them 'mixed medium' in the galleries? if so shouldn't more than half of the poser posts belong in that gallery along with alot of bryce and vue images? that would kind of be interesting in december for the AOM nominations if people who post work art posted more in there.

depends if they post worked more than 50% of the image...i'm just kidding :o) personally i think the idea of a gallery for different apps silly, art is art wether its a 24ft canvas or elvis on velvet....Steve

In theory yes. Even with the message in the poser gallery stating that the gallery is for 'poser only' images, most of the postings there involve more than just poser. Look at all the poser masters around - the best 'poser' images include heavy post production. My opinion is that a poser image is an image that includes significant amount of work done in poser (character work, expression, stance, textures...). Whatever postwork is done afterwards doesn't matter much. On a more practical point, the poser gallery is traditionally attracting more viewers (those babe warriors in temples again). So I guess people are more likely to chose the poser gallery to post their work :)

I'm not sure that the term "mixed media" would apply as the entire work remains digital. Mixed media generally refers to works created through several disciplines such as photographs mixed with oils mixed with fibre work mixed with digital, etc, etc. If you mean work created with a single program I think that might be difficult. For instance, many people use models created by Phil C who I believe uses Truespace for his models. Would an image incorporating his products as a central piece then be rightly displayed in the Truespace gallery rather than Poser's? Often such a decision can only be left to the artist. Assume I use a fractal image as a height field to create a Bryce terrain. I also use it as a texture map for said terrain and then use photoshop to adjust levels to the resultant Bryce rendering thereby emphasizing the colours and textures I consider important. Which of the three categories should claim the final work? Well, if I as artist think of it as a fractal that's where it belongs. If I think of it as a Bryce creation then so it shall be. Surely none shall know my intent as well as I? A piece should probably be placed in the program category that dominates the image (and that cannot always be determined by content percentage.) If a Poser figure is used as merely an incidental prop in a Bryce piece then put it in the Bryce gallery. If the Poser figure is the whole reason behind the image then it should be placed in the Poser gallery, regardless of how much Bryce or Vue or Photoshop may have been used. Many people are particularly interested in a specific program and wish to see what others are doing with that program or merely desire to see what is possible. It follows that categorizing imagery by program is not such a bad idea. The alternative is that almost everything will be dumped together in a mixed program category and that could prove very unwieldly. - Jack

ps. I might also add that I would consider a meal consisting of only potatoes, or meat or broccoli singularly boring and unappetizing. - Jack

I put my pics in the gallery they were rendered in, normally Poser or Vue d'Esprit. Postwork is very rarely done, as I prefer to do the work in the program, not after. That's my way :)

I agree with Raven. I build my scenes in Bryce, that's where 90%+ of everything I do is done. I always try to keep postwork to a minimum, though I will certainly use it when necessary for an effect I just can't get in Bryce. I don't care if a Poser figure happens to be the central item in a picture - that only happens as a rule when I am doing a "character study" for one of the many people in a book I'm writing. As far as I am concerned anything and everything I ever do with Poser is just PRE-WORK for Bryce. Bryce is my main application, anything and everything else I may use is simply a "helper." Regardless of topic, I will always post in the Bryce gallery. That's also where I go to look at art, primarily, though I do check the Poser gallery as well, and rarely - due to time shortage - I'll check some of the other galleries. I know I may be missing out on many great works in other galleries like the Max gallery, etc., but I'm looking to see what can be done with the tools I can actually get my hands on. I don't have time to spend all day on the net or I'd look at the other galleries much more. I recently had somebody troll a picture and also say that because it featured a Poser figure it was in the wrong gallery. My response - tough noogies, I'll post where I think appropriate. It's not ANYBODY's place to tell me where I should or should not post. PERIOD.

my point is if more people posted in the mixed area if they did post work then in december it would be a better mix of artists to choose from for AOM. dreampaint rocks hard, but i would like to see other talented people in there too.

i just posted one last night where i modelled all the stuff in the picture in rhino, textured in deep paint, and rendered in bryce....and, yes, shame on me....i double posted....to the rhino and bryce gallery, as i had done substantial work with both those programs.

This is how I act: I generally post pictures in the gallery of the application it was rendered into. But - say that I make a Vue picture where there is one or more Poser character that is prominent. Say that I made a lot of work on that character before exporting it from Poser, like: setting it's pose carefully; applying great clothing and texturing on it; make it interact with props; etc. THEN I assume that this kind of work could be of interest to Poser users, too. At least, it would for me if others did the same. So in that case, I publish on the Poser gallery. Or perhaps to both the Poser and Vue galleries. I think it depends on the plain old "good sense". The main thing is not to abuse the Poser galleries with, say, landscape pictures that have Poser characters in the background, or with an irrelevant role. If on the contrary, as I said, the Poser character(s) is much elaborated and worked-on and has a key role in my Vue picture, then i think it's at home in the Poser gallery anyway. I mean, if a Photoshop-postworked picture is, where often neither clothes, nor hair, and sometimes not even bodies are Poser's own, are accepted, why shouldn't a Vue picture in which I have an important Poser character in that displays truest Poser hair, clothes, body and joint cracks? ;-) Anyway, with the advent of the Firefly renderer, this might progressively and naturally evolve in the next months into a more pure-Poser gallery IMHO.

I add another, and a bit "provocative", consideration: Is it less pertinent, a one very carefully crafted Vue picture with a prominent Poser character, with lost of Poser work on it (pose, clothing, texturing, propping), where the Poser character is shown at best, within a context that is interesting, with a story going on perhaps, and where you can see how different poser items (like commercial clothing, textures, etc.) look from a creative point of view, or two-three quick Poser renders PER DAY from the same person (yes, that happens not rarely), with quick unaccurate lighting, uninteresting subjects, the same old seen and re-seen naked Vicky exposed, just because someone's hormons drove his brain to think that THAT particular quick and sloppy naked Vicky render is essential to the world of Poser people? Rephrasing: to the passionate Poser user, is it more interesting to see ONE good picture where the Poser characters are REALLY displayed at their best, regardless of the renderer, or a FLOOD of uninteresting, all look-alike 2-minutes renders? What I mean: I think that, if there really is a problem with some of the galleries, is NOT the strictness (or lack thereof) of a rendering rule that causes it, but the huge amount of pictures that have no real work, effort, creative fight behind them. In the end, this causes big "noise" in the galleries, where the good pictures get lost in a sea of non-careful, show-me-naked fast-food renderings.

I assume that this kind of work could be of interest to Poser users, too. Orio...you nailed it. Post it if it will be of interest to others viewing that gallery. and, i SO agree with the 3 render example, as well. i am so tired of vicki out of the box, with market items out of the box....posed, textured, lit, out of the box...with still that vacant gooch-eyed vicki stare....geeze, so many of these all the folks did was hit the render button. but, r'osity will never have this toned down. it is too good for business.

I think Orio has hit the nail on the head. If there's any problem at all, it's the vaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaast number of quickie, 2 minutes to setup (maximum) - 3 minutes to render, boringly same as a gazillion other boringly same pics that's the problem. Simply put, there is an Extremely High ratio of noise to signal in the galleries. SOme people put a lot of work into pics, for many others, it's often no more than visual flatulence.

LOL - I agree with you, Orio. Case in point - look at the latest entry in my own gallery... it took roughly three hours to pull off total (honest!), including 30 minutes of that rendering in Firefly. However, I made a semi-provocative (okay, downright misleading) thumbnail with the word "NAKED" prominent in the title (though in reality the lass has all her clothes on... she's only thinking about "getting naked in the woods" ;) ) I racked up more viewings with that image in two days than I had with any other image in my wee gallery, with exception of my first (coincidentally, my first image also has the word "naked" prominent in the title as well, but no thumbnail.) At last check, my first image has 667 viewings since January, and my two-day-old experiment has 564 viewings. The least viewed item in the pile is based on Mike... (go figure.) I think I may have set a record for the most viewings of a fully clothed non-pinup Vicky ever posted... cool; I never thought that tweaking demographics could be so much fun :p Now, to answer the original thread question? A small, non-significant amount of post-work would be cool (my experiment has exactly one small bit of it... the grass by her left toes to help blend her in a touch came from post-working in the GIMP.) OTOH, a ton of post-worked effects and such really IMVHO belongs in mixed-media, or eprhaps its own "Poser unlimited" group. IMHO, there really ought to be a "100% Poser" gallery with unpost-worked Poser renderings and nothing else in it. If nothing else, it would help cut down on the flood a touch :) /P

I decide on each image separately .. depending on what I feel I want to emphasize, for instance my last image was placed in the Poser gallery .. I did so with this particular image because I wanted to feature as specific model .. I very much liked the model and wanted to show her off were there would be the most interest in her. Technically I suppose it should have gone in mixed medium .. I painted the cloths and the background is Bryce .. Sometimes there are parts of the image that I think would be of interest to both the Bryce and Poser set.. if say I want to discuss a technique is of interest to those in Bryce, then I post an over all image in Bryce .. if that image also contains a character or technique that I think would be of interest to the Poser crowed then I also post a detail portion of the image to the Poser gallery .. for me it is a personal decision based on what I consider to be the area of interest in that particular image.

I do an extremely heavy amount of postwork after I render an image in Poser but I still post the image in the Poser gallery. Technically all of my images should go in the Mixed medium gallery. I don't put them there for a few reasons: First because I started the image in Poser, I still consider it a "Poser" image. To me Poser is just a means to an end to achieve the vision I created in my mind. Whatever other software that is used to finish the image is unimportant. Secondly, I feel that placing the image in the Poser gallery allows for more exposure to the renderosity community. Regardless of the quality of the image it will get far less visits if it is posted in another gallery other than this one.

Do you prefer to read stories written in Microsoft Word or stories written in Sun Star Office?

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=246828&Start=1&Sectionid=0&Form.Search=hankim

schmoopy you should think about posting your work in the mixed galleries now and again. in december the AoM will be selected from this section and i just saw your pics. most excellent stuff. it would be cool to see you nominated too and your stuff definitely qualifies.

Well said. Some people here, I feel, if they were carpenters would be PROUD that they only used hammers, and would look down their noses any anyone who used a saw. "Oh yeah - anyone can cut wood with a SAW - show your real skill and use just a hammer!"

Honestly, it doesn't matter where the models come from, or where the textures came from, or etc. I believe OTOH that the renderer should decide which gallery an image should be posted, IMHO. Let's admit it - everyone drops an image off in the Poser gallery because that's where the eyeballs are. I'm serious here... that's the reason why everyone has IMVHO squirming and fudging about with the definition of what makes a Poser render, myself included. This has nothing to do with the dreaded "what is art?" question, or "a beautiful thing takes a blend of tools..." No. It's a basic, venal instinct to put our work up where it is most likely to get seen. Anyone that says otherwise is lying either to all of us, themselves, or both. I freely admit it myself... it doesn't matter if the image was rendered in Bryce, or post-worked in Photoshop to the point where you would swear on a stack of Bibles that someone just scanned in a print (remember Tisa's entries? More on that in a second.) In short, as long as there's a Poser figure in there somewhere, by ghod we're gonna call it a Poser image and stick it in the Poser gallery, period. I suspect that this is why we have the problem of so many images all piled up in there. Everyone remember Tisa? She posted what were esentially heavily modified photographs with only the barest hint of Poser in it, if indeed one could ever hope to find it. World + dog jumped on her for posting it all in the Poser gallery, didn't they? (let's face it, if that was indeed a straight-up Poser render/Photoshop post-work job, it was a kick-ass top-notch effort...) If memory serves, everyone felt all smug for pounding all over her for daring to call her results a Poser render, and many used the argument that it was not truly a Poser image. Now? The argument changes... go figure. c'mon, guys... if there's going to be a standard, it has to apply to everyone. While there is no set threshold for what is and isn't enough post-work to qualify for mixed media, there can certainly be a set standard for what renderer was used to complete the image, yes? Let's use that as our guide, and call it good. /P