http://rocketbox-libraries.com/us/index.php/

This post is not meant to rehash the previous discussion at all. But this was touted as the "New" thing in my CGS letter. (*see part of letter attached) And please, this is not a discussion about what is art. Only showing that poser users are not the only ones who now utilize pre-made complete characters.

Ariana

From what I read, it all depends on what the project is and what the expectations are of the artist. If you're on a deadline and need to crank out something that looks good for a client who doesn't have a huge budget, why not? I hope that perhaps they clarify the terms of specific galleries to stipulate: must be modelled, shadered and rendered by artist.

what will it matter two weeks from now? some ppl have to bitch moan and complain no matter what if anything is going on. thxs for the post doll

Is this just spam to get people to the site?

I need another artist to team up with that can uv map and bone in poser

Quote - I need another artist to team up with that can uv map and bone in poser

Hope ya find one ;). And I see you're modeling! Good for you...lol. Fun, ain't it? ;)

Laurie

Thxs doll! too much fun:P Im addicted!

Quote - I need another artist to team up with that can uv map and bone in poser

Phantom3D's got a great video tutorial on 'boning' on RDNA...

I've seen Poser advertisements at CGS. Some serious sorting out might be in order. 1. There is a site with site owners who will allow advertisements if you pay them. 2. There are forums with participants who have their own opinions about various topics.

Has far has I know it is pretty much talk to talk!

It does have a different fell if you make everything in a image, but the industry has reached a level of perfectionism that it is pretty much not sustainable to do all by yourself 

I remember a video that I saw people calling Dylan Cole a cheater, he is one of the best artists at the moment, and the reaction of Dylan Cole was:

"Anything goes in matte painting; it just got to look good" 

LOL that content for those prices are a joke.. 

Quote - From what I read, it all depends on what the project is and what the expectations are of the artist. If you're on a deadline and need to crank out something that looks good for a client who doesn't have a huge budget, why not? I hope that perhaps they clarify the terms of specific galleries to stipulate: must be modelled, shadered and rendered by artist.

This is so true. I was just struck by the fact that after all the hoopla about using pre-made, already textured models, is what is that line that seperates true CG artists form poser artists. And the discussion that entailed, how ironic it was to get this ad.

Hey (*where are you?) ;) been a while.

To Ecstacy, stop this nattering I was making only an observation. Nothing more.

To Firecat: No not at all, this tied in to another discussion. It just occurred after the other thread closed due to people who were nattering on and caused a lot of negative stuff that was OT.

V01f: I agree I was surprised at the cost. But must say that the ad did a nifty job of proving a point that was made about poser vs "real" cg.

OK, I only posted it to show that it seems that we poser people are not the only ones to use the pre-made, buy it complete, models that we do. And I think in many ways some of ours are sometimes much more realistic.

OK, I have PP2012 to install today (*just came by ups!) so I am off to play.

HugZ!
Ariana 

I think you're attributing a position that nobody over there ever took.

The general opinion you attribute seems to be: Using premade content in CG is cheating.

I think that is not what they think. That's too broad.

I think they think:

Using premade content to finish a job for a client who does not want to pay for new content, or for a situation where the premade content is filler, such as people in a visualization of a new mall, is fine.

Using premade content in a demo reel is cheating and stupid. In fact it is embarrassing. Every studio will laugh you out the door, and this is a fact. You will not get a job in CG. The purpose of a demo reel is to show what you are capable of, 100%. If you are a specialist, for example, an animator, then they will forgive you if the model has a stupid looking head or ugly hands. You should not use a Daz figure even if it looks better. Use your own model. Do your own rigging. Why? It is expected that, as an animator, you know how modeling and rigging works. This is important. If you don't, you will not be effective at communicating solutions to problems when you talk to the model and rigging guys. So you have to demonstrate great skill in your specialty, and tolerable skill in all the others. If you use premade content, you are not doing that, and you are a fail.

Using premade content in a forum dedicated to inspiring each other, one that is almost exclusively about content creation, is just dumb and they let you know.

Quote - I think you're attributing a position that nobody over there ever took.

The general opinion you attribute seems to be: Using premade content in CG is cheating.

I think that is not what they think. That's too broad.

I think they think:

Using premade content to finish a job for a client who does not want to pay for new content, or for a situation where the premade content is filler, such as people in a visualization of a new mall, is fine.

Using premade content in a demo reel is cheating and stupid. In fact it is embarrassing. Every studio will laugh you out the door, and this is a fact. You will not get a job in CG. The purpose of a demo reel is to show what you are capable of, 100%. If you are a specialist, for example, an animator, then they will forgive you if the model has a stupid looking head or ugly hands. You should not use a Daz figure even if it looks better. Use your own model. Do your own rigging. Why? It is expected that, as an animator, you know how modeling and rigging works. This is important. If you don't, you will not be effective at communicating solutions to problems when you talk to the model and rigging guys. So you have to demonstrate great skill in your specialty, and tolerable skill in all the others. If you use premade content, you are not doing that, and you are a fail.

Using premade content in a forum dedicated to inspiring each other, one that is almost exclusively about content creation, is just dumb and they let you know.

I won't argue the post Bill, because I do see some of your points. But I only just saw the ad and thought it was laughable, especially in light of what occured earlier.

While many may want to work in the CG industry on a different capacity then "artist". I never said I desired a JOB in CG. Ever. So if that is what is being assumed by the people at CG or here, that is unfortunate, but not my problem. I do well with my art and am not looking to create drama. The ad is just converse to everything that was mentioned about the use of pre-made models. I thought it quite amusing, and yes hypocritical.

I actually see where you are coming from on certain points though. Of course you want to show your skills to obtain employment. But the gun was jumped by those who just took for absolute fact, that someone asking about poser at CG is looking for a job. I can see coming from this mind set why many CG people could be upset.  But as I stated I did not say I wanted a job animating the next 'Avatar' movie, or creating 'Gears of War 4'! And correct me if I am wrong, but CG just stands for computer graphics. It does not say in that anything more.

Asking in another forum about any subject is only broadening your knowledge base. I do not feel I should "...stick to forums that deal with poser users..." because who knows what you might learn by asking outside of the box. I sort of hate "niches" and "labels" that limit your ability to ask, learn, and grow.

I just see that while I posted this to demonstrate that there is a double standard when it comes to the use of pre-made models by the pros, how defensive it makes just about everyone. Shoot some want to talk about weither or not it is "Art". Weither or not your are a "real artist". and all sorts of BS. But if pressed to a deadline, it is ok to use the same castigated format in a pinch. Were I a consumer that read the way the people speak of these things in these forums, I would feel insulted by the attitude.

Lastly, and I guess the point. CG professionals do not like pre-made, pre-textured models. Spit on those poser people who buy them because a "real" pro does not use them. But they will buy and sell them at thousands of dollars there because...  what?  It comes from C4D or Maya? I just thought it was extremely funny.

It was an observation, and only that. So seriously, stop being so darn defensive and sensitive all of you, about what actually if looked at from the right angle was only put out there as a satirical observation. Not an invite to start acting like children and fighting over symantics. Absolutely no sense of the ironic what so ever.

Ariana

"So seriously, stop being so darn defensive and sensitive"

could you take your own advice please? YOU are the one that keeps starting these topics at the moment. think on that huh?

I think it's interesting, though that you do not want a discussion of semantics, and that you use the disparaging notion of "acting like children and fighting" over semantics.

My contention, which I hardly think is childish, is that you have to address the semantics. Clearly over there "CG Artist" means something that people here refuse to accept.

Forget those words. Consider the title irrelevant. Then what are we concerned with? Over there, they mean to say that we are not like them, because they do something we do not do. The person who does that which they do and we do not is what they mean by what they call themselves, and I'm carefully avoiding saying it. Without saying it, their world view is completely wrapped up in the semantics of whatever it is they call themselves.

I don't see how it is possible to grasp the significance of the differing world view by avoiding semantics. It is at the heart of the issue.

Let's take an analogy:

If you boil some boxed pasta and heat up some sauce, are you a "chef"? It's clear that the activity you engage in is cooking, and cooking is among the things chefs do, but simply performing the act of cooking is not sematically all there is behind being a chef, is it? And when you cook and enjoy your meal, is there any reason you need to write about the unfairness of not being allowed to call yourself a chef when speaking to chefs?

How about "race car driver". I really enjoy driving at F1 Boston where we get in miniature Formula 1 cars and race these cars. Once I did a team endurance race for six hours, doing pit stops, driver changes, etc. Clearly I was driving and racing a car. Do I get to tell people I am a race car driver? snort

Pretending semantics have no value in the discussion is the reason that people can't settle down on this issue.

It is semantics. There isn't anything else to it. Everyone is engaging in some activities in common, while some are performing additional activities, and those people believe those additional activities are an important distinction when deciding the right to call themselves something which, by their definition, semantically differentiates them.

I was wondering if those prices were serious. Nice looking site too.

Since they are aimed at professional market , where you may be paying a few hundred dollars an hour thay are not overly expansive.  For product visualization just a few figures scatterd around is enough.

Geez, stuff it. This is so ridiculous that you cannot see it in context, and not read into it things that do not exist. Time to close this because it was not anymore then I said.
Bye
~A~

Quote - I've seen Poser advertisements at CGS. Some serious sorting out might be in order. 1. There is a site with site owners who will allow advertisements if you pay them. 2. There are forums with participants who have their own opinions about various topics.

This one's easy... 

They're like any other site:

You have a huge majority who casually surf the site. Most of the rest buy stuff and post stuff. And then, you have a small percentage from both camps who hang out in the forums and post stuff.

The ads aren't targeted at the purists and the loudmouths, they're targeted at the folks who buy things. There are likely a large percentage of folks registered at that site who buy pre-made stuff (Poser stuff included), because it fills the gap.

They're too busy working towards their own individual goals (professional or private) to worry about those mouthy doctrinaires and ideologues in the fora. 

OTOH, it is pretty funny to point that out to the aforementioned doctrinaires and ideologues... ;) 

As for buying pre-made stuff among pros? Heh, let me give an example.

During my stint working at Intel, they actually had a team of CG modelers and programmers who are out here among the R&D folks in Oregon. Fun people to talk to, and I spent more than a few hours in my off time talking to them, playing with the tools, sharing ideas, learning, and in general enjoying their company. I almost joined 'em (my prick manager blocked it). 

Anyrate, here's the trick: they almost always went out of their way to buy pre-made mesh; sometimes they bought it on commission, sometimes it was off-the-shelf. Turns out that it's pretty common in any CG shop that isn't a movie shop - e.g. directly involved with making original, unique content.

After all, folks like DAZ don't rake in their bread and butter exclusively from the NVIATWAS crowd...

Quote -
Using premade content in a demo reel is cheating and stupid. In fact it is embarrassing. Every studio will laugh you out the door, and this is a fact. You will not get a job in CG. The purpose of a demo reel is to show what you are capable of, 100%.

I suspect this is the jist, right here. It would be like showing up to a programming interview, and giving them random code from the Linux Kernel that you cobbled together into something to show off as your own doing. I know I'd not give someone like that a second interview... 

Like BB said, the idea is to show 'em what you're capable of when you're on your own, doing on your own.

Quote - Since they are aimed at professional market , where you may be paying a few hundred dollars an hour thay are not overly expansive.  For product visualization just a few figures scatterd around is enough.

I can expand on it a little more as well...

Often they'll pay more for certain figures, if they can get exclusive rights to it done on commission. 

They pay that much for it on the presumption that the item is as close to perfect as one can get. Referring to the previous experience, I watched Intel shell out $10k for a head mesh - not a body... just the head. It was of a unique human being; completely textured, shaded, with displacement maps, specular maps, etc. It was made of nothing but quads. The polycount was almost perfect: high enough to give amazing detail, but low enough to be CPU-friendly.

You'd be amazed at what the going price is for some items, expecially if the items fit business needs and standards... 

wow. guess that classifies me as a hobbiest. Thats not so bad:)

BB's analysis is spot on

"But they will buy and sell them at thousands of dollars there because...  what?  It comes from C4D or Maya? I just thought it was extremely funny. "

Some thing to consider about the "outrageous" pricing at those models sites.
If you visit one of those sites with no "agenda" and look objectively at the specs.

you will see the models are for the most part delivered in Native .MAX or Native Maya format.
what this means is that the shaders have been built for use in either Mental Ray ,Vray & PR Renderman and the models come in multiple resolution for  uses ranging from game dev to Full VFX stunt players in movies.

so the company buying those models has already invested thousands in Software & required hardware and likely has bid on a job worth thousands that will easily cover the cost of any purchased asset.

and before anyone blurts out
"they could save big bucks by joining the "platinum club" and using DAZ models"

I can tell you as a person who owns Vray , Maxwell,Modo 401 and the Kray render engine for Lightwave that most Daz models and props do NOT hold up in a full 1920x1080 renders
in a physically correct render engine IMHO
and issues like  conformer poke thru etc. during animation  renders is another show stopper in many instances

also the included textures are largely useless  in Vray& mental ray and will have to be rebuilt from scratch best performance in a true production engine.

As was stated before ,CG professionals  already on a tight deadline are not going to bother with the $$LABOR COSTS$$$ of trying to convert a DAZ /Poser models  for optimum use in a pro app when they can just buy a native MAX ,Maya  ,C4D  asset already in the proper format ready for production rendering
Especially when the client is covering the purchase cost anyway.

Cheers

Seriously - who gives a stuff.  Provided the client is happy (assuming it's a paid gig) then who the hell cares where the models came from ?

Let it die already!

poser is a gateway drug to cg

except for a couple of props,  my illustrations are all store bought content. 

but i do like to put a lil of my own panache to modify a character or outfit,  usually the materials, or combine a character morph and texture between sets.   anyone in the know who sees one of my covers will spot the M4 classic hip pose and hopefully laugh at it.

Never ending story.
As long as there are fools crazy enough to buy at those ££££ there will be a market.
And in every market you"ll find cheaters.

By 2050 we will still be making post like this.

OK, back to my automatic art creation button.

How was that again?
Copy => Paste => Remame => Sell as new for double - or - tripple ££££

Well, as long as we are at it, do it right the first time huh :-)

Button, hey that is a F1 driver :-)
Euh, a "real one" from flesh and blood. Is that still allowed these days...