Thu, Jan 16, 2:39 PM CST

Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL



Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum

Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom

Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2025 Jan 15 2:13 am)



Subject: I'm getting a bit tired of the Poser galleries..


Whatthe ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 10:49 AM · edited Thu, 16 January 2025 at 2:39 PM

Like 90-95% of the pictures are of just a naked woman with maybe perhaps a nice background these days. But it's worth is when you see those truly original pictures.


3-DArena ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:00 AM

Uh-oh - here we go again.... ;-D


3-D Arena | Instagram | Facebook

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.
-Galileo


pdxjims ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:07 AM

Occasionally you can even be surprised by a "naked in the Temple". An earlier thread gave me an idea I'm working on. Not great art, but the humor factor should be good. I don't mind wading through all the Naked Vickys, the good stuff makes it worthwhile. And a lot of times there's something in a temple pic that helps me technicly (although obviously not with my spelling), or gives me an idea to try.


Hiram ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:13 AM

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=beton

Some of the best Poser art is not in the Poser Gallery. For instance, my current favorite at the link above.


max- ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:14 AM

Hmmm... how about a nekked Vicky standing on a Bryce sphere and holding a smaller Bryce sphere. Bet noone ever did that.

"An Example is worth Ten Thousand Words"


SamTherapy ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:16 AM

Well, at the risk of offending most of the community, I also hate elves, fairies, faes, sidhe, magick, fantasy and most of the "porn pretending to be art". And you can add pouty lips on most of the Victoria models, too. :) Cantankerous old git, aren't I?

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery


Turtle ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:26 AM

I for one think there is a lot of creative and nice posts. You may be tried of naked Vicky but my only bitch is Naked Micheal, Gee whats pretty or creative about his thing showing.

Love is Grandchildren.


Marque ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:30 AM

file_29593.jpg

Well, not really. lol Just playing with a new character idea. Staff Sgt. Steph reporting for duty as ordered. Marque


Marque ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:31 AM

Sorry, she's not nekid, doesn't have a sword but she's ready for duty... quick render in P4. Marque


dialyn ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:31 AM

Hiram...that's a great site. That's what I wish would happen more often...when someone finds something special in the galleries, that they would clue the rest of us into it. I'd probably never find Beton on my own, but the gallery has a wealth of interesting images on it. Thank you!


Mason ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:43 AM

Yeah I don't know why those posters bother with naked women. Its not like women bother making pics of naked men. Why give attention to one half of the human race when it doen't give attention back. I'd say stop giving praise to women and start giving praise to other things in life. Women aren't the center of the universe, anymore.


SAMS3D ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:50 AM

Hiam that link is great, thank you, really...the Stranded is one of my favorites. I saw this in the Mag a little while ago. Great pic......and Marque, very nice indeed....Sharen


Stormrage ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 11:57 AM

hmmm try viewing some of the better artists :) Everyone i think has done a naked vicky in a temple at somepoint though.. my favorites lalverson wasmuh Beton June As Shanim Xena pjero TT and many more :)


dialyn ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:01 PM

Are posters posting for other people or for themselves? It just may be, for those posters, those fantasy women are meaningful, even though they look pretty repetitious to others of us.


Mosca ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:09 PM

Content Advisory! This message contains nudity, violence

file_29594.jpg

Yeah, it's all the same...


tuttle ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:11 PM

Stormrage - Well, I've NEVER done naked Vicky in a temple, figuratively or literally ;) I recommend a petition to include a titty / temple combo ban within the TOS... MODS..? And what the hell am I doing in the Poser forum?


