Alright, I have a little complaint about some of the images being posted in the Poser gallery. ...I'll be browsing through and see this great looking well lit thumbnail, open it up and the scene looks phenomenal, I think wow firefly has realy had an upgrade and the lighting, is this what is possible with IDL, it looks so real . Then I read the comment and it says 3DS max / mental ray or C4D / Vray. ..for 1 its a V4 model from Daz, Various scene props to make up an interior, none of which are Poser content. ...So My question is, if its not a Poser Model (Daz), It not Poser content, It wasnt rendered or lit in Poser...But only posed and exported from Poser to C4d or 3ds to be lit , textured, shaded and rendered ...I mean technically shouldnt it go in those galleries...please stop posting those in the Poser gallery, its confusing as to the quality Poser 8 is capable of,  especially to a new user who is mabe just starting out in 3d, cant really afford high end but likes what he sees from Poser for the price - exact quote " Man you should see some of these images in the galley at Rosity, Poser is capable of Highend quality." ....I guess you didnt notice that was rendered in 3ds or C4d did you...It not a poser image!!

Thanks
Cant wait to hear what you guys think as well!!!!

Images can be posted in the Poser gallery as long as Poser was used somewhere in the workflow. A lot of those scenes were put together in Poser then exported and rendered in 3dsMax, c4d, etc. And Daz contenet is for both Poser and Daz|Studio.

i agree with you 100%.  images should go into the gallery relative to the program the rendering was done.  from my point of view, setting up a scene/figure in Poser and then texturing, etc.,  and rendering it in a high-end 3d program should not qualify the image to be in the Poser gallery.  only images rendered in Poser should qualify for the Poser gallery.  an experienced eye can tell the difference between a Poser and 3DMax, et al. render--ticks me off to see these renders try to pass as Poser renders.

 Jeff is right on the money.  

Plus, regardless of what you used in your workflow, it can be argued that there's no such thing as a purely Poser image.  The texture maps were certainly not created using Poser, and neither were the models.  
I know that my images, while I use mostly Poser, aren't pure Poser work.  I do a lot of postwork to get the mood I want or the image I want.  Even putting a signature on your work can be considered postwork.
So is taking your scene, normally set up in Poser, into another program for rendering.  
Hey, at least those who say "Rendered in Max/Maya/Mental Ray/etc" are honest and letting you know that's how they got the image.  In all the years I've worked here, I've seen a lot of people say "Oh, yeah, this is a PURE Poser render!" and then find out later that it was rendered in C4D or Max.

On the flipside...I know it doesn't get the same amount of attention, but people who use high-end apps to render and use items intended for Poser or DS get a LOT of crap from purists of the high-end apps.  IMHO, it's all semantics, and a way to create more "Us vs. Them" animosity.  Do what you do, create what you create.  In the end, is the work any less beautiful because it wasn't rendered in Poser?

Both sides of the argument have their valid points and I can sympathise with the OP's views, for me most of my work is set up in poser and rendered in Vue 8 Infinite so I put it in the Vue gallery, I could just as easily post in the Poser gallery though because a lot of the initial work is done inside Poser, it would be impossible to police effectively.

I think the categories should be scrapped, period.  Let people state - or not - what they used to create their stuff.

I hate the endless subdivision of music, films, fashion and so forth.  It's gotten to the point where everyone is so damn genre conscious they can't even fart without it having to be tagged as post modern subversive or some such total gonads. 

Jen X
"In the end, is the work any less beautiful because it wasn't rendered in Poser?"

No its far more rich and beautiful and realistic, and beyond what Poser can do. Some people do not even put an explanation as to how the image was created and just post it in the Poser gallery, but I can tell it was rendered in Vray or Maxwell. Im about to upgrade to Poser 8 and want to know its full capablility as far as natural lighting with IDL and its effect on textures ,aside from Bagginsbill,  I keep seeing images that looks no different from Poser 5's capability and am not sure if it would be worth the $140.00 bucks.

Personnally Im working on exporting from D/S into Blender and rendering with Lux, but I wouldn't Post a final image in the daz Studio Gallery..95% of all the work will be done in Blender and Lux GUI for shaders. I wouldnt want to give the impression that 3delight is capable of Non- biased photorealism like Lux.

Quote - I think the categories should be scrapped, period.  Let people state - or not - what they used to create their stuff. 

I'm with you, Sam

SamT
"Let people state - or not - what they used to create their stuff."

