Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL
Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum
Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom
Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Nov 05 9:36 pm)
Subject: Poser Development article...
SeanMartin ( ) ( ) posted at 5:24PM Wed, 14 August 2019
I noticed that the development team is working on implementing Poser to function with the latest and shiniest Mac OS, which I suppose is great.
However, will this curtail those of us using older OSs from upgrading? I use 10.10, because the software packages I need for work function best in that environment. Will I be SOL with the new version?
Being an ex-Mac user myself, I had to give it up because my Mac wouldn't run Poser 11. It wasn't Poser's fault. My Mac just couldn't support the new OS upgrade. If your Mac will let you upgrade to the newest Apple OS, then you should be able to use the next version of Poser. If not, and you can't afford to upgrade, you might want to stay where you are for now until you can.
Wait, WTF?
From the article: "One of the improvements we have added is an integrated marketplace search so you can easily purchase content directly through Poser and not have to visit a third-party site"
So, wait - this is where they're spending time and treasure? Really? Nobody (okay, relatively nobody) uses that feature in DS... why mimic that?
shakes head... of all the things they needed to do and could do... fscking PHB mothersuckers.
Well, It was hilarious and pathetic reading anyway.
The good news in the transfer was that all SM Mantis Poser application bug reports where transferred to Renderosity.
Posers weak point has always been content and guess what? => Mantis content reporting bugs, (950+ reports) are still at SM. Dumb oversight or is SM hiding all the previous content mistakes from Renderosity?
With no content bug information transfer, I fear that content quality is going further down the drain.
Been Posering since Poser 1, and testing for 10 years, most of us "old-timers" where hoping for better content with less errors.
With no content bug transfer, how can you expect a "new" beta team to find anything? Start all over again? Backtrack 20 years or so?
AmbientShade posted at 6:27AM Thu, 15 August 2019 - #4359421
I don't see the harm in it. SM never implemented it very well to begin with and pretty much wanted nothing to do with CP anyway. Rosity is a content store, so naturally they're going to find ways to market their content as much as possible, because that's what pays the bills.
You're absolutely right.
Now look at everything they could be doing with the application - fixing bugs, overhauling it for future-proofing, adding features that would help it exceed the competition...
I'm sure they're likely doing some of that, but this marketing thing is a diversion, and I daresay few-to-nobody will use it. It kinda reeks of some MBA brainchild that got cheers at the board meeting, but will (as DAZ found out), turn out to be as popular as New Coke (or worse, Zima). I mean, what use would anyone have for a feature that installs stuff splattered all over one Runtime chain, all unfindable because it's all named according to vendor ego/will/whim?
Quoth Glitterati3D: "Now, can we please get back to the original post and stay on topic?"
Incidentally, I thought the topic of the thread was "Poser Development Article". This worthless feature is in that article. Now if OP doesn't want to talk about it, cool, but you're not OP, so...
meatSim posted at 8:22AM Thu, 15 August 2019 - #4359479
As stated previously the primary reason for this bridge release (11.2) is to transfer poser to the new licencing system. Major bug squashing efforts or additional features were never in scope for this update.
Additional features I understand. As mentioned elsewhere, a new codebase takes time to get a handle on. Bugs OTOH? Yeah, maybe they should have spent some time on that - at least the ugliest and the low-hanging-fruitish ones. I was initially just curious as to why (well, nevermind, I already know why, and it's a dumb MBA-driven reason) they chose to spend precious time/effort on an in-app marketing thing that industry experience w/ other apps (likely including the app's own history, curiously enough) should have shouted from the rooftops at them that hardly, if anybody, uses such a mechanism. Now if they overcome the hurdles that come with making one's Runtime directory structure/orgnization a raging mess and a PITA to fix when you use it, cool, but...
Changing to a new licensing scheme makes perfect sense, especially if the old one relied on an active website at SmithMicro to activate and maintain. It's one of the big reasons I'm hanging back on buying Poser.latest for a bit (after seeing a related article on the subject), so I can avoid all that license-limbo crap and just wait for Rendo to sort that out.