SnowSultan ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:15 PM

"You may be tried of naked Vicky but my only bitch is Naked Micheal" I've noticed a lot more nude Mike pics showing up lately as well, along with more gay and lesbian embracing/kissing scenes too. Not that there's anything wrong with that... :) But as long as she's not floating and has some sort of facial expression, I say bring on the temple pics! ;) That's an interesting question Dialyn...although I know everyone says we're supposed to make art for ourselves and for personal enjoyment, I end up making most of mine for other people. That extra little bit of motivation keeps me from letting it look like junk. ;) SnowS Hoping his pictures are worth 1001 words. 1001 Words

my DeviantArt page: http://snowsultan.deviantart.com/

 

I do not speak as a representative of DAZ, I speak only as a long-time member here. Be nice (and quit lying about DAZ) and I'll be nice too.


xoconostle ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:18 PM

I don't do too many nudes, since I think being teased is nicer than being shown everything, besides which erotica isn't my creative focus. However, I've noticed that when I do post something with some feminine curves showing, the responses are condiserably increased. People usually comment on the "artistry" of those renders (which is nice of them, of course, but...) It amuses me that so many people, especially we Americans, find feminine nudity to be beautiful and artful, but heaven forbid that a bit of nether male flesh should show! There's a "I can do without the dong" dude in every crowd. Well, fine, don't look, but we guys are just as human as the women we admire. If I'm going to include nekkid Michael or Dork in a picture, I'm not going to censor his groin just to avoid the negative comments of a few uptight guys. So there! :-) As another oft-repeated but not universally believed point, nudity does NOT necessarily mean "porn" or "sex." Thank god!


dialyn ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:24 PM

Actually I find dressed figures are more interesting than nudes...what is concealed and revealed in a person tells more of a story than pictures showing everything hanging out and exposed. Clothes gives us history, and a perception of how the person is seen by us and how they see themselves...it adds to the interpretation of a character rather than detracting from it...for me. But I'm clearly in the minority of people who want to see a story told other than Adam and Eve.


Mosca ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:27 PM

Context is everything. Originality has nothing to do with subject matter, per se--it's what you DO with that subject matter. But yeah, canned pose, canned lights, props, figure, texture, background from blah blah blah in the MP--who cares? The whole penis-phobia thing is about fear--I think a lot of (young) men are afraid that if they look at too many penises they'll get turned on; which would make them gay. Of course, if it's a man and a woman having sex in a video or whatever, the penis is no prob; the more the better. Weird planet we live on.


Mosca ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:29 PM

Why not sell complete PZ3s--figure, lights, textures, camera--everything ready to render, no creativity whatsoever required. Brilliant, I tell you!


wdupre ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:31 PM

I like it Mosca, can't say I understand it but I like it. for any that are interested there is a similar thread over at the OT forum entitled "Poser hot 20". one Idea brought up there (though I'm sure it has been brought up many times before) was the Idea of having a two image per week upload limit. the Idea behind this is that perhaps people would be more choosy about the images they post and slowing down the posts might mean that really good images wouldn't be lost in the deluge.



Mosca ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:36 PM

Thanks, w! I don't understand it either--it's mostly about playing w/ space and scale. Even cutting the dl limit to one per day would help. The whole hot 20 thing has been going on forever; Legume vs. Vicky, concept versus execution. Yawn.


JohnRender ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:44 PM

{I also hate elves, fairies, faes, sidhe, magick, fantasy and most of the "porn pretending to be art".} How else can people legally make nude pictures of children? Call them "fairies" and there you go! Oh, wait, the artist says the character is "400 years old" and that's why she (never a he) looks about 10 years old. Okay, whatever. Two fairies cavorting in a garden? Take off the wings and you have two nude children. And before you jump all over people and say "Well, just skip over the ones you don't like". I tried that- you STILL have let the thumnbnails download and even then, some thumbnails don't really show what the picture is. Then again, do real artists post their images here, looking for a "cute face" or "this rockz" comment? No- they work as a commercial graphic artist and their compliment is that they get paid $50 an hour to do something creative.


Patricia ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:53 PM

Thank you for that great link, Hiram. I stumbled across Beton's work early on and am still inspired by it, but I haven't enough time for the Galleries these days :( I really, really appreciate a link to other artist's favorite works. Was going to post one myself, to occdoug's page, but I can't seem to find him...? Maybe I'm spelling it wrong? A limit on posts per day is an excellent idea. I just got back from a 2 month roadtrip and the very thought of all the images I'll need to wade through is daunting!


