This has been bugging me for some time now...  Renderosity did a survey a good while back and one "fill in the blank" portion I ended up devoting to this topic -

Why do merchants put up bad renders of their product?

Look, I'm not even that good with Poser's Firefly.  But, I can get by, occasionally.  However, I'm also not selling anything either.  But, I have sold LOT'S of things and developed entire marketing campaigns, sales brochures and all the graphics/smafics wiz-bang stuff that goes with it.  I'm not a professional artist either.  I just have a knack with putting together complete packages, no matter what they are.

However, the biggest problem I can see with this type of marketplace is that some merchants don't seem to know how to best render their products.  Some of them look like they could be pretty good products as well.  But, their renders are terrible and that's all an average customer will see to begin with.  Just like in "attraction" a potential customer will know whether or not they're interested in a product in the first few minutes if they aren't already searching for it.  How do potential sellers expect to sell their product if what they show the customer is the most unflattering render/morph/pose/whatever of their product?

I don't get it.  Is it volume they're counting on?  Some hope that if enough monkeys hit the keyboard, eventually enough of them will hit "Add to Cart" for them to justify having spent the time creating their product?

Does Renderosity, or anyone else, supply rendering advice/help?  Generally, if a merchant has a badly portrayed/rendered product, I won't even look at it twice.  Why?  Because, a lack of skill there shows me the vendor either doesn't care about the quality of their piece or, in general, has a lack of skill to begin with.

Yes, this sounds "rantish."  However, I'm not posting this because I wish to unfairly criticize anyone.  I am not "ranting."  I'm posting this because, obviously, some possible producers of 3D merchandise (That offer full renders w/ materials of their products as inducements) may be wondering why their really spectacular product has not sold.

One downside to this effects Renderosity as well and is something they should be concerned with - A page full of badly rendered products does not improve their image.  I'm not talking about "Art."  I'm talking about marketing which, despite the insistance of some, is an entirely different thing altogether.

Just my two coppers.. But, if you've produced a really great product and can't seem to sell it, you may want to take a look at the rendering work you have done and work a bit on quality there as well.

if they render it correctly, most of their users won't be able to duplicate said
render, thus forcing them to render using default settings.

Quote - if they render it correctly, most of their users won't be able to duplicate said
render, thus forcing them to render using default settings.

So, you're saying that products are rendered based on the inexperience of the user?  ie: "This is what you will get when YOU try to render it."

I can understand that, to a certain extent.  But, that doesn't account for all of them and, simply put, there's no reason why render settings and a little bit of rendering help can't be put in there as well.  I've seen plenty of producers include rendering tips and even multipage pdfs on how to best render their products and other items as well.

Wouldn't it be "OK" to show the product in different renderings?  A good quality Firefly, Poser 4 (whatever version that is) etc?

For me, I don't want to know what the worst possible render of the product could be.  I want to see the best quality that is possible to get out of the product.  Rendering to the most common denominator is understandable but, not if that means that it actually makes the product look terrible when it really has good potential.

Quote - if they render it correctly, most of their users won't be able to duplicate said
render, thus forcing them to render using default settings.

A separate reply, my apologies..

Here's an example of what I'm talking about:

A few months ago I decided to buy a couple of products from someone who was having a "deal."  I really didn't need them, they didn't look that great, but, they seemed like a fairly decent producer/person.  So, I gave them a shot.  What could I lose, a few bucks?  Only if it was completely broken would I not get any use of it.  After all, I could always alter the objects myself and redo them for personal use.

This particular vendor doesn't usually have good quality renders.  BUT, when I opened their product in Poser, I saw the level of detail and care put into the products and the obvious attention to producing a quality piece of work.  (There were a little system-heavy, but whatever...)

I would have never bought a single thing that vendor produced simply because their renders were substandard.  What "sold" their product didn't have a thing to do with any visual aids - It was a special sale along with seeing that vendor post several times and, obviously, they were very personable.

I'd hate to see a lot of potential vendors of really good products have little success simply because they're presenting their products poorly.

Quote - if they render it correctly, most of their users won't be able to duplicate said
render, thus forcing them to render using default settings.

Sorry, but that's nonsense. Nobody is forced to render product promos using default Poser lighting. If we did that, we'd never sell anything. I suspect the main reason that so many promo renders look less than stellar is that people just don't take the time to learn how to light a shot properly. It's not that hard, providing you can be bothered.

There was a vendor a little while ago who asked in the forum for help with producing product page renders for a new product, as she felt that her rendering experience was not good enough to do her products justice.

I considered offering, but in the end decided that I do not really have enough experience and it would be a bit cheeky to expect that I could produce anything more acceptable than she herself could.

I guess this, to a certain extent, is what might prompt vendors to send out their new products to some of the more popular renderers (words chosen carefully) at Rendo, in the hope of getting some decent pictures in their credit galleries? I don't know.

But if the product page renders are not themselves eye-catching, I would not even bother to go look at the credit galleries. So a better idea might be to do what that vendor did. It would be interesting to know what sort of response she got.

Just my twopence worth.
Except it's only worth onepence now.

I am not a vendor here, but am at another site (not going to state which site). I feel that as a vendor I like to show my products how they render right "out the box" with no settings changed except maybe no shadows. This may or may not hurt my sales but my products do sell.

What I don't like are the renders that are so touched up that you cannot get the real look of a product. But that maybe just me. I rarely photoshop any of my renders of my products unless it is a background image to highlight the product.

I do understand your point of view, but you also have to look at others point of view before being so critical. Some of us may have been using Poser or Daz Studio for years, but there are allot more users now just getting started with both programs who don't have the "eye" or the know how to get a good render.

What I want, as a customer, is:

1. a good product
2. a good promo image
3. and if I ask the vendor "please give me the settings to replicate your promo image", I expect him/her to show me that the image has not been postworked. Good merchants already do that.

An "out-of-the-box" render is always a good thing, but if the merchant wants to go full speed and to produce a wonderful render, it's ok for me.... as long as he's not cheating.

A good example? Aery Soul, that is As Shanim & Siliphiel. They produce AWESOME promo images with their products, AND they are always willing to show you how to reproduce them  (actually the exact settings of their promos are posted on their site).

As always, quality is one thing, marketing another one completely. When you have both, it's paradise.

I agree that commercial sites like Rendo should help vendors to improve their packages,  maybe hiring experienced artists here in the community.

Giorgio

Quote -
I agree that commercial sites like Rendo should help vendors to improve their packages,  maybe hiring experienced artists here in the community.

Giorgio

I disagree with that comment due to that will jack up prices even more, and now days with the economy being so bad some people cannot afford higher prices.  Most of us here it is a luxury to purchase items. I just spent 20 on the new Alice due to this would be a good set to have for creating products.

Quote -
I disagree with that comment due to that will jack up prices even more, and now days with the economy being so bad some people cannot afford higher prices. 

It should not be mandatory, but it could be a SERVICE the commercial site offers to its merchants.
It could actually improve sales, so I think it would good be for economy, not bad. Obviously the cost of such a service should be reasonable, given that products in the MP are more or less around $10 or $20.

But as Miss Nancy would say, "I ain't a lawyer". Neither an economist. So maybe it's a silly idea.
Giorgio.

I'd rather see a plain ordinary "bad" render than something so doctored up that I don't know what I'm getting.  Personally I think post working images in the MP should be forbidden.

I remember one package that I was interested in. I spent a good 30 minutes looking at the promos and what was in the package, only to discover that a good 80% of what I was seeing in said promos was post worked in, or parts of other packages that they either sold or from other vendors.

I learned the hard way to scrutinize ad pages because what you see is not always what you get.

Give me plain ordinary, bare bones renders any day so that I can actually see the package, not something so doctored up that I'll never be able to achieve.

The majority of good promos in the marketplace, at least here, are not postworked renders.  I'm not sure where the idea comes from that if it is a pleasing image, it must be postwork.  If you are counting putting a cutout png render of a figure on a background as postwork, then you are seriously missing the point.

Poser default settings and lighting simply do not do justice to ANY content, no matter the quality, and in many cases can hide a lot of problems, especially when it comes to textures and materials used.  Poser's default lights cast some serious dark shadows that can cover a lot of issues, and hides a lot of detail.  Personally I am much more inclined to buy a product that is well lit and rendered over one that uses default settings for the promo images because I can better see what I am getting and don't have to worry about any hidden flaws.  Shoot, you don't even have to know anything these days about lighting, posing, or render settings because there are a lot of excellent products in the marketplace already to do much of this for you.  IMO bad promos are simply lazy promos.

Quote - I'd rather see a plain ordinary "bad" render than something so doctored up that I don't know what I'm getting.  Personally I think post working images in the MP should be forbidden.
I remember one package that I was interested in. I spent a good 30 minutes looking at the promos and what was in the package, only to discover that a good 80% of what I was seeing in said promos was post worked in, or parts of other packages that they either sold or from other vendors.

I learned the hard way to scrutinize ad pages because what you see is not always what you get.

Give me plain ordinary, bare bones renders any day so that I can actually see the package, not something so doctored up that I'll never be able to achieve.

but no one said anything about doctoring.  bad renders are just that.  i've seen products that i knew could be used well in Poser because the merchant posted development renders from another application they were comfortable with, while their Poser promo renders looked like bad P4 renders.  conversely, i've seen products i knew were low quality just by what they didn't include become incredibly popular because their promo renders looked great.  not postworked, just good clean renders.

personally, i have a default white room scene that works very well for me before i even start on postwork.

If I could join in on the rant. :)

Along with good promo images, I think merchants should have a good product descriptions as well. Like Acadia just mentioned, a potential customer shouldn't have to spend 30 minutes looking at the sales images to figure out what's in a product: the merchant should spell out exactly what's included in the product description.

A lot of merchants do an excellent job of this. Since we're already mentioning Aery Soul, I think his (or their?) products have excellent descriptions: they list exactly what models are included, what textures are included, and they even include what morphs are included on each clothing model! Now that's being thorough.

Yet there are some products with a basic description such as "This is a building". (Okay, maybe there aren't actual products with such a simple description, but you know what I mean.)
Why doesn't the merchant talk a little more about what's included: is it a prop or a figure? Are there any moving parts? What about the textures? Are there any poses, either to position figures in the building or MAT poses to change the color of the building?

And more importantly, is this product a texture for an existing set of clothing? I can't tell you how many products have confused me with their odd title and lack of explanation about whether it's conforming clothing or a texture set.
While I admire the creative-writing skills on some products, a long-winded fairy tale really doesn't help me figure out which figure the product is designed for... or if it's a stand-alone product.

Just want to add that there are rules for vendors when posting there promo images, not sure if thats what the OP is referring to, but vendors cant simply advertise there products as they want.

But personally i would prefer to see products in a basic setup, and if it looks good or just decent there, you know as user that if you spend some time setting up a decent scene with nice lighting etc, the product will most likely also follow along. As you dont really know how long time have been spend on a "super" render, and then you might be very disappointed when you actually try the product and cant even come close to getting the same result.

 Clothes or hair not included, what I find baffling is few vendors of lets say building interiors and exteriors include lights but most don't. A light file and thumb is a couple of K. If I were a vendor I would advertise includes the exact light set or sets used to make these promo images. When it comes to items with interiors, buildings, rooms, cars, stage coaches what ever. I would buy the one with the lights (used in the promos) over something similar without the lights.

Quote - I am not a vendor here, but am at another site (not going to state which site). I feel that as a vendor I like to show my products how they render right "out the box" with no settings changed except maybe no shadows. This may or may not hurt my sales but my products do sell.

What I don't like are the renders that are so touched up that you cannot get the real look of a product. But that maybe just me. I rarely photoshop any of my renders of my products unless it is a background image to highlight the product.

I do agree with you.  I also very much agree with you in being against postworking anything except non-related rendered content. Backgrounds, text, arrows, etc.. are just fine.  Touching up rendering of the product should always be strictly forbidden as an unsavory practice.

Quote - I do understand your point of view, but you also have to look at others point of view before being so critical. Some of us may have been using Poser or Daz Studio for years, but there are allot more users now just getting started with both programs who don't have the "eye" or the know how to get a good render.

Please understand, I am not being "critical" of bad renders.  That's not my intent.  I am not even labeling anyone or anything as a bad render.  I would never criticize anyone for either not knowing something or simply having a different aesthetic taste than I.

However, that is a far cry from doing what is akin to purposefully torpedoing your own products with very bad renders.

Like in my example above, we had a great producer of quality products but, usually, offering products with less than stellar renders as "advertising."  How many hamburgers would McDonald's sell if instead of showing you a nice, juicy burger on a fresh bun with crisp lettuce, they showed you a pic of a burger someone forgot to throw away at the end of the day?  Usually, they have fresh burgers that are on fresh buns with good lettuce and sauces.. why not show that to the consumer?  I'm not saying disguise a shabby product with a good render; I'm saying don't sabotage your quality products before they even get a chance to be sold.

That's all I want to see: Producers of content actually benefiting from improving their rendering skills.  I will also add, "In honest ways" to exclude any possibility of photoshop or rendering with programs others would not have access to in general. 

It is possible to render in the Poser's default settings  and default lighting arrangement and come out with a render that is totally unsatisfactory.  :) Yet, content producers still use these as an inducement to purchase.  It doesn't make sense when simply moving the light or choosing a better rendering mode, better pose, better anything would be all that was needed.

If using advanced techniques is seen as a problem, then don't use them!  It isn't necessary to show "1337 mAD Skeelz" in order to have a good render of a good quality product.  A couple of well placed infinite lights and, walla, a decent product render!  If the producer wishes to salve their conscience for some unforeseen transgression at using lights included in Poser already, they can include the lightset settings by saving it and copy/paste... /shrug

Quote - > Quote -

I agree that commercial sites like Rendo should help vendors to improve their packages,  maybe hiring experienced artists here in the community.

Giorgio

I disagree with that comment due to that will jack up prices even more, and now days with the economy being so bad some people cannot afford higher prices.  Most of us here it is a luxury to purchase items. I just spent 20 on the new Alice due to this would be a good set to have for creating products.

Actually, I would look at this as being part of the Content Producer's responsibility AND the Content Distributor's responsibility as well.

In my experience in the business place, when distributing products through a third party, both must come together to maximize the potential and the benefit for themselves and the end-user.  This is completely necessary and any deviation from that arrangement never works.

Something like that should be reflected in the 3D marketplace as well.  For instance, Renderosity has a desire to be viewed as a marketer of quality products.  I believe they do have that reputation.  Therefore, they must steward that as it is one of the few things that separates them from the competition.  Their livelihood is also intimately tied into their producer's ability to sell product.  If products do not sell, they die, it's as simple as that.

What should they do?  They should advise producers when their renders are not "up to snuff" and provide some limited assistance in that area.  They don't need a separate artist for that as most of their vendors render just fine.   Heck, they could even email a vendor some basic light settings and say "Try this."  The important thing is that Renderosity, and any marketer, stewards their own reputation by assuring not only their customer's are happy but that their vendors have the best chance of increasing everyone's satisfaction as well.

Like I said before, a page full of bad renders in the "What's New" section or the Marketplace general area does not flatter any 3D Marketer and gives an overall bad impression even if the products themselves are excellent.

Quote - If I could join in on the rant. :)

Along with good promo images, I think merchants should have a good product descriptions as well. Like Acadia just mentioned, a potential customer shouldn't have to spend 30 minutes looking at the sales images to figure out what's in a product: the merchant should spell out exactly what's included in the product description.

Any failing in this area is a direct responsibility of the Marketer in not obtaining the necessary information or insuring that it is provided.  Renderosity certainly has requirements and if they select an item for distribution they have to be sure those requirements are met.  If they aren't, it's their fault at either not abiding by their own requirements or failing to have same even though we, as consumers, may fault the producer for not providing adequate descriptions of their product.

Quote - And more importantly, is this product a texture for an existing set of clothing? I can't tell you how many products have confused me with their odd title and lack of explanation about whether it's conforming clothing or a texture set.

ABSOULUTELY!  In fact, I'd go so far as to say that such products have their own section, away from "clothing."   However, if they did, not many people would ever see them, would they? :) 

Quote - While I admire the creative-writing skills on some products, a long-winded fairy tale really doesn't help me figure out which figure the product is designed for... or if it's a stand-alone product.

I agree and, even though I am not a producer of products here, I am very long-winded.  But, on writing product descriptions, I am very succinct.  Catalog entries, sales-info even marketing aids all have their limits on verbosity.  Products in the 3D Marketplace should ascribe to those same principles as well.

Quote - Just want to add that there are rules for vendors when posting there promo images, not sure if thats what the OP is referring to, but vendors cant simply advertise there products as they want.

But personally i would prefer to see products in a basic setup, and if it looks good or just decent there, you know as user that if you spend some time setting up a decent scene with nice lighting etc, the product will most likely also follow along. As you dont really know how long time have been spend on a "super" render, and then you might be very disappointed when you actually try the product and cant even come close to getting the same result.

I do understand your point and the desire to provide accurate depictions of the product under normal use.  However, IMO, some of these "accurate depictions" are accurate only if they apply to a blind monkey banging on the keyboard with a blunt object while determining rendering settings.  There, I said it. :)

For instance, it takes practically no skill at all just to move a light so it actually shines somewhere near the product being offered...  If the producers and marketers have such low expectations of their user base then they needn't worry about selling quality products at all - their customers would have no use for them.  But, I think both are intimately concerned with providing those types of products.  They just need to get on the same page as to decide how best to do that.

Quote -  Clothes or hair not included, what I find baffling is few vendors of lets say building interiors and exteriors include lights but most don't. A light file and thumb is a couple of K. If I were a vendor I would advertise includes the exact light set or sets used to make these promo images. When it comes to items with interiors, buildings, rooms, cars, stage coaches what ever. I would buy the one with the lights (used in the promos) over something similar without the lights.

From what I have seen, most sellers of interiors that are actually fully functional out of the box (textured, etc) do include light sets.  Products depicting exteriors aren't something I have much experience with.  Many (if not most) vendors also include the name of any third-party lightset they have used and I see this very frequently.

I think marketing images using third-party lights is fine if you include some standard lighting renders which are available with a default install of whatever product you are creating for.    However, and this is where it gets tricky, in renders using lightsets that use special materials, IBLs, etc not available for purchase or not included in the product without also including a render under more default settings should not be allowed.  We do want the customer to have certain expectations under "default" situations and they should be able to attain a similiar quality render using the tools that come with the package they have.

Quote -
Along with good promo images, I think merchants should have a good product descriptions as well. Like Acadia just mentioned, a potential customer shouldn't have to spend 30 minutes looking at the sales images to figure out what's in a product: the merchant should spell out exactly what's included in the product description.

Another important thing that should be mandatory IMHO and unfortunately not all merchants do: when you are including in your promo images other commercial products (like hair or clothes for a character, and so on), ALWAYS INCLUDE the list of said products. Simply writing "hair not included" is not enough for me: I'd want to know exactly which hair it is.

Giorgio

I posted a shot of AlanX over at Daz, rendered without any postwork. (I gave specifics of what I did, because I used the Artistic Lens thingy posted by BB here on the forums)
I know 2 people at least who went and got that character set for the texture alone, because of that render.

I rarely use the morph presets.

Also, I picked up Oman here the other day and rendered him (with my own morphs) and showed the render to my writers group.
Lets just say one of them said she wouldn't mind having triplets by this guy, no questions asked lol

A good render will sell stuff, I'm sure. If the product is solid, then there is no need for touch ups.
There is a need for a good render though. I do like products that include renders by other people with the stuff on sale.

Quote -
For instance, it takes practically no skill at all just to move a light so it actually shines somewhere near the product being offered...  If the producers and marketers have such low expectations of their user base then they needn't worry about selling quality products at all - their customers would have no use for them.  But, I think both are intimately concerned with providing those types of products.  They just need to get on the same page as to decide how best to do that.

Ok think i understand you, however find it rather hard to actually discuss as what you refer to as bad renders might not be the same as me and so on.

However just to comment on your mac donalds example, I agree that they most likely wouldnt sell a lot of burgers if they showed half eaten ones. However when you see a commercial from mac donalds, they always try to show how nice and perfect there burgers are, but as comsumer you also know that what you see on tv is not exactly what you get when you buy one :). And personally i dont eat mac donalds that much, but when i do, i almost always end up being a little bit disappointed to be honest :D

What I would like to see for promo renders are:

1. Neutral lighting -- all lights white. (Except for things which come with lights.) This is especially important when looking at figure textures. My prefered setup when I'm trying to compare different skin textures, morphs, whatever during character development (for my own purposes) is typically a pure white IBL with AO at about 30%, and an infinite white light coming from above and to one side at about 80%.
2. Figures should be shown in front view, profile, and 3/4 view.
3. Outside products should be listed. (If nothing else, so that I know what they are so I can buy them if they look really cool. :))

Quote - What I would like to see for promo renders are:

1. Neutral lighting -- all lights white. (Except for things which come with lights.) This is especially important when looking at figure textures. My prefered setup when I'm trying to compare different skin textures, morphs, whatever during character development (for my own purposes) is typically a pure white IBL with AO at about 30%, and an infinite white light coming from above and to one side at about 80%.
2. Figures should be shown in front view, profile, and 3/4 view.
3. Outside products should be listed. (If nothing else, so that I know what they are so I can buy them if they look really cool. :))

1. Hair should have a good full side and back view;
2. Bare bones renders should be on the first 3 pages of the ad. A 4th page should be added so that the vendor can showcase the product in a full gallery-style image to give the potential buyer a sense of what can be done.  Those types of images should not be in the thumbnail or first image on the first page.

Quote - 4. Hair should have a good full side and back view;

QFT, I don't know how many times I passed up on a hair set because I wasn't able to see what it looked like from a good side and rear view...  People don't just do renders from straight on.

Amen to that.
I've brought that up so many times, it's not even funny.
And not just here.
Mark Hair at Daz is almost exclusively front shots.
(I sent it back, btw. I found it stiff and too thin / wispy. To get half way decent coverage, I have to load it twice, and there are no side-swing morphs. Meaning if you tilt the head, the hair stays straight, unless you start messing around with magnets.)
Luc Locks at Daz is sporting the exact same pose and render 5 times -- with different hair colors. All from the left front slightly bent side.
It never even made it near my cart and never will.

Quote - What I would like to see for promo renders are:

1. Neutral lighting -- all lights white. (Except for things which come with lights.) This is especially important when looking at figure textures. My prefered setup when I'm trying to compare different skin textures, morphs, whatever during character development (for my own purposes) is typically a pure white IBL with AO at about 30%, and an infinite white light coming from above and to one side at about 80%.
2. Figures should be shown in front view, profile, and 3/4 view.
3. Outside products should be listed. (If nothing else, so that I know what they are so I can buy them if they look really cool. :))

And

Quote - 4. Hair should have a good full side and back view;

1. Bare bones renders should be on the first 3 pages of the ad. A 4th page should be added so that the vendor can showcase the product in a full gallery-style image to give the potential buyer a sense of what can be done.  Those types of images should not be in the thumbnail or first image on the first page.

Are EXCELLENT suggestions.

I think packaging white-renders, profiles and "best results" type images are completely necessary if one wants to truly give the customer a good opportunity to judge the product.  Any other products used in the image need to be named as well.  This is also a marketing opportunity as well and benefits other artists and their distributors.