I do not want to make of polemic because, “which seeding the wind collects the storm!” But I understood thanks to a “Mistake” of departure with an artist and that technical or I thought that it creates images “style” painting on the basis of true photograph and that it did not answer me, except by insults on its technique used, until what I realise that makes it post its work in the heading “Poser”.

I put here freely this question!

Doesn't that disturb you it not only one artist who improves photographs the post in the heading “Poser”?

Wow ... your words confuse me ..im not english but it hink i understand what your saying..

I see image's called "POSER"  from wich i realy whould like to see the 3D wire version ;}
But asking how they do it ... yes that mostly results in insults .. i know i have being there..

I'm pretty sure I know who you refer and it's really disappointing to see someone fool so many others. Many times I've wanted to ask what part is actually 'Poser' but just didn't bother. If someone is low enough to lie about their art, they are hardly going to give me an honest answer :/

I don't really have any issue with people doing photo manips or overpaints for their work. Matte painters do it all the time and the results can be stunning. But posting it in the poser section seems a bit weird unless maybe large parts of it is from poser renders. Mixed media would probably be the most appropriate section IMO.

But then some people just love attention and the large views that the poser section gets must be a very strong lure LOL

There is one person who does complete photo manips and never, ever tells people they aren't Poser renders - actually lists a Poser product in the credits to make it appear as though his images are actual renders. It's not very nice to lie to people, even if it is by omission :/

Yes, the only thing of which I is certain it is that the character is not a character of Poser even with a morphing, but in spite of that Xena rightly it justifies that it is done with “Poser” by publishing the credit of or comes the character creates by an 3D artist. the remainder of the compositions and either painted under Photoshop, or of the dress really makes with Poser, but often the shoes and the panties are on the photograph of origin, I have to ask has an artist quoted in credit if it recognizes are 3D character, and it my answered that “not”.

 The goal of my question in this forum and to see whether that disturbs many people or if that of it does does not have any importance. Me I think that again artist which wants to make Poser and which does not arrive has to make models as beautiful as this artist is likely to be disappointed and not to continue with Poser, it will be a pity.

 What is a pity also it is that this Artist done a superb work and that I admire!

I guess netseawolf English isn't your first language? I'm having real trouble getting a sense of what you're trying to say, my fault entirely. any chance of a link to what & who you're talking about? so I can get a better understanding of what this thread is about.

I think he used babelfish which destroys sentence structure. Better to get a friend to translate a big topic like this. "Je ne veux pas faire de la polique parce que, "qui semant le vent rassemble le donner l' assaut " Mais j'ai compris que gre une "erreur" du dart avec un artiste et ce technique ou moi a pensqu'il cr des images "mode" peignant sur la base de la photographie vraie et qu'il ne m'a pas rondu, moins que par des insultes sur sa technique utilis, jusqu'ce que je me rends compte que des marques il poteau son travail dans le titre "Colle". J'ai posici librement cette question ! Pas qui vous dangent il non seulement un artiste qui amiore des photographies le poteau dans le titre "Colle" ? Looks like good french, though...

I think i understand what he's trying to say, I think.  That, to get results like what is suggested, through a photomanip, ........ and state its poser, might frustrate new poser users, and even some who've used it for a while, that they can't GET that kind of image out of poser.

In essence, a type of frustrative false advertising, leaving the viewer, if they use poser thinking, "God, I must suck..... I just cant DO that".  And i do agree.  To a new user thinking they can get those kind of fantastic images out of poser alone?  They give up hope.

I user poser heavily, as a base for every image i do....... though i would say, on most 70 percent or more is done with airbrushing OUTSIDE poser, so I post in the "mixed medium" section.  I've also seen tho, whole poser renders in 2d......... which, if its a still image I guess thats correct, though when i first got here, i looked at the 2d section as oil paint, or drawing so on so fourth.

It can get confusing, on technicalities I suppose.  And i would surmise it can confuse newer users, and frustrate them.

perhaps some of 'em may be doing photomanips where they use a poser figure, then project/paste a photo of a face over the poser face. the main disadvantage to that technique is that all their promo images are gonna show the face at the same angle (or its mirror image), with no variation in expression nor lighting. after seeing exactly the same face dozens of times, it becomes rather tedious and cheap IMVHO.