The marketing tab doesnt doesnt bother me. Given that Rosity has far more quality content, it could actually be useful for a change — and given that the store owns it, it makes sense. Dont want to use it? Ignore it. I doubt it's going to take up that much coding space anyway, since it would just be a handy gateway to the store and probably not a lot more.
As for what happens with Mac requirements and PoserPro 14 and beyond, I'll be dead by then, so I'm not terribly concerned. In the short term however...
docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider
SeanMartin posted at 9:35AM Thu, 15 August 2019 - #4359484
As for what happens with Mac requirements and PoserPro 14 and beyond, I'll be dead by then, so I'm not terribly concerned. In the short term however...
In the short term, unless they specifically put in a check/prohibition, or their product calls a library that did/does not exist in Yosemite (MacOS 10.10), you should most likely be good to go.
Well, not yet, of course. But given the five-year span between versions, it's pretty unlikely I'll be around three versions down the road. Then they're all yours, bud.....
docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider
Meh - might be, might not be mine. Come August 23, I'll be three years older than I'm supposed to be. ;)
(Half of this forum almost got their wish that day, but I had the extraordinary luck to vapor-lock less than a mile from one of the premiere CICUs in the Pacific Northwest. Damn we're gettin' old.)
Why do you think they spent a lot of time on the content tab? Being as it was already in the code base in the older versions that pointed to Content Paradise basically all one would need do is change the URL of where to go to point you at content to purchase. That is like 5 minutes work tops. The harder part will be with the store to make sure you get Poser items and not something else
Poser 5, 6, 7, 8, Poser Pro 9 (2012), 10 (2014), 11, 12, 13
Richard60 posted at 8:08PM Fri, 16 August 2019 - #4359629
Why do you think they spent a lot of time on the content tab? Being as it was already in the code base in the older versions that pointed to Content Paradise basically all one would need do is change the URL of where to go to point you at content to purchase. That is like 5 minutes work tops.
There's quite a bit more than that, since it's basically a mini-browser inside the application. This in turn means 4 years or so of security updates and CVE-scouring at the very least (at least I hope they paid attention to security... and no, just because it hits one base URL does not make it immune to attacks and vulns, I promise you.) But, there's also a bit more, as you intimated here...
The harder part will be with the store to make sure you get Poser items and not something else
Semi-sorta - pretty sure Rendo already tags that to some extent. The work is in getting the application to recognize and hit the Bondware (Rendo site's) API securely (and in a way that doesn't expose their API to schmucks who are a lot like me, but with bad intent), then make use of it in a way that keeps it at least somewhat seamless.
Personally, it would have been way faster and easier to put a big "Find new products!' button/Menu-item/something that calls the user's default browser, and in turn puts the onus of patching/security/etc on the browser-maker. Doing all that crap in-app is a lot of work for (IMHO) little-to-no return on that investment.
Richard60 posted at 9:28AM Sat, 17 August 2019 - #4359629
Why do you think they spent a lot of time on the content tab? Being as it was already in the code base in the older versions that pointed to Content Paradise basically all one would need do is change the URL of where to go to point you at content to purchase. That is like 5 minutes work tops. The harder part will be with the store to make sure you get Poser items and not something else
There's a big ol' tab at the top of the MP page marked "software". Check it out.
docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider
I read the article and if the software is "subscription" then no thanks...... I will not return to Poser under those conditions. Poser must also be able to handle Daz Gen 3 and Gen 8 models or a new version will be useless to me. I will not give up the Gen 3 and Gen 8 models for Paul and his dorky girlfriend
I'm really not wild about tying Poser into the Renderosity store so tightly. The first thing I did with the Content Paradise tab was hide it. I kept accidentally clicking on it. I hope they at least allow you to opt out somehow.
I can understand why they want to do it, but I despised it when e-On did it with Vue. With Vue, it showed you items for sale at Cornucopia3D as if they were items you already owned. There was a little logo that indicated that you had to buy it to use it, but just scrolling past all those items that you didn't actually own was a huge PITA. If you deleted them off your hard drive, they would be re-spawned. Hate, hate, hate, hate, hate.
Then they had that security breach...
FVerbaas posted at 12:13PM Sat, 17 August 2019 - #4359671
Well we have come to a situation where the development of the program has to be subsidized by the income of sale of content.
If the choice is updated Poser with a sales link and no updated Poser at all, my preference goes to the first.
I could understand that, but...does it actually work? The Content Paradise tab didn't seem very successful, and Cornucopia3D is no more, after a security breach that took it offline, apparently forever. (The URL was offline for a long time; it forwards you to e-On's main site now.)
As Penguinisto pointed out, there's a cost to doing this, if only in keeping up with security issues, and it's not clear it's worth benefits.
Well as far as launching a web browser to the store, that function is in poser, under the help menu. Weblinks. I'm pretty sure most people never even realized that you can delete that folder in your runtime to get rid of them, or if wanted take a look at one and make a new one for Renderosity, etc.
Example a txt file renamed as Renderosity - New Poser products.pzs with the contents https://www.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/?br=new&software_family=poser .. will show up in the help menu and launch to new poser products in a browser.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consider me insane if you wish, but is your reality any better?
I have heard talk of Poser maybe going to a subscription service like Photoshop has done, but I don't see specified it in that article. Am I missing something? Read it twice -- I need new glasses -- and all I could glean way that it was not out of the question some time down the road. If that happens, I'll stop with PP 2014 or whichever next version is owned not rented.
Where do any of you find any thing that says that it is going subscription? The only thing the article says is that they have setup a new validation server which is what Poser 2014GD and Poser 11 have being using for the last several years. Please provide a valid link.
Poser 5, 6, 7, 8, Poser Pro 9 (2012), 10 (2014), 11, 12, 13
Richard60 posted at 8:15AM Sun, 18 August 2019 - #4359725
Where do any of you find any thing that says that it is going subscription? The only thing the article says is that they have setup a new validation server which is what Poser 2014GD and Poser 11 have being using for the last several years. Please provide a valid link.
There is no explicit statement anywhere that Poser will be going subscription. Someone in the article, who, I don't know, and only in an answer to a question, said that there are some people for it and against it. JennBlake has denied it as a rumor, but it's apparently taken on a life of it's own.
Richard60 posted at 10:17AM Sun, 18 August 2019 - #4359725
Where do any of you find any thing that says that it is going subscription? The only thing the article says is that they have setup a new validation server which is what Poser 2014GD and Poser 11 have being using for the last several years. Please provide a valid link.
It was posted at Facebook. You have to expand the replies to see the comment that's freaking people out.
Someone asked if Poser was going subscription like Photoshop, and the official reply was:
"No for now. SM used a third-party to manage licenses, and we are not continuing with that agreement. We have people on both sides of the subscription model, so we are still deciding."
Poser must also be able to handle Daz Gen 3 and Gen 8 models or a new version will be useless to me.
Then tell DAZ to get on with it, but dont expect Rosity to implement something that isnt going to result in revenue for it.
Further, given that DAZ changes the rules with each new iteration, do you expect Poser to drop everything and figure out how to make the now-newest thing work for you? What happens when DAZ moves on to Gen 9 — which it inevitably will — and your girlfriends wind up collecting dust because now you're more entranced with this new girlfriend? Will you expect Rosity to engineer it so you can make that one work in Poser as well?
Sorry, but I am really over this. If you want DAZ materials to work in Poser, then talk to DAZ about it. If they dont want to make the additional revenue off it, then it's not Rosity's problem.
Have a nice day.
docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider
EClark1894 posted at 1:57PM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359391
SeanMartin ( ) ( ) posted at 5:24PM Wed, 14 August 2019 However, will this curtail those of us using older OSs from upgrading? I use 10.10, because the software packages I need for work function best in that environment. Will I be SOL with the new version? Being an ex-Mac user myself, I had to give it up because my Mac wouldn't run Poser 11. It wasn't Poser's fault. My Mac just couldn't support the new OS upgrade.
Will your Mac run El Capitan (10.11.6) ? My old Macbook can't go beyond El Cap, but poser 11 runs perfectly on it.
SeanMartin posted at 6:39AM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359794
Poser must also be able to handle Daz Gen 3 and Gen 8 models or a new version will be useless to me.
Then tell DAZ to get on with it, but dont expect Rosity to implement something that isnt going to result in revenue for it.
DAZ doesn't have to care - why should they make a figure compatible for someone else's product, when they can just tell you to export to FBX format (which numerous other applications do use)? They did the math, and Poser-centric sales of Genesis stuff isn't worth the effort in their estimation (doubly so when you consider the sheer amount of stuff, even in the Marketplace here , for the Genesis figures.)
However, Poser should care, if they're trying to attract customers and income... they could get around the whole mess by importing FBX format faithfully if they don't already (and as a bonus, suddenly they can take in content from or export content to a horde of other applications, pro or amateur.)
FBX solves all that... and the specs are public
Sorry, Peng, but no. If DAZ wants to make content compatable with Poser — which they should, since they built their rep on it in the first place, and the only reason they dont support it now was from a snit they got into a decade ago over the Face room — then let them have at it and make it so and realize the bucks accordingly. But asking now Rosity to jump through hoops every time DAZ changes the way it approaches its figures' rigging? Nope.
Yes, there's a lot of content here for the Gen8 Barbies. Is the profit margin such that Rosity should throw in and support these figures? If that's the case, then prhaps DAZ shuold return the favour and throw in some support for its Poser base as well.
And we know how likely that's going to be, right?
Everyone talks about how DAZ has such a stranglehold on the market because Studio is free and Poser isnt. What I find curious is why prices at Daz have consistently risen, even for character meshes they dont even have available anymore... which suggests things in Utah arent as rosy as one might think. Perhaps it's time for both programs to start working together, but at this point, DAZ is gonna have to make the first sincere move. IMHO, of course.
Carry on.
docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider
OT:
What happens when DAZ moves on to Gen 9 — which it inevitably will
I have custom chars that I originally built in Vicky and Mike 4 whose shapes and characteristics are now on Genesis 8 figures. It's actually fairly easy to transfer the characters with the built-in tools (and thanks to Blacksmith3D, I recently brought their skins up to snuff, converted to iRay, then used a similar character's skin on each for SSS and other goodies.)
I even pulled this off recently with a Victoria 3 skin (Momiji from Momcat.)
SeanMartin posted at 7:29AM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359807
Yes, there's a lot of content here for the Gen8 Barbies. Is the profit margin such that Rosity should throw in and support these figures? If that's the case, then prhaps DAZ shuold return the favour and throw in some support for its Poser base as well.
They kinda did, by building in the ability to import nearly all Poser content. ;)
But, we're viewing this from opposite angles, and I'm okay with that, because...
Thing is, instead of demanding that either application reach out directly to the other, why not go neutral? Use a univeral(-ish) format that both can partake of, and in the process become more appealing to the larger CG community?
Forget DAZ for a minute. Poser had(has?) a reputation for being used (even if on the down-low) by even the biggest CG snobs, pro or amateur - especially when time and/or budget is tight for a small project.
So why not capitalize on that a little more by adding to the import/export repertoire? Hence my suggestion of FBX, which is useful in multiple directions :)
What I find curious is why prices at Daz have consistently risen, even for character meshes they dont even have available anymore... which suggests things in Utah arent as rosy as one might think. Perhaps it's time for both programs to start working together, but at this point, DAZ is gonna have to make the first sincere move. IMHO, of course.
No idea... but DAZ has long since left the days when it was a rowdy startup led by crazy mofos (no, seriously, it was a blast back then). Nowadays it's probably rather corporate, what with a non-founder CEO and suchlike. What I'm getting at is that nowadays, they're likely driven more by growth and profit than by being a bunch of artists jumping at it with full abandon. I don't know for certain, though, and it's just guesswork on my part.
BUT... that said, I do know from conversations with old friends there that Utah is getting more and more expensive to live in of late... the Layton nice-neighborhood suburban McMansion that I paid $130k for in 2000, now has a Zillow/Trulia/etc estimate of around $340k_(!?)_ It's even crazier throughout the West Coast, but when CoL in Utah is shooting up that hard...
A_Sunbeam posted at 11:38AM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359800
EClark1894 posted at 1:57PM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359391
SeanMartin ( ) ( ) posted at 5:24PM Wed, 14 August 2019 However, will this curtail those of us using older OSs from upgrading? I use 10.10, because the software packages I need for work function best in that environment. Will I be SOL with the new version? Being an ex-Mac user myself, I had to give it up because my Mac wouldn't run Poser 11. It wasn't Poser's fault. My Mac just couldn't support the new OS upgrade.
Will your Mac run El Capitan (10.11.6) ? My old Macbook can't go beyond El Cap, but poser 11 runs perfectly on it.
Nope, 10.6.8 was as high as I managed to upgrade. Poser 10 runs for me, but not 11.
SeanMartin posted at 3:33PM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359495
Well, not yet, of course. But given the five-year span between versions, it's pretty unlikely I'll be around three versions down the road. Then they're all yours, bud.....
Phssh! Oh please. We're still burping you,bud. If you're older than color TV then you can talk! ?
Did everyone read the article? These are the two lines the OP was talking about.
On the Mac side, we are updating the code to the latest Apple compatibility. This means updating code base to work with latest Xcode, which is Apple's integrated development environment for macOS for developing software.
The amount of time it took for us to digress was faster than the expansion of the universe. I'm not a MAC user but updating to the latest code for Mac sounds like a good thing. The rest will take time. I'd rather Renderosity get it right rather than get it fast. I don't wish to become an uncompensated beta tester for a buggy release ala Windows 8 and Vista. Still, keep the suggestions coming.
raven posted at 6:52PM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359846
Peng, Poser has had FBX import/export for a couple of versions now, from PoserPro 2014 (not sure if just the Game Dev version or standard PoserPro 2014) up.
I use it sometimes to bring things over from Studio.
Sweet - so how's the export/import of the Genesis figures? I figured that would be the fastest/easiest way to faithfully bring stuff over. (I figured with all the complaining about DSON exporting - urgh - that nobody thought to just use FBX.)
quietrob posted at 6:55PM Mon, 19 August 2019 - #4359849
Phssh! Oh please. We're still burping you,bud. If you're older than color TV then you can talk! ?
Careful...he's likely somewhere between that and The Wheel.
The amount of time it took for us to digress was faster than the expansion of the universe. I'm not a MAC user but updating to the latest code for Mac sounds like a good thing.
-
It is a good thing to get that right, and
-
I know you're not new here when it comes to the subject of digression...
The rest will take time. I'd rather Renderosity get it right rather than get it fast. I don't wish to become an uncompensated beta tester for a buggy release ala Windows 8 and Vista. Still, keep the suggestions coming.
(update Python. To hell with everything else.)
Penguinisto posted at 3:09AM Tue, 20 August 2019 - #4359864
Sweet - so how's the export/import of the Genesis figures? I figured that would be the fastest/easiest way to faithfully bring stuff over. (I figured with all the complaining about DSON exporting - urgh - that nobody thought to just use FBX.)
To be honest, I haven't brought a Genesis character over using FBX or any other means, I'm not that interested in it knowing I wouldn't be getting the full benefit of it in Poser. I think if i wanted to use Genesis, I would just use Studio. I generally use FBX for props that are only in .duf format.
I think if i wanted to use Genesis, I would just use Studio
Indeed ..however ,for a variety of reasons, the majority of those (who post here at least) will never...ever!! leave the myopic little comfort bubble of the Kia Krause 1990's poser interface.
Hence we still routinely see this long dead &utterly absurd notion that "Daz somehow needs to make a genesis figure that works in poser" etc etc etc.
wolf359 posted at 5:42AM Tue, 20 August 2019 - #4359888
I think if i wanted to use Genesis, I would just use Studio
Indeed ..however ,for a variety of reasons, the majority of those (who post here at least) will never...ever!! leave the myopic little comfort bubble of the Kia Krause 1990's poser interface.
Hence we still routinely see this long dead &utterly absurd notion that "Daz somehow needs to make a genesis figure that works in poser" etc etc etc.
So you're saying that the only reason DAZ won't make a Genesis figure compatible with Poser is because of the Krause interface?
BTW, I never really liked the Krause interface. Didn't like it in Bryce and didn't like it when Poser switched to it in version 2.
Given that I've explored the DSON .duf & .dsf file formats and have a reasonable python parser script, it occurs to me to question whether FBX format contains sufficient information to transfer inherent characteristics of the source application. E.g. DS uses a different subdivision algorithm to Poser, is the algorithm encoded in FBX? Unless it is, Poser won't be able to regenerate the same subdivision mesh, unless the subdivision vertices are exported in FBX too, which removes the point of subdivision. The HD morphs of DS are encrypted (to prevent piracy, one presumes) with no documentation of the format. Does FBX expose those HD morph deltas? if it does, then the encryption is pointless. If not, then there's yet another source feature which cannot be replicated via FBX transfer to another software platform. Rigging conversions from dual quaternion to tri-ax for Poser compatibility must be performed before FBX has any possibility of providing a meaningful transfer mechanism into Poser, but be aware, that such conversion will not result in the same appearance of bent joints, because the internal algorithms are inherently different and cannot be communicated by simple data transfer.
Verbosity: Profusely promulgating Graham's number epics of complete and utter verbiage by the metric monkey barrel.
an0malaus posted at 12:41PM Tue, 20 August 2019 - #4359894
Given that I've explored the DSON .duf & .dsf file formats and have a reasonable python parser script, it occurs to me to question whether FBX format contains sufficient information to transfer inherent characteristics of the source application. E.g. DS uses a different subdivision algorithm to Poser, is the algorithm encoded in FBX? Unless it is, Poser won't be able to regenerate the same subdivision mesh, unless the subdivision vertices are exported in FBX too, which removes the point of subdivision. The HD morphs of DS are encrypted (to prevent piracy, one presumes) with no documentation of the format. Does FBX expose those HD morph deltas? if it does, then the encryption is pointless. If not, then there's yet another source feature which cannot be replicated via FBX transfer to another software platform. Rigging conversions from dual quaternion to tri-ax for Poser compatibility must be performed before FBX has any possibility of providing a meaningful transfer mechanism into Poser, but be aware, that such conversion will not result in the same appearance of bent joints, because the internal algorithms are inherently different and cannot be communicated by simple data transfer.
In addition to the above-mentioned, the Genesis figures also have "auto fit" and "auto follow" features that probably wouldn't transfer over via FBX. It's more than just rigging and morphs that would have to carry over for 100% Genesis compatibility in Poser.
So you're saying that the only reason DAZ won't make a Genesis figure compatible with Poser is because of the Krause interface?
No... the reason Daz will never make a Cr2 based version of genesis for poser is because they DO NOT NEED TO :-)
As Peng Correctly stated, a calculation was made by Daz years ago that people who use poser exclusively are not a vital demographic to Daz's business model.
And the ones who will switch Daz studio to get the full Genesis functionality , have already done so.
The growth ,in market share ,comes from appealing to New users ..not from backwards adopting your figure tech for one external program that is still running code from the 1990's.
In addition to the above-mentioned, the Genesis figures also have "auto fit" and "auto follow" features that probably wouldn't transfer over via FBX. It's more than just rigging and morphs that would have to carry over for 100% Genesis compatibility in Poser.
Also an FBX import from Daz studio requires the user to first load the figure into Daz studio to export it in the first place.
Those few remaining people,sadly clinging to the fantasy of a fully function genesis in poser, consider this a deal breaker.
Some time, some where, some body, will discover that it is the figures quality that drives the app market.
You can have the best app on the planet, if you continue to feed it with crap figures, it WILL die.
If the Poser figures don't increase in quality EXTREMELY SOON, (obj files, textures and most of all the rigging), it is unfortunately time to call the priest.
And for me myself and I, who have been Posering since Poser 1, that was a very HARD sentence to write.
All what we have seen so far from Renderosity is defending the undefendable, and the banning of people who dare to speak up.
Privacy Notice
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
I noticed that the development team is working on implementing Poser to function with the latest and shiniest Mac OS, which I suppose is great.
However, will this curtail those of us using older OSs from upgrading? I use 10.10, because the software packages I need for work function best in that environment. Will I be SOL with the new version?
docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider