Dalmatica wrote: *to the folks who are saying, "Well, Loomis was from another era so those standards don't fit today's standards."

*Please read my post again, I didn't say that literally, Loomis made his proportionscale based on a contemporay bias. People size and taste change in time, proportions don't, but Loomis scale was based on a tall,slim woman of that time (on heels) and it was supposed to be a woman with an ideal figure, not an realistic one.

And : *Ridiculous.  Do yourself a favor a educate yourself about the human figure by buying some artistic anatomy books and see how much your artwork improves.

*I actually have several artistic anatomy books, and I'm fully aware of the efforts done by the great artist of the past era. But that's what they were: artists, not scientists.  Their proportionscales were based on a artistic point of view and observation, they wanted to look their work beautiful not common. The only people I make an exception for are Da vinci and Dürer. I know that da Vinci really did some anatomy research.

Mylemonblue wrote: *by the way anyone who wants to can find real human references by Googling "Female Anatomy Photos by Akira Gomi". There you'll find free images of average off the street every day females in front back and side views for art . They are photographs. Anyone can paste them next to the Loomis chart in a photo image editor, size the images until the heads match and see for themselves. It's fun and very educational to see and learn about body size and proportions.

*I actually did that: just by using some transparant layers in Paintshop and to say the truth, the similarities with Loomis chart are stunning, most of the women have (I didn't do them all) his Ideal proportions, but there a few buts:   His arms are too long, his waist is too narrow and his woman is on heels.And: I've scaled all the pictures up to make them fit, so the actual width and heigth proportion are not the same as the original pictures, and there is no reference on those pictures how tall or small the actual woman are.

As matter of fact, I didn't want  to offend Stahlratte, I agree with him that the proportions and the size of DAZ V3 aren't correct, I even think that they originally scanned in a Barby-doll, cause that's what she makes me think of. ( That would also explain why her feet are always in a tip-toe position) I think that V3 is popular because of the same economic principle that made the VHS-tape rule, in spite of the technical better Betamax. It is the most supported product because it is the most supported product. That seems a little cryptic but it is true: people are tended to follow the mainstream. The fact that V3 is given away free and that the old V1 and V2 were more appealing than the  original poser woman Posette (sorry mr. Hoadley) only stimulate this.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?