If your like me, you asked more than one mod In my case, I visited the Child Image Guidelines and followed the note that stated that URLs, of images which need to be reviewed, should be forwarded to admin@renderosity.com Exactly what the process is for how an image gets reviewed once a post has been sent to the above address, I don't know, but I got two emails with conflicting positions. The reason I sent the URL, of one of my images, to the admin team is because one used a Thorne fairy. Since Thorne's Platinum Club fairies are based on the Millennium Girl mesh, I felt that I should notify the admins and get their position on the image. Many of Thorne's fairies are clearly adult, with Lisha having a chest that would make Britney Spears pout in envy. Still, the mesh is based on the MilGirl (which is based on the V2 mesh), so I wanted to be safe and get an official position on the image. DAZ, by giving a smaller version of the image an honorable mention in the PC banner contest, has already tacitly endorsed it as not being controversial content. I can understand both positions. One is just more conservative than the other. I doubt that the conservative stance was taken because of any direct objection to the image as much as was taking a strong view of the guidelines. I certainly wasn't trying to be controversial when I created the image. Like a lot of the work I do, it starts with a vague notion and I let it organically grow. In this instance, I wanted to make a PC banner wholly with Plat Club products. I flipped through my content and decided to do something with one of Thorne's gorgeous figures, settling on the one with the best profile, and built an environment around what was initially going to be a figure completely silhouetted against a sunset. When throwing all the lights behind the figure gave a nice rendered contour, I shifted to playing more with that and a lot of Photoshop layering resulted in the final product. There aren't any naughty bits showing, not even the curve of a breast. Anybody can look at the rest of the images in my gallery to see that I'm not testing the boundaries of the TOS. I had qualms about submitting the image for review because simply that act puts the reviewers in a bit of a defensive position. Why would someone send an image to be reviewed if there wasn't something wrong with it? That puts the reviewer in the frame of mind where a position moves the line in the sand separating what is acceptable and what is not. In some ways, I wish I had left things alone because it is highly unlikely that anybody would ever object to the image.

My visual indexes of Poser content are at http://www.sharecg.com/pf/rgagnon