Hey Morkonan,

sad to hear about your system crashes.

As far as it's Hexagon it's a derivative of some probs that was also in AMAPI. I got Amapi 5 (??) a ten years back cause it was the only (semi-)professional modeler with a output option for the freeware POVray raytracer. That's up to today one of the best raytracing engines. But all for it has to be written as source code. And really, it's not my way to have things I see or want to see defined in values and vectors ... that must be done visually or it's a big trial and error experiment.

But on one side Amapi did that output but only as a triangle mesh instead using the POV-primitives, so changing small parts was not easy. And on other side I never became familiar with Amapi's (often prized) naturally workflow interface. I think in version 6 they offered then also a professional interface like Hexagon, C4D, etc.
So that was better but with each version I got sudden unreproducable crashes ... so I put it aside.

I also got Hexagon cause it was cheap. But build by the same developers I found lots of things I don't like also in Hexagon. For example the whole workflow with the mouse using different functions with right or left clicks and enter between is rather bumpy ... in my opinion. And it was mostly tricky to work with the mouse and the keyboard. I love to enter values for different functions and often you have to choose the number fields by mouse while function is active. And then  the drawn line etc. is  hiking over the complete desktop  to the entry field.
So for modelling C4D is lots more precise in handling ... ok, ok, also lots more dollars ... although for american people it is much cheaper as for us european guys :cursing: ... up to 30% ... I don't know why
But Hexagon has some functionality in UV making which is really outstanding, e.g. that thing in making new seams and splitting with lines ... but as said before UV mapping isn't my best side. I struggle with that ... and the winner isn't defined up to this moment ...

As for all that pc, poser, etc. crashes I'm really surprized sometimes. I read a lot of such things in the forum but I never can understand. Ok, I'm a pro with pc's since the old DOS times but except the earlier Win31 times I never had that big problems with any pc neither in office nor at home. If there was problems they had been based on hardware ... often the expensive hardware of brand name products have been much more tricky as the cheap build system from the unknow dealer around the corner.
But since Win98 all is working like a charm ... normally. The only big deal might be the graphics card or better their drivers. Especially cause MS is having nearly no competence in graphics programming ... MS and graphics - two worlds collide or might be universes :sneaky:

So I'm with you in most cases memory is the problem. But it's not the problem if poser is crashing while starting ... with figures loaded in preview it might be a OGL flaw with graphics card driver and while rendering it's mostly a memory problem. But normally a big library doesn't shoot poser. It might slow down the start cause poser is reading the complete directory structure of the library plus the content of the last choosen folder. But this isn't very memory intensive, thats only pointer lists.

@paramount: for that starting problem, try to build one separat runtime as I mailed you and leave it empty or only one easy prop in it. If you are ending poser normally, make sure you are standing on that empty lib with your library pallet. Next time starting poser will read this structure and cause it's empty there should be no delay. If doing so and poser is crashing on start again then we will be sure it's not a problem with the library as such or it's volume.

And now for the cuff's ... Morkonan, they look great but that did my also. Did you try for example with bend knee's ?   If that work I'm very interested in that cuff's.

And having a wish I would prefer cuff's with a outcut V at the back. While the overall length is well I would prefer a bigger height in the front and a lower height at the back. So that the boot looks diagonal at the top from front to back with the cuff unfolded. You know what I mean ?
In your actual model I would give them up to 1/3 to 1/4 of length more in front and up to 1/4 to 1/5 less at the back ... depends a bit how wide the V will be.

B.t.w. did you see that these boots have a bug in their CR2 ?  The creator has hidden far to much dials in that figure. You are unable to do anything with them if not conformed to figure.
At the moment I use a python script to unhide neccessary dials on the fly but that's annoying, have to go into the CR2 next time and push the respective parameters to correct values.
Are you interested in a updated CR2 ?

Hope you had had a fine kunch ... for me it's time for late night diner now ... :biggrin: