On the front page there is an article  entitled "daVinci Thursday". Does not the 2nd image of that article, the one of the full frontal drawing of a male contravene your own TOS?

jeez, it would be a bummer if they hadda censor lenny's classic drawing. maybe there's an exception for artists of note :lol:

I'm sure the admins will spot their mistake and quickly take it down :rolleyes: 

There has to be a number of works out there that have to be considered among the great masterpieces in the history of art, that would be banned completely from this site.

Then of course you have certain brain-dead prudes who think that any depiction of the unclothed human form whatsoever is pornography (and should be banned).

Yes it seems to have gone now. I'm amazed. Renderosity will become famous as the art site that censored Leonardo da Vinci .

Im not seeing this in the article? Besides, the new policy is for gallery thumbs no?

Attached Link: http://library.thinkquest.org/13681/data/davin2.shtml

Muahahaha !!!!  Amazing !!

Michelangelo's David would be SO inappropriate.

*Quote Jumpstartme2
"Im not seeing this in the article? Besides, the new policy is for gallery thumbs no?"

***Wow, Talk about double standards!!!

**

Ok fixer, its late..maybe I missed something, Im not sure what 'double standards' you're speaking of?

Da Vinvi had no problems with the Inquistion, he had the luck to have been born five centuries ago!

So 'Man of Vitruvio' is censored? DaVinci is censored by the same site which creates a "daVinci Thursday"??

O tempora, o mores ... (Marcus Tullius Cicero)

Quote - Yes it seems to have gone now. I'm amazed. Renderosity will become famous as the art site that censored Leonardo da Vinci .

This is sad beyond words...truely. Is this an art site? Even my local Catholic church doesn't ban works like this.

@ jumpstartme2: Really! You can't, well that says it all doesn't it!!!

Well, some months ago Renderosity did a contest for a new logo. Perhaps is time to open a new one: 'define what is our community'. I think with the new policies which can ban daVinci because is against them, 'Art Community' looks like a little bit obsolete

'2D & 3D community' sounds better and more appropiate nowadays :)

Ah! so it has gone now, so the "double standard" has also gone with it, there's nothing like consistency is there??

Uhhh...Fixer...the image that was being discussed was gone by the time I got here....apparently by 11:11 pm......sooo...If I didn't see it, and you didn't see it...

Pfffftt...never mind, its too early in the morning to deal with something I never saw or have control over...Im sure the admins will address this in the AM.

Well, those "famous artists days" were a farce from the get go anyway... an "Ed wood day" would be more appropriate for Renderosity.

"Renderosity, where art runs free."   

Except Leonardo da Vinci's of course!

This place is dying a slow death anyway, being ruined by an ever restrictive TOS!
For those that say, well if you don't like it here, go somewhere else....well, I do...at least I can post any of my artwork on my own website. I would love to support vendors here with my hard earned cash, but why should I line the pockets of a company that has a policy of restricting artistic creativity?

Be very careful about making jokes here people.

www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php

Hi everybody,

Just goes to show you that anybody can make a mistake.

Our apologies, we had the article ready prior to the thumbnail change and didn't catch it when it was launched. The article has been updated. Thanks for letting us know.

Best regards,
Lillian

Quoted from the article - "He is widely considered to be one of the greatest painters of all time. His genius was not fully realized until his inventions proved feasible long after his death. Leonardo is among most intelligent and capable men to ever have graced the planet."

Hmmmm, censored by the Catholic Church and now by Renderosity...how ironic!...and I thought the world had moved on!

"Our apologies, we had the article ready prior to the thumbnail change and didn't catch it when it was launched. The article has been updated. Thanks for letting us know."
So you are now saying under the new Renderosity rules the art of da Vinci will be censored?
This is a joke Yes?

Don't hold your breath.

You know what pains me more than anything...great work from great artists, such as the one I have linked to here, suffer. Now I find it difficult to figure out how Renderosity can call itself an artist community when it puts artwork such as this at such a disadvantage.

www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php

This incident is so silly, it's hilarious, but then, the whole "tribute" thing has been yet another lame commercial promo and an insult to the Western art canon and art-loving Renderosity members all along. So crass, so completely irrelevant to actually paying tribute to great artists or educating the public about them. By all means, remove Vitrivian Man because it violates TOS. So very lame.

Well said xoconostle!