Salustra ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:53 PM

I'll add my 3 cents - new to Poser but a fantasy art fan since 1977 - really tired of naked women who all look like clones - If fact of Renderosity's current constest winners (all great tech & art feats) PunkClown's Frog was my turn on! Now that was a figure with personality!


JFStan ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 12:57 PM

Thought I would jump in here.. I believe I have a theory as to why so many pics involve Vickie posing in a minimal background. We're often hampered creatively by the tools we're given, and when we (myself included) look at hi-res models like Vickie we feel the need to use them, and also to let the model itself do most of the "talking". So, we pose Vickie provocatively (nude, to show off the remarkable detail of DAZ's creation) in a room element of some kind. We play with the lights and expressions, and render it. Ta-da! Instant art. I believe that most us at least started that way, by playing with the elements and tools we were given with Poser. Often times the figures inspire the images we create, not the other way around. We'll ask ourselves "What can I do with Vickie/Mike/Steph/Dragon/Whatever?" instead of conjuring up an image first, then adapting or creating elements to make it happen. Now, this isn't a bad thing, and I am not saying that people who create "Vickie in a temple" images are all beginners or are uncreative. I'm just saying that this might be the reason for the multitude of similar images out there. Anyone else think this makes sense? -=JFStan=- "I will now accept your praise and adulation!" - Robokopf


SnowSultan ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:00 PM

FYI, I'm not against nude Mike pics, but it's no different or more difficult rendering him nude then Vicky nude. The criticism against lifeless nude Vicky pics should apply to any render where characters are simply stuck in a scene just for sexual appeal. And strange but true - Vicky in a temple can indeed be done well! :) http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=84140 http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=228231 http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=256749 SnowS

my DeviantArt page: http://snowsultan.deviantart.com/

 

I do not speak as a representative of DAZ, I speak only as a long-time member here. Be nice (and quit lying about DAZ) and I'll be nice too.


Mosca ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:06 PM

"How else can people legally make nude pictures of children? Call them "fairies" and there you go! Oh, wait, the artist says the character is "400 years old" and that's why she (never a he) looks about 10 years old. Okay, whatever. Two fairies cavorting in a garden? Take off the wings and you have two nude children." Actually, non-obscene CG nudes of children are ALL legal. At least according to the U.S. supreme court. "Then again, do real artists post their images here, looking for a "cute face" or "this rockz" comment? No- they work as a commercial graphic artist and their compliment is that they get paid $50 an hour to do something creative." Real artists make real art, not "commercial art." (An oxymoron if ever there was one.)


wdupre ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:08 PM

Not jumping all over you Johnrender but I havn't seen too many of the nude juvi fairys around here in a while. not since a few months back when the PTB carded all the fairys I'm sure you remember that mosca ;)



Patricia ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:14 PM

SnowS, thank you :) I might never have seen those artists' work if not for your links above.... (Now, if I could just find occdoug's stuff.....?)


Hiram ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:16 PM

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=tuttle

*"And what the hell am I doing in the Poser forum?"* I don't know... slumming? Dude, you do some freaky s***. It's brilliant; I love it. See? I think the real artists (myself for instance) take a look at the Poser rendering and composing capabilities, say 'screw it' and go render in Bryce. Then they post their stuff in the Bryce gallery where the Poseurs never go. I did this at first, but then I decided that if I did the modeling in Poser I could put it in the Poser gallery. Some I put in mixed medium.


SamTherapy ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:17 PM

Mosca & John Render... First, I agree with JR's point about the fairies. Not sure about the "real artists" though; I am a "real artist", but currently unemployed. I'm using my new found spare time to get to grips with Poser. So far I haven't posted anything in the gallery because I don't feel I have created anything worth looking at. As for the term "art", I believe it's completely redundant in the context we're discussing here. Common usage says that a piece of graphic design is artwork, and is therefore produced by an artist. Whether or not it's "real" art is debatable and pointless (IMO, there is no such thing as "real" art, anyhow). Mosca - define "obscene". In my country, the general definition is "Indecent; likely to deprave or corrupt". Pictures of naked children usually fall into that category.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery


doozy ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:18 PM

Response seen in a previous version of this thread... Most of those posting are guys who can't get a date in the real world, so they use Poser instead...


