Quote - @Cobaltdream: Aha. I knew I didnt get something, thanks. I didnt realize that replacing an image doesnt activate the e-bots.  In which case, I agree with Acadia's suggestion.

I made the suggestion because I see posts in here with critiquing and announcing edited images.  It was my effort in an attempt to keep this thread for it's intended purpose....sign ups.

However, giving this matter more thought....I think it's just another example of why a forum model would be much better than using the gallery.

A person can post their WIP in a thread they create in a particular forum, people can make their critiques there and subscribe to the thread. The artist can then read the critiques, make their adjustments, post their redo and those who have subscribed to the thread will see that it's active and go and look. If it's an edited image for review they can continue to give their feedback etc.  That way all comments and all images are in one place and can easily be reviewed so you can see the progress made.

Once the image is as the artists is happy with, then they can upload it to the gallery to display and showcase it which in my opinion is what a gallery is for.  You certainly don't see artists putting their displays up for a showing in a real art gallery and handing out slips of paper asking viewers to leave their "critique" after looking at the image.  The image is there to be viewed and appreciated, maybe even purchased, not corrected and graded. I feel online galleries are the same thing....upload and showcase your finished works.

I'm still quite unsettled about the gallery being used for this because of all the reasons I've previous mentioned in earlier posts in this thread.

I strongy believe that a forum model would be more useful and productive in the long run. It also wouldn't falsely affect  gallery art charts, comments, views etc.

Quote - Karen, I think we need a way to notify people of reuploaded (edited) images.  This thread is drifting off topic from what it was meant to be....a place to sign up for the "Critique Group". 

I agree with that

BTW....I reuploaded my image coz there where some minor postwork I forgot :m_cigar:

@acadia: 'I think it's just another example of why a forum model would be much better than using the gallery."  Do you mean instead or in addition to the Art Theory forum?
People started to use  it  for discussing their WIP. It just isnt used that much yet.  
However it isnt true that pictures in 'real'  galleries are above critique. There are newspaper, radio etc. and those critics can be realy harsh. There are also guest books for gallery visitors. It just isnt  expected that the artist will make a new version.
My view is that work in its initial stages should be put in a forum(art theory or new one) as you suggested, but I dont see why work in the gallery shouldnt get an honest critique if the person  explicitly said they want it.  If  I  think an image is final and I dont want any additional critical comments, I can choose the relevant option.
(I already  suggested above a way to fix the related problems.  Havnt heard from any admin/technical staff if it's realy mission impossible.)

Hi: I just wanted to thank those of you who leave reviews. I always try to comment back on your renders, but some people have not done anything lately. So, Thank you to those people. Karen, time to do a new render!!!!!! (virtually kicks Karen's butt, LOL!) Sherrie

I am a proponent of y'all using the art theory forum. I ain't in charge of anything here, but IMVHO the changes y'all would like to see in the galleries are not feasible. one further observation - if they ain't in the critique club, don't assume they want critiques. after 10 years of experience with poser users, one fact is self-evident to me: never give anything but uncritical approval, unless specifically asked otherwise.

Sherrie... rubs butt hehehe. Actually I had an idea for an image the other night, but time is a bit tight right now. Maybe I'll get a chance to work on it this weekend!

OK... I'm going to submit a change request to have ebots activated on Editing an image to all previous commenters. Hopefully it can go into the next round of updates.

I had suggested the implementation of a "versioning" system for the images. Here is how I have thought it:

1. When you upload a new image, you are asked if it is a "new" image or a new version of an existing one.
2. If it is a new version of an old image, a drop-down box lists your "x" last uploaded pictures so you can choose one of them.  (only the last "x" ones because otherwise the list could be filled with hundreds of images).
3. When you look at a versioned image, a line on the page could inform you that there are previous or subsequent versions of the same work, and offer the direct links to them.
4. Each image could have separate comments like they have now. Combining this feature with the possibility of making multiple posts per for each image (eventually with only one rating), we could have a coherent "discussion thread" for each posted work.

Giorgio

Wow, interesting idea Giorgio. I would say that it would definitely be a large scale project because there would be quite a lot of coding rewrite needed.

Is it possible to add to the e-bot messages which gallery the posted image is from, and the genre
(possibly the key words)?  Could save some time checking images that are not at all of interest.

No changes would need to be made if this was all done using a forum instead of a gallery.

Thanks ArtPearl, I have added that suggestion too. I would see that as a great improvement for all the gallery ebots.

Acadia - it would for those of us who don't want to post our galleries in a forum.

Quote - I had suggested the implementation of a "versioning" system for the images. Here is how I have thought it:

1. When you upload a new image, you are asked if it is a "new" image or a new version of an existing one.
2. If it is a new version of an old image, a drop-down box lists your "x" last uploaded pictures so you can choose one of them.  (only the last "x" ones because otherwise the list could be filled with hundreds of images).
3. When you look at a versioned image, a line on the page could inform you that there are previous or subsequent versions of the same work, and offer the direct links to them.
4. Each image could have separate comments like they have now. Combining this feature with the possibility of making multiple posts per for each image (eventually with only one rating), we could have a coherent "discussion thread" for each posted work.

Giorgio

I like this idea very much...great suggestion :)

Sounds like Giorgio is on to something useful!  I know I wish I had those options on the last post I made in my gallery!

Ok, i would just like to object to the crit club being used for blatent product advertising. A recent upload by a member was nothing more than that... and there wasn't even the option to crit the image.

You can't segregrate the images you post here!  If the crit club need not apply, you post 'em without crits enabled.  Stuff like that, just ignore it.  I know I did.  Like commercials, you tune 'em out if you can't post crits.

I know I did.

Oh yeah, i forgot that images cant be segregated... ok then, i'll just grumble into my coffee and get over it.

If you feel someone really abuses that aspect, using this effort to put advertisement in front of you, you can certainly just un-favorite them.

Karen: It's with regret that I have to ask you to remove me from the list, sorry everyone but the whole thing has grown beyond my expectations and I just don't have the time right now to give it the attention it deserves, especially to commenting on others work!
I'm afraid RL issues are getting in the way right now and prolly will be for the foreseeable future!
Apologies!! 

Quote - Karen: It's with regret that I have to ask you to remove me from the list, sorry everyone but the whole thing has grown beyond my expectations and I just don't have the time right now to give it the attention it deserves, especially to commenting on others work!
I'm afraid RL issues are getting in the way right now and prolly will be for the foreseeable future!
Apologies!! 

I removed you. Hope you rejoin at some point when life settles down a little for you.

I find that there are so many uploads that I don't have time to view them all, so I just pick a few random ones when I have time and if there is something I feel I can contribute I will comment. 

On a side note, I finally got around to uploading an image. I really wasn't inspired but I felt like making "something", so I went with my 2 favourite standby's....Asian influence and dynamic cloth :)  Some very helpful comments and suggestions have been given. Thanks :)

as an aside, regarding the experience of artists hoping to post works in galleries (actual physical rooms in buildings) where they'lll be seen and appreciated: one big problem is that there are far fewer esteemed critics than aspiring artists. this means that good artists may become discouraged from lack of recognition and publicity, and that the few distinguished critics often become hated and despised by the very group whom they've taken the trouble to represent.

Will do Gwyn. Hope things get a little less manic for ya!

Quote - what you're suggesting is a many to many join.  you need a table of images, a table of galleries, and a table to join the two.  and that assumes one genre, not multiples. in which case you'd need a genre table and another many to many join table of images to genres.  now that's fine if they've already built it that way.  since gallery and genre have ids, they might have.  but given the existing functionality, my guess is that they have a table of galleries, a table of genres and an image table with a genre column with holding genre id and a gallery column holding genre id, and an author column holding user id.

if that's the case, it's a total rearchitecture of the database.  and it's the case i'm betting on, since mostly programmers don't make their jobs unnecessarily hard on themselves.  pulling from a join table mean more complex queries and more to keep in your head.  and i'm betting that it's a complete no to rearchitecture the database, as it means not only transforming  loads of data, but  probably recoding every line of code that makes up the galleries.

it always amazes me how people think if they can imagine it, it must be simple for  a computer to do.  not a dis, it's just no one thinks, "i don't know what's involved with making a new bathroom, it must be incredibly simple because i can imagine one right there."  but somehow, people think if they can imaging a computer doing it, it must be easy to make it happen.

I've done this kind of work on a fairly regular basis, using MS SQL Server. It's not that hard. Takes a couple of hours to program at most (though a LOT depends on ANSI92 compliancy of the DB engine).
If Bondware runs on MySQL 4.x, you're in trouble, however. It lacks some important features. MySQL 5.x has fixed most of those problems.

The data migration could take some time, however. The migration script will be quite complicated since the size of the database prevents converting in one go, the machines would run out of memory.

As for the client application, again, it's not that bad, provided you're using views instead of client-side complicated SQL statements.

In short: it can be done, but it requires a) a capable database programmer b) several hours of Renderosity downtime.

I'd love to see this functionality, I've asked for it before. But I'm afraid the staff has other priorities.

svdl - i've never had the javascript editor i'm typing in now work properly.  and the pages are a labyrinth of html and css implemented in very, very inefficient ways.  in my experience, changes to an existing structure that's very clean, very precise, and very abstract still take about 3 to 10xs as long as it seems like they should and as people predict, because issues just come up.  i honestly don't know of a programmer or project manager that would suggest a structure change to something as extensive the bondware content management system, let alone something as messy as it appears, when they're still in the process of implementing existing technologies site wide.

i agree, if it's an mvc design pattern, it's shouldn't be but so bad.  my guess is that you'd still need to change each page to work with an image property that's an array instead of a string, but not so bad.  like i said, if this used a framework, then the change should be easy.  but most scripts and even tutorials i've encountered don't use php that way.   conversely, most content editors don't use tables any more (as this one does).  i've certainly never seen anything use css like (for instance) this forum does, or even the gallery does.  i've seen the .js text editor before, and personally i turned it down for exactly the reasons i'm having problems with it now.  i found it very flaky in testing.

i'm not impugning the designers and developers at bondware. i just know you have to design for extensibility in the first place, or it's pretty hard to grow in new directions.  and from looking at what i can see, i'd say they were a very small team doing just in time work, and focusing on what's most important.  not designing for huge amounts of possible futures.

i wouldn't be surprised that the staff has other priorities.  it seems like a lot of trouble for something that probably wouldn't get used much.

oh, and pm a response if you have one.  i just realized i'm being bad responding to you in this thread. ;D

Boy, I'm really coming to this late -- real life has been a pain recently. Anyway, this is such a good idea. I greatly appreciate feedback and the few critiques I've received have generally been very helpful. Please sign me up. -Alan

Alan, you're in :-)

Hi,

Don't know if you're aware but it appears that the current member list in the first post has been somewhat truncated (or so it seems to me)... :unsure:

I'm not not bringing this up because my username begins with a "W" --- honest...!

Ant.

Yes, half of it does seem to be gone. 
That's a bit of a problem. /poke Karen

Nobody after the L's stayed in? How odd, I didn't realize I was out of the group.

Day-um. I have been having some real problems with the html in that post for some reason. I'll correct this in a little bit.

I think it is more helpful when the critique person knows the software. Also if they can point the person to a tutorial. Example. I used an old daz bridge that did not look so hot close up. People suggested bump maps. It did not come with any. How to make bump maps and what should I set them at. Things like that are more helpful.

OK should all be fixed now :-)

drifterlee, from what I've seen in my Textures folder, a bump map looks just like a greyscale of the texture.

that's often not quite true.  for instance, i once made a displacement map for a texture the floor of the paradise pavillion (daz plat club item).  it was marble, so the texture wasn't smooth even when the surface was.  i had to make it by hand.

I tried to set a bump map for a Vickie and she came out looking like a cracked, dried-up riverbed.

Quote - I think it is more helpful when the critique person knows the software. Also if they can point the person to a tutorial. Example. I used an old daz bridge that did not look so hot close up. People suggested bump maps. It did not come with any. How to make bump maps and what should I set them at. Things like that are more helpful.

Ahhh! Sorry. I was one that mentioned the bump. I didn't think to give instructions.

Just take the texture into your graphic program. Change it to a grey scale image. Save it with the same name but add "BUMP" at the end IE: textureBUMP.jpg.  Then in the material room, go into "Advanced Tab" and right click in the working window. Pick "New Node", and "2D Image" and "Image_map". Browse to the grey scale image you made.  Then hook it up to the BUMP area of the Poser Surface Window.  Set the value to something really low so that the texture isn't overwhelming. Try .0003 to start and see if that works.  Work your way up or down from there and see what you think looks best.

damn. I've not seen anything other than ppl listing me for the group....

When did you sign up?  It's pretty generally accepted that people come and critique new postings that they have an interest in, more than going through older images in somebody's gallery.  Post something and you are sure to get some critique comments.

Quote - I tried to set a bump map for a Vickie and she came out looking like a cracked, dried-up riverbed.

To fix those bumps you need to set the amount to something between 0.001 and 0.005 to keep it from looking too rediculous... LOL I tried it once on the quickie tex i made once and I think the default is like 0.083 or some such number and she had this ugly black streak of who knows what running down her spine :P

One thing I would like to ad. Some of my work is promos for merchants. Often I can't change things like the lighting, etc, because it is supposed to show the product as is.

The default for bump maps is way too high. I set it at .01 for Mapps wallpaper and it came out ok.

Quote - One thing I would like to ad. Some of my work is promos for merchants. Often I can't change things like the lighting, etc, because it is supposed to show the product as is.

In a case like that you really ought to spell that out in the notes as you post.  I hate to critique someone on some aspect of an image that was a conscious choice and will be inflexible - why annoy the artist picking on some detail that is by design?

Also would be good if people explained when they are using preset lighting, or preset character poses - I don't want to criticise someone's posing work when it's a canned pose.  Not bashing canned poses, I just would rather folks spelled out what's completely original and what is not.

Quote - I just would rather folks spelled out what's completely original and what is not.

I couldn't agree more. It would be useful if people would be more explicit about this.

just a mention: i think, though, it's kind of moot whether it's a canned pose or not.  because people should know when they can use something out of the box or it needs tweaking.  for instance, even though i've seen several people say that v4's arms are cut too high, when that shows in an image it's almost never pointed out.   i think that a lot of works with poser figures get less respect outside the community in part because the same figures appear again and again with the same glaring errors.  i think it's instinctual for us to discount the problematic aspects of canned content, rather than addressing them and thinking about how to overcome them.

Mmm is this dead ?

Or were my last work so damn good that most here cant type anything in awe ?

Im not asking for comments ..but after 20 days its getting less and less...
So are we done with this "club" 

Chris

BAR-CODE: I know this isnt particularly about my comments, and this post isnt about your images  neceesarily, but some points for consideration: 
-Some people post  a lot , maybe an image a day, noway can I post a comment on each - actually takes me some time to consider an image.
-Some people post a series of similar images, in which case I think if I comment on one I have done my part.
-There should be some elements of mutuality.  Not neccesarily that each image I comment requires  a comment back,  but if I get none at all I figure it may be neccesary for me to stop too.
-I have this feeling if you are good and/or experienced its a bit intimidating for beginners or less confident people. Not  that I think I'm that good at this,  but I do welcome and would encourage any comments, not just of "experts"

• This is just about 3 weeks since I joined, still only about half of the group members added me to their list.  Even if I commented on their images.  I was just about to send messages to these people to explain that I will drop them from my list in a week or two. I dont want to offend anyone by just removing them with no explanation, but it has to work both ways.

I do hope the group isnt winding down, the comments I'm getting, and comments are read for other people's images  are realy helpfull.

I strongly believe that the group is alive and kicking. I also feel that some members contribute more to it than others for whatever reason. Also, there could be any number of reasons why a particular image doesn't get so many comments or critiques. For that reason, I don't think it's justified to claim that the group is dead just because you've had a few less comments recently.

Artpearl .. you are so right ..

I dont have to have 40 comments saying "good work" or " nice image" and thats it..
Thats more for the most comment list "that i never ever will understand"

I do like the read comments about originality the way the image is setup etc etc...
So im not fishing for loads a comments .. but for Good one's
And ik do think somewere the ADDING of members goes wrong ..
I have added people and later i had to ad them again and again.. something is not 100% working ..

But i too hope this is a thing that stays .. even when its just a hand full of people realy trying to help on and other ..

Chris

Quote - But i too hope this is a thing that stays .. even when its just a hand full of people realy trying to help on and other ..

Agreed. 100%. It'll keep going as long as people are prepared to give and take. I think we've all seen the benefits of it so far from people reposting work that's taken into account criticism offered by the group, so there's no doubt about that!