I've been out of Poser for so long (P5) that this fooled me, too. Only after getting P7 and looking at what can be done, and what is being posted, do I see what netseawolf is talking about. The work is very good, but it would be just as good posted in the appropriate gallery, and wouldn't make everyone else think they've missed something very basic in posing, texturing and lighting. The shoulders, knees, elbows, soft tissue deformations... no one else gets any Poser figure to look like that, and there are some real pros here. (OT: I'm really happy with all the new characters from P6 & P7 and the new DAZ creations. Things have really moved along here! Glad to be back.)

I've been "guilty" of this in my posts, but think it's Ok as long as

1. you say you are compositing and
2. the primary 3D tool is Poser.
   "Mixed media" sounds lame, and it applies, I'll bet, to 99% of the posts in the gallery. How many Poser pictures are posted without retouching?

M

All of this reply is intersting !
but what realy thing about this:
1- Take a real women (nude) in Photo.
2- Change the skin lyke painting or redering
3- Draw the eyes the lips and the nipp undr photoshop to make lyke "digital"
4- opend some time some 3D part lyke Heat, boots, or another 3D stuff.
5- remove all the background (or keep somme wrap of whit tissus) to keep only the women and aditional stuf.

And finaly Post this (great work) in Poser section whit some contribution of the Poser part creat by another artis, but whit impossible to reconise this part in the final picture and spécialy the women, of course is not Poser model it is a real women.

I'm thing this is Bad, and is bad for all poser Artist.

Well, it certainly made me feel like a mook, and I do the rendering, clothing, and a lot of morphs in Cinema. Until I see a wireframe, I think netseawolf is right. I've never seen photorealism like this, even at CGTalk, posted at this speed. mickmca brings up a question: If I do so much work in Cinema, is it better to post in Cinema, or in Poser... ??? Probably Cinema, but I'd like the feedback from people here...

Quote - mickmca brings up a question: If I do so much work in Cinema, is it better to post in Cinema, or in Poser... ??? Probably Cinema, but I'd like the feedback from people here...

I don't think anyone minds where you post, as long as you are honest about where everything is from.

Quote - And finaly Post this (great work) in Poser section whit some contribution of the Poser part creat by another artis, but whit impossible to reconise this part in the final picture and spécialy the women, of course is not Poser model it is a real women.

well IMO,

1. Anyone who does this is an attention junkie and they will only find other ways to get that attention, ethics be damned.

2. Someone who is actually skilled enough to pull off a fake of this sort and posts their result as a poser creation is an idiot.

In the industry, concept artists and matte painters do the exact same thing... they mix photos with 3d and painting to get their designs out quickly.  And they are paid astronomical amounts of $$ for this. But no one is gonna  give you that kind of cash (or respect) if you pass off your own hard work as the result of a poser render. Sheer lunacy.

"In the industry, concept artists and matte painters do the exact same thing... they mix photos with 3d and painting to get their designs out quickly.  And they are paid astronomical amounts of $$ for this. But no one is gonna  give you that kind of cash (or respect) if you pass off your own hard work as the result of a poser render. Sheer lunacy."

Nobody said he was sane -just skilled.
DPH

"In the industry, concept artists and matte painters do the exact same thing... they mix photos with 3d and painting to get their designs out quickly.  And they are paid astronomical amounts of $$ for this. But no one is gonna  give you that kind of cash (or respect) if you pass off your own hard work as the result of a poser render. Sheer lunacy."

Nobody said he was sane -just skilled.
DPH

To ilustrate my write, and according what "tekmonk" is write about "matte painters" see this link "http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1354729 " to one of my creation to illuste what i speek. this is painting Photo to transform lyke painted création. and i post this in 2D section. (not in poser)
I post with this message an picture with extract part of the work of this artisit say is Poser work and for all of this model he publish the name of the 3d artiste creat the caracter and /or the 'pose" creat by ....
But i'm shure when you see this sample picture zoomed 200% for all of you you see a Photographie part of real women ans clot .
or if this sample is realy made with Poser i'm completly stupid man and i dont use good Poser.

If nothing else, you've discovered how to get 1 million comments on an image. ;) Nicely done, by the way!

And please not comment the picture id 1354729 link in my last post. is just to sample, according whit **scanmead.
**Thanks, but a wait your reaction about the picture in attached Link

If I am following the gist of this conversation correctly, I remember seeing several pieces of "art" posted like in the original topic three or four years ago.  They had about a hundred comments along the lines of "OMG that's so great!" and "Great use of textures!"  when it was plain as the nose on your face (no pun intended) that they'd taken a photo of a real person and photoshopped a pair of posette eyes and other features onto it.  At the time I thought about marking up a copy of the artwork and posting it to show people what they were praising, but it seemed pointless.

The part that grieves me about such pieces is that the manipulation was done only to deceive people, and not to improve upon elements of the image.  The elements were added only to give the impression that it was a rendered piece.  Seawolf I see nothing wrong with your image, you used poser to improve your illustration, and the perceivable intent makes all the difference to me.

I hate the deception type of images, and it's pretty much why I stopped going to the gallery unless specific artists I like have posted something new.

if they do photomanips, they should give the source of the original photo, the name of the photographer, and the name of the girl/guy in the photo. I've noticed that they have often posted photomanips in the gallery and some folks have congratulated them profusely for their work, not realising that all they're doing is smudging a few pixels around and "tubing" some original artist's work. I useta do photomanips myself, and posted 'em at porno newsgroups (no names please). it takes alotta skill to do some of those "celeb fakes", but it also takes alotta skill to crack a safe or a computer. perhaps it's the danger element, the knowledge that it's basically illegal, that makes folks do it.

netseawolf, the close-ups you posted are definitely photos. There are things in there not even a Renderotica pro could model. Now, you sure you don't want us all to go comment on the image you posted? (I'm teasing.)

Pretty sad that they feel their talent is so lacking that they have to use photos to impress folks.

In fact I asked at the beginning if an artist misled the others if it were necessary denounced or if that does not have any importance.
After having read your various opinions I think of having understood that for you as you thought as it of is not well misled the others.
But I wonder whether I must give the name of this artist here and if that is not likely to be slandering.
If you thought of having recognized of which artist I speak and if you thought that it should be noted that it cheating. Then I think that something should be done!
so not end of the discution! thank you

Anything that mentions names, or is a complaint should, of course he handled by contacting a moderator by site mail or email, in private. It's a situation that should be handled by the staff. We don't want anyone's feelings hurt, this artist, or artists who feel this is a standard they should try to achieve.

Of course, yet this is confusing to several factors because such images identified as pictures cannot reasonably be associated with the skills acquired by others with lesser or worseter means to achieve them, regardless of  factors beyond their control. Da Vinci most often employed tracing paper when draw making his famous wall plaster cartoons, but were his hands stained with anything but paint, and perhaps also slippery olive oyl when his fingers had been naughty?
So let us retire the questions which seek to be enlightening of this drama, for one must be sure to difference making between what is plagarism of thematic processes and simple recapitualtion of form. In the final urinalysis, one may liken this situated event to revelers consuming far too much aromatic soft cheese before attending a soiree hosted by Germans a playing violins without cellos accompanying, then complaining of an off key harpsichord making a stink offensive!
Anyway, Carthage must be destroyed!

or Carthago delendum est?..;)

agrees 100% with Tilandra's post.  I even thought about doing a step by step tutorial showing how they did it, but what is the point.  I'm rather dubious the wow!ers  and kiss kiss!ers would add 2 and 2.

Netseawolf, if you have a complaint, please contact a member of the Poser Team, and we will help you.

Also, please do not post links to other artists works that you have a complaint about, instead direct it to us so we can help.

Hello evry body.
To day this discution is Over the stff know beffore the problem,

and I am trustful in their work! 
thank you for your opinions !
Bye, bye, 

** **

The Truth is Out There

Now having seen the pictures in question & the "artist" mentioned elsewhere, there's no doubting their expertise with photoshop but to consciously claim it as poser work when it quite clearly isn't is just naughty to say the least.

yes it is ! the staff know the problem but this week in the "Renderosity Weekly Newsletter: February 8, 2007" this artist is the "week's Favorite Artist", it is unbearable for my the problem with genital part and TOS violation is nothing compared to that !
the staf dont move i dont understand, i hope i 'm not the only one in Renderositi is hungry about this cheating !
If many artis write a comment to denounce that in the galery of this artist it can be will have shame is it will change.
Have nice day to all real Poser artist and good (hard) work!

Netseawolf, See your IM's.

This thread is finished, as it is going nowhere but down.