How they can ever pay tribute to great artists and then censor their work in the same breath is hypocrisy of the worse kind - Artists are good enough to market from, but it seems not good enough to fully appreciate.
Hmmm, it does say "Art Community" up on the top there doesn't it?
 EDIT: Actually looking at Leonardo daVinci's portrait on the front page - he himself would probably turn in his grave if he knew he was being censored by the very same people that are "promoting" him for their very own marketing purposes. daVinci, was censored during his lifetime, and Renderosity's actions are disrespectful of his memory and those of the other great artists they have "showcased".

Quote - > Quote - Yes it seems to have gone now. I'm amazed. Renderosity will become famous as the art site that censored Leonardo da Vinci .

This is sad beyond words...truely. Is this an art site? Even my local Catholic church doesn't ban works like this.

Is this an art site? In a word......NO. This is an online store selling mesh and textures. Period.
Banning Davinci? Figures!

Censoring DaVinci - that's just so appallingly pathetic for a site touting itself as an artist community.

It's along the lines of the teacher who lost her job for taking kids on a field trip to a museum because parents found out they saw nude statues.  (it seems that although they have to sign permission slips none of the parents in question has ever actually visited a museum).

But at least this has more strongly encouraged me to insure that we have a full week this summer for the Smithsonian.

Also ridiculous since there are, as I posted in the thumbnail changes article, several US states that allow topless women with others trying to follow (well ok so Texas allows a woman to be topless only if she is white thanks to GWBush - but it's still topless)

Sorry!!  Did I read that right??

Only "White" women can go topless in Texas!!!

That is amazing!! [If I read it right]!!

yes, GWBush instituted that in 1999 the reasoning is that topless non-white women could lead to racism or rape.  Same apples to breastfeeding in public

Oh and full nudity is allowed in Maine since it's only illegal to show one's genitalia in public and by the definition of genitalia a woman's are all internal - hence it has been argued - successfully, that a woman can jog nude.

Wow! That is freaking amazing!
I don't want to hijack this thread but I can't get over that, this is the same guy that attacks Sharia law as against Womens rights and he does something like this which is also so discriminatory it makes me wonder what's going on over there across the pond!!
Amazing!!

no, that "white/nonwhite" thing can't be true. it would violate the american bill of rights AFAIK.

look into it yourself, it stands only because it hasn't been challenged (as far as I know it is still effectively on the books) and there is no outline that specifically states a white woman CAN be topless although the reasoning has been stated to be for the prevention on racism and rape (because "supposedly" those things don't affect a white woman). But then again laws do not tell you what you are allowed to do, only what you can not do.

But then again Texas has many laws that violate the american bill of rights

How do they define "white" in Texas then, for purposes of Jim Crow boobism? Maybe with a photographer's light-meter?

Well I've just googled on it and pulled up absolutely nothing besides one page without cites which basically gives the same info you've just said, LSM.

I'm not finding anything on any news sites or on the ACLU site.

Where did you hear about this?

Im in Texas and have never heard this...and I've been here all my life.

I read it in a few articles some time back (about the time he ran for President the 1st time) and in a listing regarding racism, laws and his stint in Texas during his governorship, it wasn't big news just one of those little known things like his previous partnership with bin laden's brother  or laws that get passed because no one notices the fine print. 

I haven't googled it to find it online to be honest, I don't always expect to find things online, especially laws without knowing the actual proposal or cite number.  I remember it was supposed to have either gone into effect or been written in 1999 because that was the year we moved from the west to the east, I remember it also supposedly applied to breastfeeding because I'm an advocate to allow women to breast feed without shame (which is also why other states are trying to allow topless women, as a way to allow breastfeeding), and I remember the reason was supposedly to prevent racism and rape because it was stupid.

I collect worthless information in my brain lol

Perhaps I'll do a search, it may be found on pro-nudity sites, or anti-bush or anti racism sites.  I'll post it in an OT thread here in the community forum so it doesn't continue to de-rail the sad action of censoring DaVinci, may take a few days to wade through all the little amendments, if one can find them in one place that isn't eye crossing

Attached Link: http://www.lilithgallery.com/feminist/toplessness002.html

Actually I'll credit Karen that link is the only one I'm finding with  google, but I've only run one search and when it comes to statutes the wording is important, but you can find little known things (like Bush sold his dallas texas house with an illegal racial covenant that prevented it from being sold to blacks and it didn't make big news either).

I'll have more time to look this weekend (heck I can't even find the love poem Pepe LePeuw wrote to the cat...)

Sounds like the Spanish Inqusition to me.

That's the link I found, Unicornst, with absolutely no solid information or cites.

I did find this link:
http://michaelbluejay.com/nudity/
Which is about how it's legal to be topless in Austin, Texas. Nothing about what shape or colour you have to be...

I can see why they did it.  Removed the DaVinci, that is.  Not that I agree with it, but I can see why.
It is sort of related to the new thumnail images, true....but it's not that the "prudes" complain about such things.  Because, usually, in all honesty, it's not the "prudes" who complain when stuff like this goes down.

It's those who are pissed at the new policy, who will bitch and complain until everything is "fair".  Well, DDevant, ya got your wish!  Renderosity is "fair and balanced", and the DaVinci sketch was removed!  Bravo!!!  Way to stick it to the man!  I mean, because, if we can't have horribly-lit, zeppelin-breasted, plasticky skinned thumbnails in the galleries, we HAVE to complain about every posting Rendo makes that might come close to skimming the line, or even crossing it!!!

.....it's crap like this that reminds me why I could never be a humanist.  I don't have enough faith in people.

Quote - It states that black, indian, latino and asian women are not allowed to go topless in public.But not white/caucasian women.

**
**Latino is a race???, which color?
If latinos are not arian, black, indian or asian, from where did they came, from Mars perhaps?

Quote - I mean, because, if we can't have horribly-lit, zeppelin-breasted, plasticky skinned thumbnails in the galleries, we HAVE to complain about every posting Rendo makes that might come close to skimming the line, or even crossing it!!!

Da Vinci is gone thanks to your own rules, if you want to blame something blame your own TOS.

Quote - > Quote - I mean, because, if we can't have horribly-lit, zeppelin-breasted, plasticky skinned thumbnails in the galleries, we HAVE to complain about every posting Rendo makes that might come close to skimming the line, or even crossing it!!!

Da Vinci is gone thanks to your own rules, if you want to blame something blame your own TOS.

2 points. 

1. I'm not on staff here anymore.  Even if I was, staff doesn't make the rules, they just enforce them. 
2. The DaVinci image wasn't even a thumbnail!  Yes, it was a small image, but a thumbnail, in regards to the TOS, denotes an image that leads to another vial hyperlink!  It was a STATIC image!!! The thumbnail leading to the page where it resides is a PORTRAIT of DaVinci!!!  So, they've removed the 2nd image...does that mean that, since the thumb on the front page doesn't match the product images that are being advertised, that someone's going to complain about that now?  I mean, it's open season! 

GAWD, I loathe lack of common sense sometimes.

Quote - > Quote - It states that black, indian, latino and asian women are not allowed to go topless in public.But not white/caucasian women.

**
**Latino is a race???, which color?
If latinos are not arian, black, indian or asian, from where did they came, from Mars perhaps?

rotflmao - I understand the point. I've a friend who says he won't check those boxes, "I'm Mexican - WTF is a latino" is his general response.

JenX, I think what people are ranting and raving about concerning this issue is that it highlights just how pathetic Rendo's TOS enforcement has become. If any common sense is required it is from Renderosity/Bondware themselves.

I couldn't care for zeppelin-breasted, huge nippled, horribly lit thumbnails or art...but I do care about art and what it stands for. Art is a freedom of expression.

Now Rendo, may have the right to make rules as they wish (and I respect them for that), but they should remember a couple of things:

1. It is the members that pay for the upkeep of this place through the market place.

2. From Renderosity's mission statement: "MISSION STATEMENT
   The mission of Renderosity is to create a thriving, productive environment that encourages an atmosphere of community, respect, collaboration, and growth for graphic artists, digital artists, animators, photographers and writers of all backgrounds and levels. We are a community created by artists, for artists ... *Because The Art Matters!"

"Because The Art Matters!" -* if you enforce censorship, then I will argue that art isn't the thing that matters.
"growth for graphic artists" - growth isn't encouraged by censorship!

The TOS doesn't actually bother me, but I will stand for an artists right. Besides, Rendo's TOS is full of double standards - they won't allow copyright infringement (and rightly so), but do allow copyrighted characters from all media's (be it TV, film etc) to be used as avatars.

OMG... I'm crying :lol: