I have an image I want to post in the gallery,

in it are three gigaliens one is a young female ( I have flattened her chest plate )

and the other two are adults (mother and farther)

being aliens, the female do not have breasts  as such and being from a primitive planet they have loin cloths but are topless.

So I ask would I need to post a nudity warning and would the young female clash with the TOS about under age.

I'd contact an admin or who ever polices the gallery myself. What I or anyone tells you doesn't matter.

good idea thanks

I hope this helps:

From the TOS for child nudity guidelines:
"No Child Nudity: Images of children or characters resembling children (including teens, pre adolescent, child like fairies and other imaginary figures) under 18 years of age, depicting nudity are no longer permitted.

Child Image Guidelines:

No child nudity of any kind which includes exposed chest on females, buttocks or genitals.

No images in which characters under the age of 18 give the appearance of having no clothes."

I am sorry for this, but as described your image unfortunately falls under these guidelines.  Please site-mail me if you have any questions.

Boni

Venturing further into this, and in all seriousness:

Quote OP: "in it are three gigaliens one is a young female"
Quote TOS / Boni: "No images in which characters under the age of 18 give the appearance of having no clothes"

So a render of a naked, 12 year old ape (chimpanzee, gorilla, pavian, you name it), would also be considered illegal under these rules?

Is this still the real world - or have we already drifted into - The Twilight Zone??

-P-

I understand you are using this example to stretch the definition in the TOS.   Realistically there is a line drawn between a human-like alien and an ape.  When the line is thin it is up to the Renderosity staff to confer and make the final judgement.  We are not trying to be prudes here ... but this is a commercial site and certain professional standards are set forth.  I quoted the TOS only in part as a reference to the OP, the full TOS makes things a little clearer.

Point taken ... keep in mind that although the is a commercial illustration on a public product ... there isn't a social community involved and although that may seem unrelated there are a variety of issues to address.  At this point I suggest Soultakr site-mail me a copy of the image and we can settle this once and for all on this particular image.  This may not be about exploitation of minors since they are digital ... but avoiding the appearance of inappropriate attention. 

Boni,

I'm not questioning the TOS, and I perfectly understand the reason for them, from a "professional" POV.
I also don't want to talk about "prudishness" of any persons or companies in particular.

I just wanted to make people think about the way our society, as a whole, is heading.
Every chain is cast with the first link, so they say.
And self-censoring is definitely a first link, because it starts in your head. And then goes forth, until you're a perfectly docile, controllable subject for whoever controls the prevalent "public opinion".

I agree this might be kind of OT here, but couldn't it be some food for thought too:

When is an alien considered "underage", and which anatomical features qualify him as an adult specimen?
Then, define "Alien". How old can aliens get, and when do they reach adulthood? What's their equivalent to homo sapiens's "Age Of Consent"?
Etc.

I especially stress this because in so many other aspects, I often heard the arguments "but this is all Fantasy" and "artistic license". Obviously, these are ignored as soon as it comes to "taboo" matters, like "underage".

Or nudity!
Would you tag a "nudity" flag to a render of a dog, or the afore-mentioned ape, to a render of any of these?
Why not?
They're mammals, they don't wear clothing, and their genitals are clearly visible!

Again, I'm not questioning the TOS, and I won't argue about either the TOS, or your opinion /decision. I accept it.
I just wanted to bring up some stuff to think about.

Regards,

Peter

EDIT: @ primorge, Boni: crosspost, sorry.

Fair enough Peter.  And a thoughtful point, thank you.

"When is an alien considered "underage", and which anatomical features qualify him as an adult specimen?
Then, define "Alien". How old can aliens get, and when do they reach adulthood? What's their equivalent to homo sapiens's "Age Of Consent"?
Etc."

Who knows?  On this board it's Renderosity's rules.  It's not some made up in your head unknown alien race's rules.

I just looked up Gigaliens http://www.daz3d.com/gigaliens

If these are the aliens in question then I would find it really difficult to see nudity in it., but that's just me, especially if one is flat chested. Those things don't resemble humans at all.

I can understand why Renderosity would be cautious about any image showing a child. Especially since Japan pushes the limit (in my opinion goes over it) with some some of their "Art."

I would send the picture and ask if it breaks Renderosity's TOS.  I wouldn't even ask the "child question" If they don't bring it up then it must be ok.  If you have to point it out to them then it leads into assumptions about your intent.   For example,  A mother takes a picture of her 6 year daughter in a swimsuit at a beach.  A creep guy takes a picture of the exact same girl at the same time the mother takes the picture.  It's a photo of the same girl, in the same environment, but not the same intent.  If the Gigaliens are considered naked then the Grey alien is even more so lol.

Just to be clear on this.

I didn't start this post to start a war.

I wanted to post an image and just wanted to cover myself

I post here so I follow the TOS. if I don't like it I know where to go.

I can see the points made in the above posts.

the age of consent is interesting, in Europe it as low as 13 in some country's (Vatican city is 12)

as I said these aliens don't have breasts as such, any more than an ape, that is why I asked.

I am changing the image so that the young female is covered ( for want of a better name) if I feel that this changes the image beyond what I wanted then

I will take Boni's kind offer up and send her (guessed from avatar) a copy of it for pass/fail  

I hope this helps:

From the TOS for child nudity guidelines:
"No Child Nudity: Images of children or characters resembling children (including teens, pre adolescent, child like fairies and other imaginary figures) under 18 years of age, depicting nudity are no longer permitted. 

Is this Earth Years?  :D
PS, for the humour impaired, this is a rhetorical question highlighting the perversity of the Universe in general, and is unworthy of a response...

I just looked up Gigaliens http://www.daz3d.com/gigaliens

If these are the aliens in question then I would find it really difficult to see nudity in it., but that's just me, especially if one is flat chested. Those things don't resemble humans at all.

I can understand why Renderosity would be cautious about any image showing a child. Especially since Japan pushes the limit (in my opinion goes over it) with some some of their "Art."

I would send the picture and ask if it breaks Renderosity's TOS.  I wouldn't even ask the "child question" If they don't bring it up then it must be ok.  If you have to point it out to them then it leads into assumptions about your intent.   For example,  A mother takes a picture of her 6 year daughter in a swimsuit at a beach.  A creep guy takes a picture of the exact same girl at the same time the mother takes the picture.  It's a photo of the same girl, in the same environment, but not the same intent.  If the Gigaliens are considered naked then the Grey alien is even more so lol.

You raise some important points and, while I understand the need to look after children, I do think society is in danger of loosing something.  Here in the UK a lot of our history comes from the photographs taken in a bygone age, children going up chimneys or down or playing road of a run down group of terraces.  Today very few photographers would dare to raise a camera when there are children around.  The irony is many of the children under the age of consent are happily sending pictures that would not meet the TOS here to all their friends and who know else via social media. As with others I am not disagreeing with the TOS, but I do wonder where all this will lead.

OMG it won't "lead" anywhere. This is a business and they have rules. I would no sooner think it "leads" anywhere than if somebody put a pinup at the office and they took it down.

Sheesh - artists.

OMG it won't "lead" anywhere. This is a business and they have rules. I would no sooner think it "leads" anywhere than if somebody put a pinup at the office and they took it down.

Sheesh - artists.

I should have expressed myself a little better, I don't think the TOS will lead anywhere and I do understand why the rules are there and the fact that it is a commercial site. As photography has been a hobby of mine for over forty years, I am just aware of the changes that surround children.  I just think it is a shame that parents are not allowed to take pictures of the kids in the school play, cameras are banned in most armature dramatic performances if they include children so I have few pictures of my wife performing.  Some tourist have been asked not to take pictures of structures like the Houses of Parliament due to 'terrorist threats'.  

OK, I may have lived in a much safer world when I was a child, but I doubt it, it could be that I have just developed a very active dose of grumpy old man syndrome, but I still do wonder where we are going with some of these restrictions.

Hornet3d

The way photos are handled has definitely changed.  It only takes a couple of clicks to make a personal photo available to everyone in the world. We no longer have the film development shops that would red flag illegal pictures so many people are cautious when it comes to someone taking their photos.

Hornet3d

The way photos are handled has definitely changed.  It only takes a couple of clicks to make a personal photo available to everyone in the world. We no longer have the film development shops that would red flag illegal pictures so many people are cautious when it comes to someone taking their photos.

Oh I am well aware that things have changed, I no longer spend hours in a dark room with some evil smelling chemicals in the name of photography having gone digital many years ago.  I can also understand the reluctance of people in having their pictures taken I just find that difficult to square with some of the pictures my nieces have access to, sent by people who are well under the age of consent.   I am not a technophobe in any way I just don't see every new development as necessarily being progress.  I also support the TOS here at Rendo, particularly regarding children but have difficulty relating that to what I see going on around me.  Then again I am in my advanced years and nostalgia is not what is used to be.  

Hornet3d

The way photos are handled has definitely changed.  It only takes a couple of clicks to make a personal photo available to everyone in the world. We no longer have the film development shops that would red flag illegal pictures so many people are cautious when it comes to someone taking their photos.

Oh I am well aware that things have changed, I no longer spend hours in a dark room with some evil smelling chemicals in the name of photography having gone digital many years ago.  I can also understand the reluctance of people in having their pictures taken I just find that difficult to square with some of the pictures my nieces have access to, sent by people who are well under the age of consent.   I am not a technophobe in any way I just don't see every new development as necessarily being progress.  I also support the TOS here at Rendo, particularly regarding children but have difficulty relating that to what I see going on around me.  Then again I am in my advanced years and nostalgia is not what is used to be.  

"I just don't see every new development as necessarily being progress"  I'm about the same way.  This is always a "cart before the horse" thing for me. Technology usually races far ahead of the common sense.  I'm in my early 40's and things are just as baffling as they were in my 30's.  People yell about privacy but yet willing post their privacy online. People complain about the government knowing too much about citizens yet people give this information up for free to private companies (smartphone apps is a good example) that could be from any country.   I gave up on trying to relate and have settled for  "It is what it is"  like Renderosity's TOS..  "It is what it is" and if there is any gray area then I'll let them determine if my art crosses the line. When does nude art turn into pornography?  Things like that and the original post don't have solid lines beyond what the business sets. 

I'd say the real question is why would anyone want to render pictures of 1/2 naked children, be it alien or human?

OMG it won't "lead" anywhere. This is a business and they have rules. I would no sooner think it "leads" anywhere than if somebody put a pinup at the office and they took it down.

Sheesh - artists.

The problem with the rules, is that they are subject to change without further notice. I had an image removed because it "kinda" showed parts of the vulva.

Ironically there are images in the store that clearly show the vulva.

Rules are rules, and I agree with that. Enforcing them differently on each incident is just odd. 

I am not going to report any of theses, because I don't really care anymore.

But on the other hand, when you have things deleted that others are clearly allowed to post, it does make you wonder.

I'd say the real question is why would anyone want to render pictures of 1/2 naked children, be it alien or human?

1. What defines an alien as being underage.  Human years or alien years?

2. The term underage apply to aliens or only humans?  

3. The term underage being used for an alien is strange, to me that's like saying what's an underage ET considered to be.  ET was butt naked through the entire movie and still to this day I have never heard anyone question the age of ET.  If ET was "underage" then does that make everyone that saw it sickos?  If ET was an adult then what was it doing playing around with a 10 year old kid?

4. Kid movies like Planet 51 features child aliens without pants on. Cartoons have been using characters without pants for ages. Clothing was only added to help distinguish between male and female. What's the difference between Minnie Mouse and Mickey mouse? The clothing.

5. What makes an alien nude?  Look at the picture below. Is it nude because it has clothing in some areas and no clothing in others.

6. If some made a child version of the same alien (below) standing next to these two, do you instantly think underage child made by a sicko?

Now don't get me wrong on where I stand when it comes to depicting children, but Aliens aren't children and they don't represent anything that is considered a human, or anything that exists in real life. Like many others I don't have a problem with Renderosities TOS, I just wanted to point out that the "underage alien" issue isn't so black and white with a clear line separating the two.  How old are the aliens in the picture?  When dealing with pictures of children we are talking about an image that actually represents a real child or the generalization of a child.  I could say that the alien in the picture are both 7 years old or 300 years old and any age would be correct according to how I tell the story.

"the problem with the rules, is that they are subject to change without further notice."

I posted this picture in a social media art group years ago and I actually got in trouble for it. Yet people were allowed to post real pictures of themselves in underwear with genital bulges, cheeks hanging out of panties, and women and men posing in sexual suggestive positions with no problem. This picture was flagged by someone as in appropriate even though the other pictures were allowed.  Decisions to allow or not allow can change just as fast as the minutes pass.  Sometimes a single argument for or against something can influence what is done.  The law will always have the first say, but it will always be a "coin toss" for all of the gray area topics and questions that come up.

FightingWolf - Simple. Anything that's clearly meant to be a naked child and the context of that image.

For instance using your example about Planet 51 and Mickey Mouse, those are obviously not created for shock value or titillation, they are what they are - cartoon characters.

It also doesn't really matter if it's alien or human, or even the medium, it could be a abstract drawing rather than a render. If the artists intention is to say look here's a naked kid, then yes the artists motivation should be questioned.

OK as your 2nd image/post shows, yea sure it can get muddy at times and that's often down to the social situation in which an image is shown. Whats the answer? I'd say there isn't one, things have to taken on an indvidual image-by-image basis based on a set of general guidelines.

So yes there will be times when an image isn't going to be allowed. Some may argue that's censorship, but I'd say it's commonsense. Plus if an artist chooses to prod around the rules - as many of have done - then of course we're going to get slapped down at times, so should we surprised if that happens?

"I'd say the real question is why would anyone want to render pictures of 1/2 naked children, be it alien or human?"

when I first read this I was a little put out. just what is he calling me/trying to say. 

How can anyone make such a cover all statement. lack of imagination maybe?

but I think its more to do with not understanding what the image is about. and rightly so, as I have given very little information on it.

so here's the out line.

a family of aliens from a pre iron age society are out in the jungle, and are attacked by an unfriendly meat eater 

pre iron age = no metal, simple weapons

jungle = hot/ warm climate =  simple clothing

I have dressed them in a way not for "shock value or titillation"

but because that is what they would wear.

I am trying to make the image factual, as much a sci fi image can be. as opposed to fantasy where they would be running around in loin cloths and high heels.  

just google south American tribes or African tribes and you will see more flesh of all ages than I am planning. because that is what they wear

Obviously no offence meant

If you've seen my work you'll know there's never any lack of imagination :)

Your description is also exactly what I mean about an image having a context, rather than being created purely for titillation.

Mr.Sparky.   So a 7 year old naked Sleestak, from the TV show Land of the Lost, would be offensive and inappropriate. 

The Sleestak looks like a 70's version of the Gigaliens lol.

Obviously no offence meant

If you've seen my work you'll know there's never any lack of imagination :)

Your description is also exactly what I mean about an image having a context, rather than being created purely for titillation.

I agree with this sparky.  The context in which an image is presented makes all the difference in terms of the artist creating it.  What people do with that image could be totally different.  It's like a prostate exam.  Insert finger for a prostrate exam = ok.  Being in prison next to a big guy named tiny that will be giving a forced prostrate exam = not ok. lol.  Same action, different context. lol.

FightingWolf - nice analogy in your 2nd post there :)- but yea that's pretty much it. It's all about the message that a creator wants to send out.

It doesn't matter if that's achieved by a bloke in a cheesy rubber suit, or a lifelike render, an overly creepy image is still gonna be a creepy image.

Moreso if as artists know that depiction might be close to what many might consider the "edge of decency". Then we can't really cry censorship or say that's unfair if we choose to press that button. So really it's about common sense.

Also think it's about how creative we are as well. It's so easy with poser to just render out a naked person - or alien :) - yea sure it gets eyeballs, but is that the lazy way? Could taking a different visual route be more effective when trying to put across that story ?

OK sure it can be harder to do, say adding furs - which cave people/aliens might wear - would be a pain in poser. But it might showcase our talents and increase the power of any message better than basic nudes.

Sparky.. I understand now.  yes to naked child cherub angels and no to naked child aliens.. I'm all good to go lol.

@ SoulTaker we finally have an answer.  Make 2 Alien parents and replace the alien child with one of those nude cherub angels..  Make sure it has wings or it may be considered just a naked kid. lol  Oh and those water fountains that have a kid posing as if he's peeing those also get a green light too. Make sure that water is coming out so that they know it's a fountain. Add a few Kewpie dolls and you'll have the perfect pictures.. lol  Those are fine but alien children are not lol.

But in all seriousness the term "underage" is what seems to be rubbing people the wrong way.  Underage is usually used in reference to someone one that is "too young to legally do something and therefore brings up the question that someone may be doing something that is wrong.  If a person says that they are taking pictures of under aged children then the context is that the pictures contain something that is only acceptable for adults to be doing.  Like underage drinking is not the same as a child drinking.  Underaged drinking suggests that the child is drinking something that is only legal for adults.

A photo of kids in a swimsuit isn't considered an under aged photo.  We see photos like that all the time because of the context in which they were taken.  But the moment someone says an underage kid in a swimsuit.  Then it gets legal and automatically refers to a picture of a child in a swimsuit doing something that only an adult should be shown doing or portrayed as.

I haven't send the scene that you are talking about but the responses that you are getting are due to the term underage. If you said that you wanted to create an reptilian alien family without clothing, without genitals, nipples, etc. then you probably would have only gotten 5 responses as by nature, we don't naturally label aliens, animals, and other fantasy creatures as underage.  Cherub angles are all over the internet and in art and no one is screaming "underage."

The term underaged just puts people in a totally different mindset of someone young doing something that they are not old enough to be doing.

Actually Cherubim and Putti, if depicted nude, are a violation of TOS. Go ahead and test it. ;)

Don't mistake the law with Renderosities TOS, legally there is no issues with naked Cherubs as there is no sexual suggestion or content so they would not be classified as Child pornography in anyway, of course you need to consider the applicable laws of the country. But I have a feeling ,details aside ,any nudity of anything other than a fully mature individual which is humanoid in nature would have issues here with the TOS. 

A naked alien child may be a against Renderosities TOS but it's definitely not against the law. 

Of course Renderosity is just trying to protect their family friendly image with rules like this one. Though the market place seems to sing a different tune I must say. 

Just to be sure, naked Alien child = horribly offensive, but Bondage, Lap dances, mistresses and Skimp wear = fun for the whole family!

Here some of the today's hottest products. Confused??? I am...

Don't mistake the law with Renderosities TOS, legally there is no issues with naked Cherubs as there is no sexual suggestion or content so they would not be classified as Child pornography in anyway, of course you need to consider the applicable laws of the country. But I have a feeling ,details aside ,any nudity of anything other than a fully mature individual which is humanoid in nature would have issues here with the TOS. 

A naked alien child may be a against Renderosities TOS but it's definitely not against the law. 

Of course Renderosity is just trying to protect their family friendly image with rules like this one. Though the market place seems to sing a different tune I must say. 

Just to be sure, naked Alien child = horribly offensive, but Bondage, Lap dances, mistresses and Skimp wear = fun for the whole family!

Here some of the today's hottest products. Confused??? I am...

I must admit that, for me, the Shibari product is raises a few questions although I have to say I do see a certain artistic nature in the subject matter.  On the other hand I have a suspicion that many of the renders I could use them in would not be allowed in the Rendo gallery as it may be regarded as violence.  Yep I accept it is not overtly violent but the poses certainly do not look comfortable and put me any of the positions and believe me I am going to be in a lot of pain.  

I think my image will be ok

after looking at the market today and seeing this

I think my image will be ok

after seeing fairylu in the market place here

So I guess we are intended to determine appropriate gender by hair length.

On a baby. 

Just an observation.

Actually Cherubim and Putti, if depicted nude, are a violation of TOS. Go ahead and test it. ;)

I'll pass. Those things are creepy to me on multiple levels.  They rank right up there with the post-mortum photos from the victorian and the chucky doll from the horror movies who looks just like one without the wings.  To me they look like dead babies with wings.  Not sure why different pictures are given for Cherub and Cherubim when I google them.

FW - yes and er no :)

Seriously though yea it's all about context, plus like you said add a contentious word, and of course certain type of images/subjects will risk upsetting someone.

So if an artist knows that's going to happen (usually resulting in their image getting deleted and hence their viewpoint being lost) then why bother to keep uploading the same things?

It's not like doing that will change the rules, if anything it's more lucky to lead to the rules being toughened up.

As artists we're supposed to have an imagination, so why not use that and create something that works around what that artist considers as unfair.

FYI - if anyone thinks the TOS is unfair here, they should check out the licence for offical ford models sold at the squid. In that there's a couple of terms which says artists HAVE to always show the model in a positive light. Literally no nudity, death or bad language is allowed if you use their product.

Now imagine if a poser site demanded that happen with images :)

The winged baby is sucking a BLUE pacifier , hence its a boy.

Well, gosh... totally missed those color cues in that image. Must be getting rusty from looking at Poser art, my old critical theory instructors would be sorely disappointed. ;)

How can you be sure the fae use Pink for Girls and Blue for Boys? Maybe their system is the exact opposite. Or maybe they just go along with whatever color the kid likes, regardless of gender. If they even have a system. Not to mention, how do we know fae kids even have genders? Maybe they're born (or hatched?) genderless and don't know which they'll be until puberty when their bits begin to grow. 

I mean, they're mythological (fictional) creatures, right? So anything is possible. 

the age of consent is interesting, in Europe it as low as 13 in some country's (Vatican city is 12)

I'm not sure age of consent matters.  In the US, it's illegal to take or possess photos of subjects below 18 years of age, and it seems like the rest of the world has gone along with that idea, at least online.  I'm not even sure the age of consent in the US is 18 in every state.  In some places a 19 year old can date a 16 year old, but it would be illegal for a 20 year old to date the 16 year old (max 3 years age separation if only one person is an adult).  But it would still be illegal for anyone of any age to take or possess nude pictures of the 16 year old.

What use does a Fae have for nipples anyway? The plot thickens...

Hmm...could be they're something completely different but humans keep mistaking them for nipples because of the resemblance. Seriously, what does any human know about Fae or alien anatomy? Until we actually meet one in person (which ain't looking to be any time soon) we'll just have to guess. And anyone's guess is as good as mine. :-)

Pinky - your lens cap thing running into your post is driving me crazy.

Since the programmer here is a totally lame dumb ass and can't see for shit, could you put a bar or something at the top of your sig so I can stop reading it like you're saying it every damn time?

(Grumble - yes I've been drinking)

"(Grumble - yes I've been drinking)"

I gave that up before I started. 

However, I have been known to have caffeine jitters before eight AM.

Doric.

Hmm...could be they're something completely different but humans keep mistaking them for nipples because of the resemblance. Seriously, what does any human know about Fae or alien anatomy? Until we actually meet one in person (which ain't looking to be any time soon) we'll just have to guess. And anyone's guess is as good as mine. :-)

Time to call in the expert. He would know about alien nipples.