Yes, I have P5 and P6 - but P4 is the fasted, cleanest version ever made. It imports so beautifully into Vue and Bryce. And with no problems!

There are more p4 users than they know in the marketplace.

Please keep us in mind when you release freebies and 'for sale' products, as we will pass them up.

Some of us are still purchasing products that are for P4.

Just ask Dr. Geep...

Well....there are those who would argue that the 1936 Bugatti was the greatest car ever made.  But you don't see many of them on the road any longer.  And there are those who would argue that the Amiga was the greatest computer concept ever.  But you don't see many Amigas around anymore.  And there are those who would insist that pong was a 'purer' computer game than...say.....Warcraft or Civilization IV.  But there comes a time........

P4 will ineviitably fade out with the years.  And none too soon, IMO.  It's like sticking with Windows 98.  Simpler, perhaps.  But definitely not "better".  Besides which, you inevitably get left behind when you insist on living in the past.  Be it with computer software or with old styles of clothes.

I suspect now that Poser 5 was released for free that you will see a reduction in the release of products  that support PP and P4. Lots of people still used P4 and PP because their finances didn't permit them to upgrade, but now that Poser 5 can be had for FREE, there is no excuse to not upgrade their version, other than preference of course.

Dr. Geep says:

YES !!! ....... P4 ROCKS !!! :thumbupboth:

Oh, did I say P4? ... I should have said Poser Artist.
(Poser Artist and Poser 4 are identical)

So while Poser 5 is being given away for free, Poser 4 (aka Poser Artist) is still being sold and that should tell you something.

Poser 6 has many bells and whistles which do not grace the halls of P4 but, with a talented and loving touch, Poser 4 has a great deal of capability; far more than most people realize.

Oh, and did I say that Poser4 ROCKS !!!

P4 will live on for quite a while ... thanks Billy Goat for pointing that out.

cheers,
dr geep <----------------------- climbing down off soapbox now ... ;=]
;=]

P.S. Have you seen the new pool at P.U.? ...... :blink: ___ HUH ?

P.P.S. There's a FREE class in Room #101 going on RIGHT NOW for a limited time.

Quote - Well....there are those who would argue that the 1936 Bugatti was the greatest car ever made.  But you don't see many of them on the road any longer.  And there are those who would argue that the Amiga was the greatest computer concept ever.  But you don't see many Amigas around anymore.  And there are those who would insist that pong was a 'purer' computer game than...say.....Warcraft or Civilization IV.  But there comes a time........

P4 will ineviitably fade out with the years.  And none too soon, IMO.  It's like sticking with Windows 98.  Simpler, perhaps.  But definitely not "better".  Besides which, you inevitably get left behind when you insist on living in the past.  Be it with computer software or with old styles of clothes.

Lest we forget that the almighty Propack plugin still thrives within Lightwave; thereby "rendering" it sacred. I therefore concur with the origonal poster. Within the realm of Poser, P4PP rules.

so how cum Doc and I ar thu ownly wuns still usin' it?..;) I'm just in line for Poser 5, I have to wait until the anaconda makes it through the drinking straw at CP..;)

I useta think the Mac Classic (the one with Jobs and Woz's signatures inside the case) was the best mac ever made, until I got an intel mac. but I agree, poser 4 was good. they kept it clean and simple, free of all the render/light/material features that can be so vexing :lol:

Yes, I am still using P4 (despite having both P5 and P6).  Why?  Because the current versions simply cannot match P4 in terms of ease of use, render speed and overall performance.  I can live without the face room, dynamic cloth. ray tracing, etc.  If P7 is going to be as bloated and clunky as P5/P6 then I will stick with P4.  Hopefully, e-Frontier does a better job in moving the Poser platform forward.

Depends on how you are using poser i guess. If poser is your main 3d app then the latest versions are of course the best, they have more features, the renderer is more advanced and you can use it more effectively. But if you mostly import poser stuff into other apps for rendering or whatever, then you lose a lot of the benefits of poser 5 or 6 IMO. The extra overhead of the 'advanced' features of 5/6 may even get in your way more then the 'simpler' features of Poser 4.

So i dont think you can actually call it 'living in the past', more like 'using what suits your needs and budget.' In OS terms the analogy would be sticking with XP cause you dont really need Vista as yet :)

Quote - And there are those who would argue that the Amiga was the greatest computer concept ever.  But you don't see many Amigas around anymore

Actually... ;)  There are still a few Amigas chugging along - I had one only five years ago.  And it was the greatest computer ever!!!! ;D

(P.S.: I'm being facetious)

Ahh, Poser4, how I miss the juggling of folders to keep inside the 250ish limit just to see all of my content, the quite often unwanted crosstalk, the double click replace not add figure dance, ahh yes, memories..... :)

There's no denying I thought it was good at the time, but I don't think i could go back to it from Poser 6 now. Besides, in P6 you can just use the P4 features, set the material room to the simple tab, and you almost have a newer version of Pro-Pack :) Well, ok, apart from the free lightwave/max plugins!

Pakled, Doc, you're not the only ones using it. Even though I've had P5 for over a year and am planning to buy P6 in the near future I still use P4 (well ProPack) in preference.

If I need to do multiple renders in a pinch, which I do quite often, then P4 is the bomb. I like to use P6 if I'm doing just one intense render but I find it very slow when trying to do renders for a story board. I agree with the doc if P4 is on its way out then why is e-f still selling it? It does say something.

around, even if only among a limited set of enthusiasts.  Not so much for the tech,

but for the people.  In tough times or disasters, the folks who know how to get it

done with minimal bells and whistles, come in mighty handy. 

With a simpler machine, you can get into a pinch more easily, but this requires

you to understand the situation more deeply than the push-one-button machine.

However, I'm not practicing what I preach!  This picture was done in P6,

to take advantage of the Weave node!

At the risk of ignition, I must truly say I fail to see the point of this thread. I use a 10-inch compound mitre saw when I cut two by fours, a multi-speed jigsaw when I cut plywood and a chainsaw when I cut branches and logs. If you have a tool that does the job then use it, but don't get on a soapbox about why you erroneously believe that it is the best tool "ever made." It is only the best tool for your particular purposes. I would hazard a guess that in this limited marketplace, content creators are those best positioned to determine what is selling and what is not and, if there is no significant demand for P4 content, they will not be creating such, notwithstanding your pleas. For better or for worse, it is the marketplace that ultimately determines "the best."

<"))%%%<<

Yup ................. what he said.

;=]

Oh, the "best" is whatever I think that it is.  And to me: the best is the future.  Not the past.

I'm well aware of the fact that there are still P4 users (holdouts?) out there: and that they all have their reasons for sticking with an aging program.  But they'll find themselves being less and less catered to with time -- it's happening now.  And it's in the nature of things.

Quote - In OS terms the analogy would be sticking with XP cause you dont really need Vista as yet :)

P4/Poser Artist is like Windows CS, if you want an OS comparison.  It might do what it does well; but it's limited when compared with the full desktop version.

Quote - So i dont think you can actually call it 'living in the past', more like 'using what suits your needs and budget.'

Some people like 78rpm records, too -- I'm sure.  Perhaps because they could never afford to nor desired to upgrade to a 45rpm record player.  But for the rest of us......there's CD's & mp3's & ipods & such.  Personally -- I'll take the new technology.

And there's the metaphor; not the analogy.

Attached Link: Vulcan salute

Strictly OT to this thread, Dr. Geep, but the 'Vulcan Salutation' at the opening of your hand pose tutorial is of Jewish origin.  It's the hand pose assumed by the Cohen when blessing the assembly, with the Tripartite Blessing, either in the Temple in Jerusalem (not done for the last 2000 years) or in the modern day Traditional Synagogue.  It's done with both hands held outwards, palms down with the fingertips of the thumbs and index touching.
Leonard Nimoy popularized the gesture in the Star Trek series, but then Leonard Nimoy is Jewish, and started his acting career in Yiddish Theater.
DPH

As for the issue of giving away P5 for free vs. selling Poser Artist -- that's most likely a marketing strategy; and one that's being used for a number of reasons.  One likely reason being a roll-out to P7; another reason being to answer the competition; and yet another reason being to wean P4 holdouts off of the mother's milk of an old program -- on onto beverages of a more mature character.

Perhaps we'll still be hearing pleas for P4-oriented content when P10 is all the rage.  But by then: P4 quite possibly won't run under the then-extant OS's.

Too bad that Commodore 64 programs can't run under Windows XP.  It was a great machine -- for it's time.

My P5 waits patiently at CP for me to have time to d/l it and try out, but I won't abandon ProPack. It has very simple material dialog which usually allows me to make what I have in mind without all the mess with nodes (although I'll happily try them out in future). As for the incompatible products - the only stuff really incompatible is dynamic stuff and materials/shaders. Everything else may look worse but still works fine under  this ancient app. I've even forced P6-targeted CP Chinese Dragon to work for me, so mostly (not always but mostly) it's just a matter of patience and knowledge of your tool of choice ;) Technology is good, but sometimes something simple is far more better even if it's outdated.

Hmmm, well I use Poser 4 and Pro, but have been using my copy of P6....I actually like them all.  I use the one that suits my needs at the time.  Sharen

For me Arendar has sumed it up. I agree with every thing he said. I have both P4 and P5, but it takes me 3 times as long to do anything in P5. P5 does have some good points, but life is too short to spend it making scenes in P5.

Here's my opening letter for the "Inside Poser" Basics class that I teach at P.U.
It's posted on the Bull@ten Bored on the 1st Floor of the main building.

This is a fascinating discussion ......... just fascinating. ;=]

I have P4, PP, P5, P6, and Poser Artist and I use 'em all for my tuts ...
... cuz I don't want to leave anyone out.

:b_grin:

cheers,
dr geep
;=]

You forgot one, Xeno. With the impending release of Vue6, and the nigh onto quantum leap in interconnectivity discussed with P6, EF may be getting people ready for -that- change, as well. Being able to finally read the shader tree in Vue is going to open up nigh onto all of the effects possible in P6 into a renderer with pro level features.

Personally, I like all the posers I have used (P2,P4 and P6). I will admit that I struggled a bit with P6 and am still learning things (I've only had the program for 4 months) but I really like what it can do, aside from the slow render times, and I'm really loving the the clothroom. However, I still wonder why if P6 is suppose to be so advanced that e-f kept the P4 render engine in the program?

But I have to say that Vue has really gotten my attention!  I love being able to render an image to look almost life like , I've gotten some really good renders with P6 however, I see Vue doing this more so than poser. I maybe buying Vue Espirit to use for a while and it's cheap right now the download version at the e-on site is $149 bucks so I just may end up purchasing it.

I do see the P4 content fading away I myself do not have P4 or 5 on my machine I just use the P4 render engine in P6 if I want to do multiple scenes and not wait until doomsday for them to finish. I will not go back to P4 I really like the things P6 does. I have also been toying with POV-ray and while it renders well and I do use it a lot it sometimes does not always import all the textures or props from my poser scenes. I am very much looking forward into what P7 will hold. I really hope it's a brand new build and not a patched up P6.

Cheers,
Micheál

Well now.... this sounds like fun. I'm going to be purchasing Poser Artist because for general work, P6 is just way to involved (some would say clunky). I'm still using Poser 3 because "I" like it. Others will pooh-pooh my choice because it's old school and just not as "cool" as the new stuff. I like it because when I do an animation, it gets done fast (I animate my stuff mostly in sketch or Toon mode.... I just like the looks of it, and so do others). Is P6 better..... well, for the price and all the do dads it should be. but I also think back to the history of spaceflight. The early Mercury and Vokshod machines were so insanely primative compared to the modern space shuttle but they still went up and accomplished the job. Titanic was built by professionals, Noah's Ark was built by an amateur. My 1970 VW Beetle could run rings around a Corvette in the slalom. And I still use my Amigas, I have 6 of them (two A 500's, three A2000's with two being Toasters, and one A1200) I miss my Beetle...... except in winter. Use what works for you, this is art, don't try and be fashionable. Fashion is for people who want to be trendy, Art is for people who want to create trends. and, unless you've made other plans, have a great day!

The early Mercury & Gemini spacecraft carried up into space perhaps 1 or 2 men for a short flight.  No one ever considered using those 'basic' craft to accomplish tasks like building space stations; performing sophisticated experiments on board; carrying up multiples of people; or many, many other things that Mercury & Gemini simply couldn't do.  Mercury & Gemini were great for their time.  But nowadays those craft sit in museums.  We all remember them fondly; but no one is suggesting bringing them back in as the standard.

Yes, yes......walk into a party wearing platform shoes, a lime green leisure suit and a paisley-pattern ascot.  And a shag hairdo, of course.  If anyone questions what you are doing -- just tell them that you are refusing to be trendy & fashionable.  Because the old ways are still the best.  Who knows?  Perhaps you'll create a new trend..........:lol:  Hey -- if a 70's-era leisure suit doesn't appeal -- then try a 1920's-era Al Capone-style men's suit with a panama hat instead.  You should make just as much of a favorable impression on your fellow party-goers either way.  Especially on the ladies.  Everyone will understand that you are making a statement about refusing to be trendy.  Be sure to say, "Hey, babe, what's your sign........?"  Works to break the ice everytime it's tried.

In the meantime, I'll have a great day by going shopping for a brand-new Corvette.  I wonder how much they'll give me in trade-in for my 1970 beetle...........?

Quote - You forgot one, Xeno. With the impending release of Vue6, and the nigh onto quantum leap in interconnectivity discussed with P6, EF may be getting people ready for -that- change, as well. Being able to finally read the shader tree in Vue is going to open up nigh onto all of the effects possible in P6 into a renderer with pro level features.

That's true, Dale.  With Vue 6I, I believe that we'll be advancing to a whole new level for Poser-related 3D applications (not to mention all of the way around) -- for anyone who cares to move on beyond the elementary foundations of this hobby.

P4 - I'll always remember it fondly.  Just like I remember my parent's old 1966 Pontiac Catalina.

But it isn't 1966 today.  And it isn't 1999 any longer, either.

Talking NASA they plan on a moon shot here in the future using lunar vehicles very similar in design of those use in the Apollo program. The main rocket to carry the payload will be much bigger and more powerful than the old Saturn Vs. But the command module and lunar module will be very much like the old Apollo crafts. Upon mission competed the capsule will break away from the rest of the command module and return to Earth much as it did during the Apollo program.

Everyone talks about advances in technology but have we really advanced all that much? I can remember being a kid and reading popular science where by this time we would have had cars that hovered, there was no such thing as fossil fuels and everything was more environmentally kind to the Earth. What happened to that stuff??

But you know what? Even though my parents 1955 two tone Fairlane maybe a museum piece now but then it was built with pride and craftmanship as were many other things. Now days things are thrown together and made like crap and there is no pride in a job well done. All that matters is the bottom line and that's how much money people can stuff in their pockets. While I love technology and all the wonders that come with it I also put little faith in it. It all comes back to basics and having knowledge of the basics is what will help you to survive. Hell, now days if the power goes out for more than an hour or cell phone reception is interrupted people think it's the end of the age.

On the point that technology breeds dependency, I won't disagree with you.  But I'll also point out that the average life expectancy (at least in Western countries) is far, far greater than it was back when the human race didn't have that advanced technology around to become dependent upon.  It's true that if you threw the average metrosexual urban man out into the woods or the desert without his cell phone -- that he'd likely not last long.  But while that's true, most of us wouldn't care to spend our lives dwelling in the desert or living in a cave in the woods (or even in a grass-thatched-roof log cabin).

I guarnatee you that any new moon missions won't be using Apollo-era computers: or other types of Apollo-era technology.  Sure, many of the basic concepts are the same -- but the means of achieving them most definitely are not.  shrug  But there's always the potential for human error.  That's one factor that will never change.

As for the pride with which 1955 Fairlanes were built -- I won't argue on that point.  But I will say that the average Toyota today lasts a WHOLE lot longer, mileage wise, than the average 1955 Fairlane did.  And as for the problems that GM and Ford are both having today -- much of it is directly traceable to deals that were made back in 1955 & even earlier.  You can't afford to pay people to not work for you for 30 years or more -- not and still sustain a competitive business......but that's all OT to this thread.

Quote - Yes, I have P5 and P6 - but P4 is the fasted, cleanest version ever made. It imports so beautifully into Vue and Bryce. And with no problems!

There are more p4 users than they know in the marketplace.

Please keep us in mind when you release freebies and 'for sale' products, as we will pass them up.

Some of us are still purchasing products that are for P4.

Just ask Dr. Geep...

It doesn't have a cloth room so what good is it?  Sorry, but I just can't live without dynamic clothing.  That's all my character wear when they wear anything at all.

Quote -

Everyone talks about advances in technology but have we really advanced all that much? I can remember being a kid and reading popular science where by this time we would have had cars that hovered, there was no such thing as fossil fuels and everything was more environmentally kind to the Earth. What happened to that stuff??

Look at the computer you are typing this message on.  Look at the means your message is
getting out to the entire world.  Now was anything like this available when that 1955
Ford Fairlane was built? For that matter, did that Ford Fairlane have a computer in it
that monitored the fuel injectors, the spark, the timing, the emissions, like modern cars?
Hover cars are a stupid idea because you would expend a great deal of energy
keeping the car suspended in the air.  Rubber tires are for more energy efficient.
Fossil fuels are still used because even now they are the cheapest and most
abundent and easiest to use fuel available.

Quote - Perhaps we'll still be hearing pleas for P4-oriented content when P10 is all the rage.  But by then: P4 quite possibly won't run under the then-extant OS's. Too bad that Commodore 64 programs can't run under Windows XP.  It was a great machine -- for it's time.

OMG! My first ever computer! :)  That is where I learned to program BASIC and Assembly.  There might actually be a C64 emulator for Windows.  There is one for Amiga (I have it installed and everything - with software like Imagine, DPaint IV, Deluxe Music, BattleChess) called AmigaForever which uses several emulators and supports AOS 1.3 to 3.5.

Now Battlechess I can relate to.

But I'm fairly certain that they'd be able to do more with the graphics in 2006 than they could in 1987(?).  Whenever it was that Battlechess first came out.

Hmmmm.....a version of Battlechess animated using Poser figures.......

Don't confuse the task with the method, xenophonz. And realize, as well, that by the time Apollo launched most space technology was fairly mature; we have made only incremental improvements since on the majority of the technologies Apollo used. Were we to attempt an identical mission today, we would likely use vastly similar hardware. Same for engine performance...even fuel ignition and electronics provide only small gains. The majority of the high-tech stuff under the hood of a modern car is not to make it more efficient; it is to make it less polluting. And as for the mileage -- my 1986 Toyota gets better mileage than most of what I share the road with. Why? Because it weighs a third of what those SUV's do! Aerospace is generally too smart to use bleeding-edge technology. They'd prefer stuff that has enough history behind it for there to be a solid empirical understanding of how it functions under stress. Look for similar in other high-stress, production oriented environments. Advances are costly. There is re-training, and there is the constant risk of being the first to discover some new bug. Taking on a new technology is a calculated risk; you hope the productivity gains projected will be larger than the productivity losses you can't predict. The problem facing small computer users -- like the members of this forum -- is that the computer industry is supporting itself on a program of constant obsolescence. We haven't made anything but incremental improvements to word-processing since the first memory typewriter. If you are typing a memo or writing a book the best software and computer out there can't give you more than a few percent faster. We've been "good enough" for emails for over a decade; the lag involved is human eye, and spam filtering, not the network speed or the number of bells on the mail server. Some tasks ARE vastly improved. The ability to render increasingly realistic scenes for film, for instance, or to calculate interactions on a molecular level, and many other tasks, simply weren't practical a decade ago. As a for-instance, engineering is moving swiftly away from the older empirical solutions for certain classes of problem, and increasingly into forms of finite-element analysis -- some of those are run on some of the best of today's supercomputers, but it is quickly moving down to a level where an average mold-making shop can leverage those methods. But what the industry has made a pattern is this constant round of improvements. New hardware begats new OS to run on it, which begats new applications, which demand faster hardware...and the cycle goes around again. Five steps down the road, you have a vastly more powerful computer that does several things vastly better....but still creates and sends an email almost exactly as well. What 3d software often forgets...with that long, heavy, and probably spiked gaming tail wagging the rest of the dog...is that the prime choke-point remains the human operator. Our "productivity," as individual artists, and our ability as ARTISTS to interact with the material and shape it to our own internal vision, is largely independent of any marvels of computer speed or monitor size or how fast our card can do real-time ray-tracing. That has always been the underlying problem with Poser, as it is with several other consumerist art applications (I think particularly of Garage Band, for instance!) -- whereas the software is driven to create more and more polished piles of shit with an easy press of a button, it is the chore of the artist to do what they wish to do, often despite the software. In a way the argument that better renders are automatically better art is like arguing that oils always trump watercolor always trump pastels always trump ink always trumps pencil. And by extension, no picture could possibly be as good as a movie (pictures do not move or have sound), and no novel could possible be as good as a picture. And of course the other buried assumption is that it is better to do a paint-by-numbers that has been blocked by a professional, than to paint a scene from scratch. At the reductio ad absurdum of this line of thinking, since few of us can paint as well as the Dutch Masters, we are better off returning the oils to the counter and buying a big glossy book of reproductions instead. In short, we don't always want those things a powerful computer can add. As a layout person I may just want a black border. A drop-shadow may not add anything artistically to it, even though the latest and greatest version of PhotoShop can now do ten million kinds of drop-shadow, and my Unrepentium XVIII can run the algorithm faster than I can hit the "enter" key. As a writer, I am aware there are items of software out there that will regularize my grammar, outline my plots for me, generate my names for me....but does any of this make MY writing better? Or does it simply create generic crap that has little to do with me and my voice? And we come full-circle to Poser 4. I have Poser 4 installed. Due to that merry-go-round of the software and hardware giants I can no longer run it without a reboot -- and that turns off several of my other tools (on the other hand, it does give back to me PhotoShop 4 -- which has all the functions I use frequently, and none of the clutter of functions I've never found a use for. Somehow, red-eye reduction has never played a part in any texture map I've created!) So I mostly use Poser 6 now. It is less buggy than 5, but other than that, for me it was a pointless upgrade. The files it produces are a huge pain from the point of view of an independent content creator, and half the functions are just plain silly, but I do like having a cloth engine handy. It is, for better or worse, what I chose and probably would chose freely (if operating systems gave me that option.) But I understand, respect, and support those who have realized that Poser 4 is better for the tasks they face. I also own a handsaw. Although I use power tools more frequently, it is a very, very good handsaw (Japanese of course) and is in those special times the more appropriate tool. Only in the world of software would I be physically prevented from using my handsaw after I had bought my first power tool, and laughed at in forums when I complained about what had happened.

whoa Xeno..... nobody said that you had to be a fashionista. when I go to parties, I dress casual, unless it's formal, then I dust off the old top hat (what's that you say..... you don't own a top hat? oh, so sorry.... maybe someday;-) ). I don't dress fashionable like you suggest (panama hat.... maybe thirty years ago I might have but that was then, this is now.... get with it). The new design for the space shuttle replacement is an almost carbon copy of the Apollo Service module. why? because it works. in Pop Sci and Pop Mech, both magazines promised that we would be living on the moon in the 80's and colonizing Mars by the 90's..... I want the future I was promised........ I want to be "Captain MacDonald - Mars Patrol" (cue music sci fi Theremin). Instead, I'll have to create my own future by using the machinery that I have. I will create my future that should have been.... by using Poser Artist (cue music again, heroic trumpets).... and trust me, you'll pick up more babes with a well running 1970 VW Beetle that you will with a Corvette (corvettes being so... well.... 1985) "Life is like juggling three rabid badgers... if you don't get torn up in the process, its a beautiful thing!"

Quote - Don't confuse the task with the method, xenophonz. And realize, as well, that by the time Apollo launched most space technology was fairly mature; we have made only incremental improvements since on the majority of the technologies Apollo used. Were we to attempt an identical mission today, we would likely use vastly similar hardware. Same for engine performance...even fuel ignition and electronics provide only small gains. The majority of the high-tech stuff under the hood of a modern car is not to make it more efficient; it is to make it less polluting. And as for the mileage -- my 1986 Toyota gets better mileage than most of what I share the road with. Why? Because it weighs a third of what those SUV's do!

Oh, I'd never dream of confusing tasks & methods.  Certain elementary concepts lay at the base of many things.  We haven't improved much on the core principle of the wheel since it was invented.  The wheel is the wheel -- whether it's on a chariot, a wagon, or an automobile.

But....then you start getting into matters like pneumatic tires, advanced materials, tread patterns, run-flat military designs, specialty designs, space shuttle landing gear wheels -- on and on.  The basic principle behind the wheels on the space shuttle remains essentially the same as the principle behind the wheels which were mounted on an ancient Egyptian chariot.  But are they the same thing?  Hardly.  Likewise, any new Apollo-esque craft won't be the same as the original Apollos.  No more than a mid-60's era Phantom fighter is the same thing as an F-22 Raptor. 

Quote - The problem facing small computer users -- like the members of this forum -- is that the computer industry is supporting itself on a program of constant obsolescence.

And that can't be helped.  Although there is without doubt some deliberate strategy behind what used to be called "planned obsolecence" -- new developments will only happen as they happen.  It's another of those core principles that's simply in the nature of things.  They didn't have access to dual-core processors 20 years ago.  So the PC's from that era aren't quite able to do the job any longer.  Some obsolecence is planned -- but obsolecence happens anyway.  Even without anyone deliberately planning to help it along.

Quote -  We haven't made anything but incremental improvements to word-processing since the first memory typewriter.

Once again, this is one of those "basic principle of the wheel" type of issues.  Writing down a written language is writing down a written language.  The basic task will always be the same.  But personally, I'd rather type it out on my PC than press a sharpened wooden stick into a soft clay tablet.  Even though the ancient clay tablets can still be read today; while our electronic PC text most definitely won't survive for a similar period of time.  Archaeologists 3000 years from now won't be reading our e-mails.........so perhaps we should consider going back to using clay tablets........?  Nahhhh.

There's only just so much that you can do to improve upon the task of word processing.  Unless if you want the machine to do creative writing for you.

Quote - In a way the argument that better renders are automatically better art is like arguing that oils always trump watercolor always trump pastels always trump ink always trumps pencil. And by extension, no picture could possibly be as good as a movie (pictures do not move or have sound), and no novel could possible be as good as a picture. And of course the other buried assumption is that it is better to do a paint-by-numbers that has been blocked by a professional, than to paint a scene from scratch. At the reductio ad absurdum of this line of thinking, since few of us can paint as well as the Dutch Masters, we are better off returning the oils to the counter and buying a big glossy book of reproductions instead.

Well.....show me where anyone made the assertion that "better renders are better art" and then I'll be able to better follow your line of reasoning here.

A pencil drawing is in no way artistically inferior to an oil painting -- although some would think that it is.  But the analogy doesn't apply.  Differing media don't correspond to differing software packages.  We don't use the first published version of Photoshop anymore.  But we'll still be using basic pencils on into the forseeable future of mankind.

A nail is still a nail.  Whether it was used to drive into wood yesterday; or whether it was used to drive into wood in ancient Babylon.  Some basic things don't change.  But other things most certainly do change -- and software/hardware is one of those.  shrug  Try running Photoshop CS2 on an Apple IIe -- if you like.  But a pencil will always be able to write on paper, no matter how 'technologically advanced' the paper is.

Quote - In short, we don't always want those things a powerful computer can add.

Nor do we always need a fancier plasma-screen HDTV sitting in our living room.  But it sure can be nice to have vs. that old Zenith.

Quote - But I understand, respect, and support those who have realized that Poser 4 is better for the tasks they face. I also own a handsaw. Although I use power tools more frequently, it is a very, very good handsaw (Japanese of course) and is in those special times the more appropriate tool. Only in the world of software would I be physically prevented from using my handsaw after I had bought my first power tool, and laughed at in forums when I complained about what had happened.

Oh.....I've not questioned anyone's "right" to do as they individually please vis-a-vis hanging onto P4.  I'm merely pointing out the fact that while some few people might enjoy starting camp fires by rubbing two sticks together -- most of us prefer to use matches and/or lighters.  Even though the basic principle of fire hasn't been improved upon much.  

Quote - ).... and trust me, you'll pick up more babes with a well running 1970 VW Beetle that you will with a Corvette (corvettes being so... well.... 1985) 

If you say so, 1358.  But that's not a game that I need to play these days anyway, thank goodness.  I'm married.  So I haven't experimented with the efficacy of Corvettes vs. 1970 VW's as chick magnets.

I'll have to admit to one thing: at least with the 1970 VW, you'll know that it's YOU that she's interested in.

I have to agree with idea mentioned earlier (was it you, Xeno?), that it all depends on what you're doing with Poser on which version does it for you.

There is a lot of baggage in Poser 4 (not Pro-Pack) that makes it troublesome to use.

Certainly the crosstalk.  'nuff said.

Library .rsr's - undecipherable in Windows unless you use P3DO and you have to go through hoops to make them pretty (if you were inclined to) by converting them from .rsr to .png to .rsr again. 

Geometry .rsr's - Get corrupted often causing you to remove them for Poser to make them again.  It's file bloat since you have the .rsr's and the objs along with them.

BUM Files - Huge, bloated bitmaps.  Again you wind up with extra files, having to convert jpg's to bums.

No Python - For me, that's a big :(  Python has vastly improved Poser's capabilities and usefulness and P6 python is the best so far.

I like all the other little things P5 and P6 have to offer too - I'm not talking about the extra rooms (they're cool in my book) but things like dial organization, splitting morphs, open gl display (P6, of course, and much better to use if you have a good card), render wipes - tons of little tweaks.

Again, someone pointed out that you can use the simple material mode in P6 and render using the P4 renderer (it makes good, fast thumbnails anyways).  I think some folks might be trying to push all the advanced firefly features to the max when they aren't always needed to get a great render and then wonder why it takes so long.  ;)

Really I can only speak for myself but I don't see the need at all to hold out unless you're only in Poser long enough to get something into vue or you have an antiquated computer system.  But to be honest, as far as the computer thing goes, you really need to have a mid-grade computer or better to stay in the 3D game - that really enters into any pasttime where "technology" has a hand in things.

Something being up to date doesnt mean it is good, just look at poser 6 for example and the pop charts, in britain even younger people dont particularly like the newer music.

When I first bought poser 4 I thought it was the best app ever and propack made it better, not much has happened since then to change my mind.

Quote - Everyone talks about advances in technology but have we really advanced all that much? I can remember being a kid and reading popular science where by this time we would have had cars that hovered, there was no such thing as fossil fuels and everything was more environmentally kind to the Earth. What happened to that stuff??

.

I have a book published in 1944 about what the world would be like in the year 2000, and although some of the predictions came true (but not always exactly how they thought they would be), a lot of it didn't, like a helicopter whose rotor folds up and doubles as a car (a solution to the traffic jam problem). There was little importance attatched to fuel efficiency (the business model in those days for gas was based on selling as much as possible at dirt-cheap prices), there was no mention of computers (the onlyt computers extant at that time were top secret) and the futuristic electronics were vacuum tube based (microcircuitry was still thought to be impossible then).

Quote -

No Python - For me, that's a big :(  Python has vastly improved Poser's capabilities and usefulness and P6 python is the best so far.

Poser 4 doesn't have python?  What a worthless piece of junk.  Can't even run Matmatic scripts
wth it then.  Who wants something that obsolete?

Poser 4 hit the classic sweet spot. Earlier versions like the first Macintosh, the Wright brothers first aircraft, etc. were great new things but they took a few iterations to become really polished. P4 is a classic and I think that's why it's lasted so long. It has enough capability, low enough hardware requirements, and a reasonable learning curve that it is still a truly useful application. It doesn't have features that some people now feel are must haves, but it must have everything that some people really need/want or they wouldn't still be selling it. I doubt that any current or future version of Poser will have the life that Poser 4 has. Like a classic 60's muscle car, the Swingline stapler or any number of iconic products, Poser 4 may be improved on but never really equalled.

I think Notepad is the best app ever. Its stable simple and doesnt have all those peskey "features". its output can be imported to most anything.

EditPad Lite is better.  It can handle file types that Notepad chokes on.  It also has a nice 'Search and Replace' fuction that comes in very handy when editing Cr2's.  I speak from experience.
DPH

I have finally downloaded Poser 5, and while the face room shows great potential, especially in light of my experience to mold faces in Posette using MT's, I find the materials room quite agravating.  The constant need to create a seperate node to texture each body part is irritating to say the least, whereas in P4 this was simply done by a couple of clicks on the materials dropdown menu.  The nodes might ultimately give more variety of choice in the final results, but they do come with a price, not the least the wear and tear on one's nerves.
David P. Hoadley

I think with P5 at $19, Their hinting that there will be no upgrade from P4. Not to mention I heard here and there P7 will be a completely different animal. P6 is based on old technology.

I doubt that poser 7 will be a total rewrite but they probably will add things like being able to use more memory and other more modern program stuff.

Another beneficial improvement would be if there were a room for shaping the body as well as the face, so that one could full sculpture his figures inside Poser, without having to rely on specific MT's to do everything.
David P. Hoadley

That would be a good idea, a body room.