laugh at the view of the words "Poser" and "Michelangelo" in the same line, but just think about what he could have made with a Poser base...

And finally, always remember this: if a Maya, Max, or Lightwave user could model quickly a realistic human mesh in the app and pose it, Poser wouldn't even exist and everything about 3D art would be called "pornography".

Rubbermatt:

Some times ago I made a joke about Mac G4s used in the lowest floors of a great firm, when the owner wuold have played with a 2-floor-high Cray in his personal office; the joke was around my friend being a great firm owner...not that that would happen in a couple of days, mind you :-) he is really young...

Suddenly, one Mac entusiast sat at me telling "Mac is used for so and so...here and here...", in a pointless defense of something that would have been clearly outdated at the time my friend would even have became famous.

Problem is: that moron is a PROFESSIONAL, a really big one too, and he sure uses his tools for his works, all his apps are regularly registered, and so on.

Point taken?
If someone is anal about something, pro or not pro, he is anal, period.
He didn't even accept my excuses, he didn't even listened to other board members telling him that that was clearly a joke...


Rubbermatt ( ) posted Sat, 13 November 2004 at 10:12 AM

Yeah I was being a bit flippant

As someone just pointed out at R'otica a lot of the anti poser league are newly graduated, wedded to the software they use and evangelical in singing it's praises/defending it's borders

They spend a lot of money and time learning then someone with a low end prog comes along and creates an image that puts them to shame and they huff around in a high dudgeon

BTW there's nowt wrong with porn, etc in it's right place

i.e. if you do a bondage pic you post it in the Renderotica galleries, only a complete womble would send it to 3D World

Unfortunately the womble population is breeding out of control


hauksdottir ( ) posted Sat, 13 November 2004 at 12:42 PM

"Unfortunately the womble population is breeding out of control" Usually the best population control is making something useful and desirable... and then it quickly goes extinct (such as birds killed for food and or feathers dieoff whereas starlings multiply). Are wombles edible? Can they be stewed if they are too tough to digest otherwise? Carolly


Questor ( ) posted Sat, 13 November 2004 at 1:25 PM

Unfortunately lucstef you completely missed the point. Oh well, not like that's a new thing either. You'll do very well in the forums, perfect material. :) Carolly: Yes, Wombles are eminently edible, actually quite tasteful when served correctly. The older ones can be somewhat chewy and gamey but stewing with a good wine and some subtle spices fixes that problem. I used to have some very good recipes for cooking wombles, I'll have to see if I can find them. :)


Rubbermatt ( ) posted Sat, 13 November 2004 at 1:37 PM ยท edited Sat, 13 November 2004 at 1:42 PM

Also the thick nearly impenetrable hide could be considered as an alternative to leather by the fashion industry, and the thickness and density of the skull might interest the military for use as a lightweight but effective armour plating on main battle tanks

Message edited on: 11/13/2004 13:42


lucstef ( ) posted Sun, 14 November 2004 at 1:56 AM

E-hi Questor, don't even think I'm edible, my wife keeps telling me that I'm too salad :-DDD

Seriously, I didn't told you I disagree, I just disagree with a couple of your statements.

Perhaps you missed one of my quotes:
"I want respect for what I do, not for what others do with the same program I'm using; or I can smack down a Lightwave user for what Stahlberg had done with it...".
Actually it is Maya and not Lightwave, but the meaning isn't changed.

P.S. - Then, it is really possible I missed the point, as I'm not a true English-speaking person; if so, just take the time to re-explain it to me, if you want :-)


lmckenzie ( ) posted Mon, 15 November 2004 at 2:23 AM

I think the notion that 'if only the great unwashed mass of Poser users would stop rendering that danged old porn' Poser would get the respect it deserves is an illusion. True, the councils of the small and the silly may latch onto that if if it didn't, they'd find something else. The 3D elitist crowd doesn't respect Poser for the same reasons some Porsche owners don't respect Mustangs. Poser is cheap and accessible to the masses. You can enjoy using it practically without opening the manual and most people can become reasonably proficient without the equivalent of a college level course devoted to training. Worst of all in the eyes of the elite, someone with Poser can create something that the average person on the street might compare favorably to one of their "masterpieces." No thoughtful, or for that matter, skilled person is going to judge a tool based on what they see someone else do with it. If they have an open mind, they're going to see beyond the images and realize the potential the tool has to do other things. By the same token, they can see beyond the genre that a particular artist chooses and see talent, even if it isn't being used in a way they prefer. Anyone who can't accomplish these things is so closed off and lacking in imagination that I don't see giving their views much weight anyway.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken


wrpspeed ( ) posted Mon, 15 November 2004 at 7:59 AM

all of society is based on someone being higher on the ladder than another to make that person feel better about themselves. it is money based, racially based and also creatively based and object based. dont know why but some people dont feel better about themselves unless others feel worse about themselves.


Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.