Stormrage ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:24 PM

tuttle.. actually i don't think i have done one either.. *thinking then looking through my art.. hmm nope not one naked vicky IN a temple.. * Mosca.. actually some artists are putting their art here not everyone is looking for comments.. I enable my comments but not ratings.. but honestly I don't care what people say about my art. I use it to gauge peoples reaction to it.. I don't go to a local art gallery to show my art. so can't hear the peoples reaction.. though what defines a real artist? Someone who has sold their work? thinking I have. 10 times over.. Made a fair amount for each piece I did too. Who creates fantastic images? Well mine are mostly pinups but then I don't show the work I have done for pay. A real artist is as ambigous as the truth sometimes :)


Tirjasdyn ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:36 PM

Hrm...I thought it was because people rushed out, bought vicky and p4 and didn't have enough left over for clothes.. Pet Peeve, slap a wide mouth expression on vick, import her to bryce and render, ick. I do like fantasy art...not much for fairies(sorry ever since the I came here I have found "fae"s to be some queue word for pornographic, even with thorn's rants about it.)

Tirjasdyn


Hiram ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:37 PM

"Real artists make real art, not "commercial art." The ceiling of the Sistine chapel was a commisioned piece.


tuttle ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:37 PM

Cheers, Hiram, glad you like it. :) Now, if anyone out there knows how I can get PAID for doing it I'll give them a coconut & a kiss (or a hand-shake for the guys...)


TrekkieGrrrl ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:39 PM

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=245755&Start=1&Artist=ernyoka1&ByArtist=Yes

Someone once said :"Tits = Hits" I have to conclude that it's true. Of all my pictures, the one that's had the most hits were a picture where the thumbnail made you believe it was a nude pic. As I do VERY LITTLE "real nude" pics, I thought "well let's see what happens if the thumbnail showed some skin" and whaddayaknow? more than 700 hits, closely followed by my only pic where I put [nudity] in the title, becourse it really WAS a nude pic, one of the rare ones (mostly becourse I was just playing with a new set and didn't bother to put clothes on Vicky) It's a bit strange with the nude Mikes...somehow most of them cry GAY to me.... but I really don't know why, and being a straight girl, one should actually expect me to prefere nude men to nude women. I have to admit that I find most of the nude Vickys boring (even if the pic might be great) but nude men in renderings just turns me OFF. The link is to my "no. 1 hit" which actually looks quite a lot like me, hence the title "Trekkie's bath"

FREEBIES! | My Gallery | My Store | My FB | Tumblr |
You just can't put the words "Poserites" and "happy" in the same sentence - didn't you know that? LaurieA
  Using Poser since 2002. Currently at Version 11.1 - Win 10.



queri ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:41 PM

Gods be praised I'm not a real artist! I have now a deep and abiding need to do a slew of naked Mikes in temples and post them, dongles adangling. I have done Vicki in a temple and Vicki Naked but not combined the two. I was mentioning the convention to a friend who doesn't do Poser but enjoys seeing a picture of mine once in awhile. He said Vicki, Naked, in a Temple, with a Sword. Sounds like Clue. Emily


nnuu ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:44 PM

i totally agree with the a limit of uplaoding from 3 to 1......this site used to have unlimited uploads until someone decided to upload 40+ pics each just slightly different than the other.....so they changed it to 3 uploads a day.....but that was when there were only 25 thousand members.....now there are over a 100 thousand members ...i totally think it would be a great idea to limit the uploads to one pic per day.....its not the nudes that bug me......anymore.......its the fractals that bug me......and for those of you who say that i should ignore them.....well i would if i could just ignore fractals and enjoy the other galleries ........caue i just dont want to limit myself to poser galleries ....i want to see the 2d galleries and the bryce galleries as well......dont get me wrong....some of the fractals ive seen look great in colour compostion and so forth ....but the majority of them look like they were made with some kind of fractal generator......i dont kow if they make them anyway else but IMHO there a waste of space.....sorry if i offended the fractal community nnuu


Hiram ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:44 PM

tuttle: Find yourself an agent. You are definitely good enough to be doing this as a livlihood. It's hard to break in at first, but you have to be motivated (read: stubborn and persistent). One of these days I'll get there. It's the work of guys like you that inspires me. I'd hate to have you looking at my art on a book cover someday and saying "Gee, I coulda done that."


ScottA ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:47 PM

There is a cure for people who get tired of naked people. Go to my gallery. After you see that. Naked people will look much better. :-) ScottA


Mosca ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:50 PM

"The ceiling of the Sistine chapel was a commisioned piece." Sure; just working on spec doesn't make you an artist. But it wasn't an ad or an illustration or a canned, inoffensive image designed to fill layout space. A lot of people got seriously torqued about those paintings--they changed everything. That's the difference. "Mosca - define "obscene". In my country, the general definition is "Indecent; likely to deprave or corrupt". Pictures of naked children usually fall into that category." Here the legal definition varies from state to state, county to county. But in general, it means they'd have to be presented in clearly sexual/sexualized situations--that is, the same standard for obsceniy applies to CG images of children as it would for CG or non-CG images of adults. Everybody's so hysterical about this deal--a friend of mine just sent me a picture of her toddler sitting on a potty chair. It's cute as hell--are you saying it's obscene? Where's that at? "...a few months back when the PTB carded all the fairys I'm sure you remember that mosca ;)" Sure do. I also remember that they reversed their decision and invited me to repost the "questionable" image. And another image of mine using the same (naked) figure made it to #1 in the Hot 20. Here's what the TOS currently says on the subject: "No depictions of young humanoid characters in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context." In other words, non-eroticized nudes are ok.


Stormrage ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:51 PM

hey scott I like your work :) reminds me of saturday morning cartoons:) which is a big compliment btw.. Reminds me of things that are cute precious and time well spent :)


tuttle ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:59 PM

file_29595.jpg

Hiram - thanks for the vote of confidence, I'll get a bit more practice in first & see what happens :) Now, where was that free temple model I was looking at...


Mason ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 1:59 PM

Like I've said before about fairies and I'll say again. ANYTHING 400 years old ain't gonna be cute and innocent. Its going to have a cigratte out of its mouth and be jaded all to hell and its middle finger is going to be permantly stuck in the upright and straight position.


kuroyume0161 ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 2:14 PM

Hiram: Here! Here! Most of the art of the Renaissance - paintings, frescos, mosaics, murals, architecture, music - was commisioned by some wealthy businessman, royalty, or the church. JS Bach, DaVinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael, Donatello (and other Ninja Turtles!) were all handsomely paid for their work. In my case, "real" art is defined by the skill of the artist in how he/she uses the tools available and the presentation resulting, not fame or pocket book (or lack thereof). Square blocks painted on canvas or paint splattered willy-nilly (seemingly in a fit of spasm) are not art (sorry - that sums up my basic feelings about most abstract art, especially that of the latter half of the twentienth century). Would you call someone whose only trick is making a coin disappear in the same manner everytime a "real" magician? No, that's a 'one trick pony', a 'one hit wonder', a hobbyist, amateur, but not a "real" magician. As for naked people scurrying about rendered scenes, I have no problem as long as it is done tastefully and with a purpose (even if just to be erotic). Frazetta had more "Vicky's in a temple with a sword" type art than I can remember, but he was a professional, "real" artist, whose art had a purpose - even if pandering to the nether regions of the male anatomy. ;) Kuroyume

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

 -- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone


kuroyume0161 ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 2:15 PM

Mason: You owe me a keyboard!!! Kuroyume

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

 -- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone


SamTherapy ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 2:58 PM

Content Advisory! This message contains nudity

file_29596.jpg

:) Victoria makes her feelings known.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery


TheWolfWithin ( ) posted Wed, 30 October 2002 at 3:04 PM

i wouldn't touch this subject with a 10 ft. Naked Vicki......


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.