I agree to a certain degree.. I mean this is a field where we have to personnally fork out hundreds to thousands of dollars ( or other currencies) for the tools, and some tools are used in industial piplines and others arn't. The catagories give us a clear guidline as to the capabilites and weakness of each individual package..to make an informed dicision which tool to add to your pipline for a desired effect...the maker of the software will have images that after years of playing with it you still wouldnt figure out how it was done, so average user feedback is important...to me at least.

Goldie
"ticks me off to see these renders try to pass as Poser renders."

I dont know why they would want to.. other than the fact that this website has a large Poser user base and it would get more attention in the Poser gallery..I guess that since poser was used in he worklow (even at a minute level) it can be posted as a Poser image.

thefixer:
"a lot of the initial work is done inside Poser"

But what is is that makes you post all of your work in the vue gallery?..mabe its was because Poser was not used to produce the actual image. but only to contribute to the content within the image ..Doesn't make it a poser image, and I do respect your approach, I can get an idea of what can be done in vue.

Perhaps they should be posted in the 'mixed medium' category, no?

*But what is is that makes you post all of your work in the vue gallery?..

*Mainly because I believe the lighting to be superior in Vue and with it being a true 64 bit app. I also believe the render engine is better especially where lighting is concerned, for me lighting is all important!
That doesn't really answer your question I guess, so really I suppose it's because I light and render the scene in Vue so I see it as a Vue image, that is my persoanl opinion of course, not saying it's right!

Exactly ..Lighting is one of the most important aspects of the game herenext is render engine quality.

Your answer is why I believe they shouldnt post in the Poser gallery!!

Porthose:
"Perhaps they should be posted in the 'mixed medium' category, no?"
Yes , technically thats what it is, thats fine. but its not a Poser produced rendered in firefly image ,Posr gallery is not the place for it.

Didn't Stalin liquidate all the post modern subversives?  

Im not trying to tell anyone what they have to do like a communist dictator here ,I'm just asking if other people feel the same as I do about people not thinking about it when they post in the wrong catagory and no one says anything about it, and other think that image is produced from the capabilities of a lesser application.

No need to "Hail Hitler" here ok. 

Me, I post in whichever gallery corresponds to the render engine I used (or the modeller if there isn't a category for the renderer - VRay for e.g)

Quote - Im not trying to tell anyone what they have to do like a communist dictator here ,I'm just asking if other people feel the same as I do about people not thinking about it when they post in the wrong catagory and no one says anything about it, and other think that image is produced from the capabilities of a lesser application.

No need to "Hail Hitler" here ok. 

I think you misunderstood the intent of the poster, there.  He's replying to my earlier comment about "post modern subversive".  Humourously, too.

My opinion is as worthless as any other, so here it is:

I browse the Poser gallery to be impressed that somebody got an atypically good image out of Poser, to find people who can teach me a thing or two. To that end, seeing a Maya or Vue render posted in the Poser gallery irritates me. But ... pretty much everything irritates me, so that's not very interesting is it? grin

I do not browse the gallery to see art. For art, I go to the Louvre. Have done so twice and I intend to do so again.

SamT :
I see that now ...my bad.

FrankT:
I find your vue gallery quite inspirational and have consirdered vue several times because of it.
I mean I really like the 3ds and C4d imports rendered with vray and ,but if im looking to analyze poser on a average user basis,  its a bit confusing to me. ive even had to ask " hey is that rendered with firefly" before because it didnt look quite vray quality.

Quote - ... pretty much everything irritates me...

Gee, really?  We'd have never guessed.  ;)

The flip side of this is that when you post canned Poser content in the 3ds Max or Cinema gallery, it will greatly irritate some people who are looking for 3ds Max or Cinema stuff, and many of them have much higher standards.

I think it should be either the app that rendered it, or the app that modelled it (if applicable), depending on the point of the pic

I put DS->Maxwell renders in Other Apps

BB:
"I browse the Poser gallery to be impressed that somebody got an atypically good image out of Poser"

Me too, I love to see some of the stuff you post regularly in the forums for examples and spreading the learning around. When I look in the Poser galleries I want to see firefly renderer images with Poser lighting, possibly some IDL use. Anything that catches my eye and blows me away like "wow I cant wait to upgrade my poser 5 to 8 because this is awesome" is always rendered in vray from 3ds or C4d. If it wasnt for your renders from Poser 8 with vss (thanks by the way for that, I would have bought it) I would just get the DS3A so I can use Uber 2 Idl (Ah 3 has been quite lacluster in performance). But I like the effects and quality that show in your renders, and have been conviced to upgrade to 8 because of it.

See what I was talking about.

PJZ99:
aah so thats what JenX meant by the purist attitude..but dont us Poser users have the same right to have a (semi)purist attitude ..if its rendered in firefly it can go in.

I hope Zorglube gets in on the forums and i can ask him a few questions. haha
I love his work, but dude. I can tell vray when I see it.

I'm not saying one position is "better" than another, just that you shouldn't think your opinion is all that universal in this.  Myself I post almost everything in 3D Modeling, because, well, I 3D modeled it god dammit.  And you know, it irritates me greatly when I see (very often!) an image that contains nothing the poster actually modeled for themselves, despite bold red text on the gallery page requesting otherwise.

edit: Here's a real winner, in both 3d modeling AND realism - I don't much like to name names but geez.

pjz99;
I want to try to see if I can combine these two forums in either one or the other so that we can all get on some sort of mutual ground of understanding here.

Yeah that should go in the gallery of the application used to render v4..seeing as that was not modelled by that person..My same frustration shared on that image as well.

Images produced using the rendering engine in Poser should go to the Poser Galleries.
Everything else should go to Mixed Medium or their prime application category if the uploader
uses a different  rendering engine other than Poser.
porthos suggested the mixed medium earlier.
That's fair dontcha think ?
That way there is no confusion and someone new can see the differences between
the Poser engines and those images rendered with other applications and spend their
money on the application that best suit their interest.
  

Well in all fairness enigma-man:
I do agree that all images rendered with Poser render engines should go in the Poser gallery.
But on the same coin 3ds and c4d folks dont want poser imports pinning up they're galleries and "diluting the highend capabilities of those apps - understandable, I think mixed medium is exactly what those images are , posed ,clothed , scene set up in poser exported out and shaded ,lit and rendred with vray or maxwell..its a mixing of the app which is our mediums.

fair enough for me.

The guy who complained in the other thread objected to Poser figures

So even if you used Interposer you'd have to go to mixed medium.

That's ridiculous

I had a roast beef sandwich and a Guinness for lunch. :)

It looks like people can post wherever they want, irregardless of content and application.
This cannot be "policed" effectively and why bother ?
The image in question will fade into obscurity in a day or two anyway and nobody
will remember it, hopefully.  Hahahaha
I see no reason to be irritated over something one cannot control or do anything about.

Methinks I'll post something to the wrong gallery just to irritate folks and get you
all worked up over nothing.
Nah, more fun to turn this into a comic panel. o)

Well Tzorg:

I have several props that were modelled in c4d, if I load them all in a scene and render them in Daz Studio can i post it in the c4d gallery and put "modelled in c4d" for description..what if I do this all the time and and the c4d galleries  become cluttered with models created in c4d but rendered in other apps, and some one sais wow I thought the maxwell engine was good , this looks like 3delight renders or firefly renders..and then i come back and say ..well the props were modelled in c4d , why not.

Thats rediculous too.

enigma man..lets say you were looking to spend $230 to hell $3500 for a piece of software and user input was imortant in your decision and you keep looking through gallery samples and seeing stuff that interests you only to later find out it wasnt that software at all ..and now you feel like you cant get an accurate idea of the softwares advanved capabilities ......doesn't effect you at all huh?

There are administrative reasons why it's a good idea to keep the galleries separated into the varous categories but, IMO, if they're not more well defined they should really be revised into:

CGI 3D (comping allowed, no other postwork)
CGI 2D 
CGI Mixed (postwork ranging from simple filtering to painted over renders)
Photography
Traditional
Mixed media (combining elements from any of the above)

I'd also make it optional for the creator to state what they used to make their image.  

 ...In the end, both this thread and the one in the Cinema 4D forum have been posted before, just by different people and at different times.  All comments made here have been made then, too.  Not everyone's going to be happy with the fact that we only move images that are obviously in the wrong gallery (such as Photographs or images that belong in the MP Showcase), and don't move images that contain Poser characters or use Poser in the workflow somewhere.  You might not like it.  You might find it "cheating".  People work hard to get their artwork to be as beautiful as they want it to be, and, sometimes, Poser doesn't cut it.  Some folks cut their teeth on Vue's lighting system.  Others started using C4D in college, and that's what they know.  Personally, I've always preferred DS's lighting, but, using DS's lighting helped me to learn to use lighting better in Poser.  

We're all different.  Renderosity is a huge community, and not everyone does everything the same way.  

I do understand that not everyone does everything the same way and  nor should they. That would impede the evolution of the craft . Nor am I aiming my rant at the moderator of the galleries , I would like the poster of their image to more carefully consider their use of the software and what actually made the image what it is and for God sake post it in the correct spot so as to avoid confusion to potential purchasers of that application based on certain quality aspects from average users. Or to avoid someone pm'ing them to say is that firefly or vray , How come I cant get my firefly renders to look that way. or something like that i guess.
Dont get me wrong Im not really blaming anyone for anything or asking anyone to change anything. I just want others opinions on this subject.

example - I attepted to use a Poser 8 render as an example of photorealism possiblity from poser, Posted a link and then went to read some of the comments made on the image." I just got Poser 8 cracked it open played with it for 6 hours, did a test render came back and checked it, this is what was there"....complete photorealism...later to read " I usually set everything up in poser and render in Carrera.....so what does 6 hours of poser 8 have to do with that render...Nothing.....post it in the Carrera gallery.

i basically agree with SamTherapy.  i think we shouldn't have software genres, we should just have workflow tags.  that way you could pull up everything with Poser, or C4D, etc, but actually see "Poser, C4D, Photoshop" when you get to the image, like at CG Society.  i think if the check boxes were available, the system wouldn't really need policing.

wespose - i do know what you're saying. as i consider what P8 can do and what PP 2010 will do, it matters whether i'm seeing IDL in P8 or GI in Vray out of C4D.  and i know some who use poser get but post to other galleries get flack for posting there because those users feel a similar need and want to know what was done with the software rather than Poser.  i mean, if you take V4, poser her, and really morph and render her in C4D, she might not be easy to spot.  and then it looks like something built, mapped, posed and rigged in other software was done in C4. i think software tagged images would solve the problem both ways.  maybe possible one day, since images already allow tags?

Quote - I think the categories should be scrapped, period.  Let people state - or not - what they used to create their stuff.

I hate the endless subdivision of music, films, fashion and so forth.  It's gotten to the point where everyone is so damn genre conscious they can't even fart without it having to be tagged as post modern subversive or some such total gonads. 

I agree.  It should be grouped by genre, not program.

I can agree with that as I do enjoy CGsocieties galleries where all is just posted and a small tag of all software used ...but then this site would be just like that and rosity is a perfect spot for beginners to learn complex software from other users. share resouces , sell resources. its more of a community that learns together than just a host site for the best images.  Right?

Agreed on the community and learning side.  Hopefully there are some high quality images posted here, too.  

As Jen said, the way things are done here ain't to everyone's taste but at least it's workable.  Most of the time.

As things are, I'd say - IMO - an image should be posted to the gallery representative of its render engine.  

The postwork/no postwork debate is older than Methuselah's donkey and it boils down to smoke 'em if you got 'em.  In other words, a postworked Poser image is still a Poser image.

So,  by and large, there's merit to the current system.  Even though I don't personally care for it.

high nasal voice

We have a gallery?

Quote - high nasal voice

We have a gallery?

Indeed down the hall, second door on the right. : )

Quote - .but then this site would be just like that and rosity is a perfect spot for beginners to learn complex software from other users. share resouces , sell resources. its more of a community that learns together than just a host site for the best images.

first of all, there are a large number of beginners at CG Society, and way better beginning resources on certain CG topics there than here.  just as an fyi.  second of all, one tweak to the galleries would hardly make this into CG Society.  and third, i don't think you really thought through the implementation.  so right now you just post to one gallery, as if that were the only piece of software you used.  we also have tags for our images, and i'm not sure how they're being used.  if on the upload interface end they added the ability set some tags with checkboxes and section list in addition to the comma delineated string, kept the interface for galleries exactly as they are for browsing, and use whatever function that displays images with a certain tag to display the galleries instead of whatever displays the galleries now we'd have the best of both worlds.  multi-gallery posting with a minimum of usability change for viewers, a slight change of usability for uploaders, clarity about tools used, and no huge change to the backend.

 I actually like that idea (the checkboxes), and I'm going to bring it up to the programmers for a future idea for the gallery.

(That means, don't expect it to be implemented before I turn 30)

cool!  yeah, i realize there are already plans in motion for development and deadlines that can't be sacrificed because some random member had an idea.  but i really appreciate you passing it along.

Attached Link: Dramatic Lights

Okay.....what about this
Categorize them this way.

Firefly renders
Maxwell renders
VRay Renders
Rendercow
Flamingo
Renderman
for postwork folks: Rendered in photoshop or PSP or Gimp

If you're so hung up on the render engine used

Happy?

Just my two dimes

How many divisions has the Poser? - Stalin...;)

I do tend to look at pictures. If I like 'em, I don't get too nutsoid about how they were made (envious, perhaps, but that's another story...;)

I've found through expermimentation that the whole shebang here is totally fractured; I get different people viewing by category (I find it a little sad that some folks just look in 'science fiction', or 'fantasy'...they're really missing out, whether it's Poser or not.