This is not meant to complain about the new thumbnail policy, but rather to ask some questions about its possible effects:

Do you think that without nudity in thumbs, we will see less disparity in hits? I.e., since T&A usually generated more hits (certainly did for me!), if this advantage is taken away from certain artists, will hits be more equally divided?

What effects are you seeing in your hit counts since the policy went into effect? Too early to tell?

I'm just curious.

Discuss.

I'm still seeing nudie thumbs. I clicked on some of 'em, but skipped all the "protest" thumbs. they went thru a similar snafu a few years back, when folks put up satiric thumbs in an attempt to annoy the mods here and draw attention to themselves. :lol:

I would think that peoples'  views would increase because now people won't be able to get their T&A fix just by looking at the thumbnails. They will actually  have to click the thumb to have a look inside.

T&A thumbs will still display flesh, jut not the naughty bits of flesh. It probably won't have much of an effect on views.

Sure its changing the amount of views ..everybody who says its not .. is badly mistaken
A T&A thumb boosted your views with at least a 150 views ...

I think this site is letting a small portion of people putting there wil on to the rest of the community.
Thats a shame ...
And saying the new rules where requested by loads,many,some people ..nah its always the same bunch of people that have there saying done here...
Its the same kind of people over and over again ..and doing payment with paypal does not help too.. 
They too have the same demands as the bunch of people that have the law in some parts of the US ...
In your face thumb are unneeded but like always the rules are more stricked then needed to stop the in your face thumbs ..the rules now are wanted by some groups of people with strickt rules and there own "laws" and they do like to push em onto others...

But i think they can feel good about tehm self on sunday...

Such a shame this good Art Community site is going down like this ... such a pitty ...

Greetings Chris

I agree with rreynolds. 

If anything the changes could actually make artists even more creative. 

A suggestive, with no rude bits on show, image can be more erotic and arousing than a straight forward 'pack shot'.

I think initially there will be a drop as the people who dont read the "news" nor forums and who are only looking for boobs and buts scan through the pictures of faces and feet until they realize what is going on.

I don't get many hits either way....and my stuff is less than stellar....so I'll still see the same amount of low hits no matter what. =P

Actually Ben, that thumb wouldn't make it. ;)

My last post wouldn't take the thumbnail, and substituted the whole picture. About 40 hits, instead of the usual 60 or so for the first day. Jury's still out.

Probably.
Posted a thread about my system hanging when rendering, and called it "Am I well hung?".
One hundred and eleven hits in under 3 hoursHuman nature.

I wonder what this experiment in behavior modification will result in.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1371810

This one has gotten more hits and comments in the first 15 minuets than my NUDES ever did.  Go figure!
David P. hoadley

I don't think I've ever had blatant nudity in my thumbnails and I get plenty of hits.  And, I still get way more hits on my nudes then my non-nudes.  So, I guess it all comes down to how you design your thumbnail.

People don't much look at critters....even though they're nekkid.  I posted to zbrush gallery this morning, instead of the lw gallery.  I don't think many go to the lw forum at all.

Hey Poppli :o)

Have you tried adding a nekkid vicky next to the nekkid critters?... It works.. I got two with over 1000 hits.

JV

I am no one to judge someone else's work but it would seem a lot more productive to limit gratuitous nudes and sexual situations to the other rendo site; it'd be alot easier to find the gems that are often posted here but overlooked.

I think if you're actually LOOKING for nudity, you might as well "filter nudity" so you get a uniform Content Advisory thumb (easier to pick out, just as it's easier to avoid).

Quote - I am no one to judge someone else's work but it would seem a lot more productive to limit gratuitous nudes and sexual situations to the other rendo site;

What is "productive"?  The mandate of this site is to make money by selling content - nothing I object to, considering I've spent nearly $500 bucks here myself - but how does limiting anything in the gallery translate into "productivity"?

Gennerally speaking, from what I've seen in my long time here while cruising the galleries, is yes, there are a whole lot of hits on images that have displayed gratuitous nudity.  This has never bothered me, as those "hitting" for the sake of seeing a little T&A, are probably looking for just that, and won't be interested in my Zodiac series LOL.  

What I find amusing, is the hooplah about making a tame thumbnail.  So?  If it blatantly states "nudity" and you even put next to its title (graphic) or (erotic), believe me you, people are going to find it, wether the thumb shows it or not.  Just as if, they decided to sell "Stuff" magazine in a brown wrapper, men are still going to buy it!  (matter of fact, that tease and exclusivity makes it MORE appealing).

I'm considering doing a test (of the emergency nudity system?).  I dont make erotic art, though I do do nudes....... but I'm compelled to make a really wild one, and put up a tame thumb that meets the criteria, and put next to the title (graphic erotica).

I bet a million bucks it gets a ton of hits, even if i used a plain black square as  a thumbnail LOL

@pjz99

Perhaps productive is the wrong word and I really don't want to start an argument about the ethics of art because I am a self described novice; I'm not sure of the exact amount of money I've spent at this site but I'm sure it approaches 4 digits.

What I meant to say was perhaps compartmentilization of the site or among sites could benefit all; those who are looking for nudes could go to the nudity section and those who have come to admire the artistic vision of other community members could browse without interference (which as you mentioned is done by filtering)

Don't get wrong, I like skin as much as anyone; overall I do not get aroused from 3D figures and there's already a site that exists which caters to that market. I dont even know why I care. I frequent this site because I like the forums and I rarely browse the galleries here.

braces to get slammed

What I meant to say was perhaps compartmentilization of the site or among sites could benefit all; those who are looking for nudes could go to the nudity section and those who have come to admire the artistic vision of other community members could browse without interference (which as you mentioned is done by filtering)

So what about artistic nude ? by splitting them in nude section and a artistic section you make the nude by defenition not art ... 

For me i dont realy care about the new thumb law .. i do care about the way it was  brought here ..like its a good thing that we ALL wanted  .. and thats not true..
The new rules are Good i think ..makes people think about the thumnail .. 

Chris

*"...those who are looking for nudes could go to the nudity section and those who have come to admire the artistic vision of other community members could browse without interference..."

**dphoadley @ replicand
**Sir;
Would you please define your meaning of art?  And also, are you possibly aware of the tendencious ramifications of the above statement, or even why they're tendendious?  Do you think that Auguste Rodin, or Peter Paul Rubens, or a few others would agree with it?
Yours truly,
David P. Hoadley

I'm not a Puritan and I'm not endorsing censorship; I don't claim to be a visual artist because I'm definitely a student. Art is subjective which makes all of this very sensitive. Also I'm aware of how much of a clusterf*ck it would be to say "this is tasteful, that is not" sitewide. So again, here's what I mean:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1372816 Is this art? Yes. Has it somehow enlightened me or answered some deep burning mystery insight into the nature of reality? No. Are male bullfighters in the real world bare chested? No.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1372713 Is this art? Yes. OK, I'm not into fantasy, but clearly the artist has spent considerably more time thinking about the composition, although I don't know why there's a mirror on the ground; there's detail, variation and I'm sure the render took a wee bit longer than example one (I'm not saying that longer render times equate better art).

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1372223 Is this art? Yes. Since I chose images from the what's new gallery, I also wanted to find one that blew me away. This one doesn't but I did have to look at it for several seconds to understand the perspective. It's almost like "porn for philosophers" since you can't really see anything but the right foot and left knee lead the eye towards the hip.

it's possible that the decision to ban nude thumbnails is related to a desire to shift nudie pix to other sites. if nudie pix don't show any tendency to draw in users who buy poser items (e.g. clothing), then shifting the burden of nudie pix to other sites may increase their revenue per user here. it's not cheap hosting hundreds of thousands of nudie pix, whether in terms of server maintenance, software maintenance, or bandwidth costs. hence the tendency to archive most of the images, as new ones are dumped into the gallery at a rate of 1 per minute or greater.

Quote - it's possible that the decision to ban nude thumbnails is related to a desire to shift nudie pix to other sites.

Thank you; that's exactly what I was trying to say.

Quote - > Quote - it's possible that the decision to ban nude thumbnails is related to a desire to shift nudie pix to other sites.

 

Thank you; that's exactly what I was trying to say.

AKA biting the hand that feeds it!
DPH

AKA biting the hand that feeds it!

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Please clarify.

What do you think brings the customers here in the first place, US artist.  Without us and our nudie pics, this place would be a Ghoast Town.
DPH

Quote - What do you think brings the customers here in the first place, US artist.  Without us and our nudie pics, this place would be a Ghoast Town.

I'm not so sure. I was originally attracted to this site for the shear volume of Poser content available at that time (2002). I began reading the forums are have been amazed that so many people have clever techniques to make their "hobby level" program do incredible things. So earlier in the thread you say that  "If I Forget" gets more hits in 15 minutes than any of your nudes. Why do you think that is? Because nudes are so common that perhaps people are interested to see something "not nude". Granted, there's a fair number of landscapes in the gallery and some really exceptional work (Meats Meier is my current favorite); mostly everything else is skin, seduction related or flat out soft-core.

There's stellar work at several other sites that don't rely on nudity. There's another site that specializes in rendered nudity. I like this site the most because there is usually a sense of community and lacks the condescending tone found at other sites.

Since I have been demoted from my screen tag to merely "US artist", I see that our differences in opinion cannot be rectified. I haven't been to your gallery but I can't understand why you so vehemently defend nudity. I'm not arguing prudeness (I'm quite liberal actually, and I live an alternative lifestyle) ; I'm arguing desensitization and I'm arguing against overexposure.

US means you, and me, and everybody else; I don't see why you should feel demoted by the term. 

As for the rest, I'm proud of most of my nudes.  Qith each one I tried to do something special,  to take it out of the ordinary, but You would have to reruse my gallery to understand fully.  I don't lay claims that my nudes are on a par with such masters as Rodin or Wyeth or Paul Émile Chabas, but neither do I want them catagorized as non-art.

Yours truly,
David P. Hoadley

The whole issue is stupid; if you don't like nudity, that is entirely OK, and by default, nudity is not aggressively put "in your face".  It's when you manually and explicitly tell the site "Okay, I can take it, show me the titties and stuff!" that this new policy applies, which still completely mystifies me.  Show me the titties, but only full-size, because small titties in thumbnails ...

DPH - whoops, I misinterpreted the US artist  to mean United States artist, which is where I live and is decidely more conservative than many other civilized countries. Forgive me.

And again I'm not knocking nudes; they've been an art staple for centuries. I think it boils down to nudity in context. For instance, a render of Vicky as an auto mechanic with no shirt might appeal to a gearhead, but is totally incongruent with reality. In this case are we serving intellect or desire?

Nudes for study of form, light and texture is something completely different and an observer can tell right away that we are not serving desire but appreciating the aesthetic of the human form. There' s a consensus of what's appropriate and what's not (such as when the child nudity rule was placed in effect). Many nudes here I believe don't fall into this category.

Then (generally speaking) people wonder why the 3D world thinks that Poser is for perverts and why it is mocked by users of more sophisticated packages.