If Antonia could take V3 textures, that would be wonderful. I'm sure many people would appreciate that. On the other hand, I played with UVLayout for a few hours and came up with something that already bagginsbill sees potential improvements in over the V3 mapping. So it seems that V3 is not perfect and we might be able to come up with something better. Why not try?

I'm doing all this for three main reasons: because it's fun, to learn how it's done and to make a figure that I would like to use. I appreciate the attention, and I'm happy to share the results, but my motivation has never been to maximize the number of downloads or the number of gallery images using her. So, I'll finish the mapping I'm currently working on and make it as good as I can. If  someone wants to make an alternative mapping, they're very welcome to. Antonia will come with an open licence, so there are no legal obstacles to making and distributing modified versions - free or for cash. I'd say we try to come up with ways to make it easy for the user to switch between mappings. Plugging a modified geometry into the cr2 shouldn't be too hard, but maybe there's even some way to directly inject a .uvs file into a figure within Poser. Python magicks, anyone?

Finally, I think that texture maps, particularly photo maps, are a bit overrated anyway. Look at my last render in the gallery. The only image maps I've used are the trans  maps for the lashes and brows. And I bet you a live-long free membership in the Antonia fan club that if we locked up bagginsbill in a cellar for a week with a computer, a water cooler and a stack of pizzas, he'd come up with procedural lash and brow maps that would beat anything ever made in pixels. Anyway, I'm not denying that a good texture would make that render look even better. But if I had to choose between the best texture possible on a default P4 style material and a really good material setup with no texture, I'd certainly pick the second.

-- I'm not mad at you, just Westphalian.