Last Thanksgiving, my mom decided to play a trick on my sister (who's blonde). To get her out of the house, she convinced her that we needed more half and half for the coffee.

While my sister was out, my mom took the turkey out of the oven, removed the stuffing, stuffed a Cornish hen, then put it inside the turkey, packing stuffing all around it. She then put the turkey back in the oven.

When everything was ready, my sister took the turkey out of the oven and began to remove the stuffing. When she felt something, she reached in and pulled out the Cornish hen.

Pretending to be shocked, by mother exclaimed, "Patti, you've cooked a pregnant turkey!"

My sister began to cry and was inconsolable. It took us half an hour to convince her that turkeys lay eggs!

Quote - ** "A Chihuahua? They gave me a  Chihuahua?!"**

Now THAT was worth resurrecting the thread for!

"Well, folks, here's the latest update. I guess this is good news. BP officials say the 'top kill' plan is working. The bad news — BP officials are a bunch of lying weasels." –Jay Leno

"In a new interview, BP's CEO said that the Gulf Coast oil spill is relatively tiny compared to the 'very big ocean.' That's like telling someone who's just been shot not to worry about the bullet because they're really, really fat." –Jimmy Fallon

"Scientists say they have developed a car that can run on water. The only catch is, the water has to come from the Gulf of Mexico." -Jay Leno

"I love this. On the news today, the CEO of British Petroleum says he believes the overall environmental impact of this oil spill will be very, very modest. Yeah. If you live in England!" –Jay Leno
 

There's your trade off, the more time and effort involved to get it done right cheaper or paying more for people that are willing and know how to do it already. 

It depends which you have more of, time and patience with teaching or money and a desire to make it easier.

Attached Link: Voice123

Voice123** is home to the biggest and most technologically advanced group of talents and voice producers ever to exist.

Quote - There is no hypocrisy here.  Just rules concerning thumbnails that some people find objectionable.  For whatever reason.

There is certainly a double standard in the way the rules are applied, since why do some things like nudity that are objectionable by only a certain small percentage of people get forced on everyone one while other things like violence that are ojectionable by another small percentage of people get a pass?

If one is forced on everyone to have none of it in the thumbnails what makes those have priority over those that object to something else?

There is a violence filter just like there is a nudity filter but that didn't stop those that wanted to pick the degree of what kind of nudity they wanted set for eveyone.

Why is that different than the kind of violence that everyone can see either? Sounds a lot like a double standard being applied to me.

I agree if it's on a set of textures that show scars and bruises there isn't much you can do about it, but that didn't seem to make much difference to those that wanted the degree of nudity they objected to eliminated so why should it to those who object to the violence they percieve?

Quote - my suggestion if you need to time the piece to a song is to render in poser and then piece together in a movie making program.  For me at least I have found a lot more freedom in the timing that way.  Timing in poser afaik sucks.  Either way you are going to be rendering 1440 frames so - might as well take the easier approach with the timing..

I do that also render the animation as image frames and put them together in Adobe Premiere, but it's still at least 30 frames a sec and with a song with that fast a tempo you'll never get any decent shots following that script if the verses take only 15 secs. 

Well in the video to the song I remember Bob Dylan barely had time to flip the cue cards with the lyrics on them since the tempo of the song is pretty fast.  

Were you going to try and time the animation to the song? That could be very problematic to get it to fit. If you're just going to animate the scenes without the music it could be done a lot easier.

The basics are to make sure you do it in small shots of about 3 seconds each with different camera angles, to fit together the long shots, inserts and close-ups. That will make it easier to animate it in pieces and also hold the viewers attention more.

Since you have the script already, the next step you should take is to make a storyboard of how you want each shot to look like and what motion the scene will have. You can do single frame renders in Poser since you'll have to set up the models for the animation anyway.

Quote - At least Sinbad got a bit of publicity

That's probably why someone changed it, Since I was confused on how many people could notice it and email it to others in the short time it was changed. Sounded kinda like either a publicity stunt for Sinbad or someone with a grudge against Wikipedia. 

Even if it was one of those people like in the song "White & Nerdy" that enjoys screwing with Wikipedia articles then how did so many people find out about it and why was it so widely reported if it wasn't a publicity stunt?

I'm not sure why this story recieved so much attention, 

I looked at the history on Wikipedia and it showed that someone had entered that Sinbad was dead, but then someone else had changed it back 10 minutes later and reported the vandalism. They banned the person that made the false entry and locked the page the prevent any more until it could be settled.

So how is that an indictment on how unreliable Wikipedia is? Sure they let anyone add to it, but it's still under constant review and thepeople that know something can correct the mistakes. Newspapers print errors that last a lot longer before they are corrected than Wikipedia does. The Encyclopedia Britianica has had erros in it that have lasted for decades.

Even Stephen Colbert couldn't get away with it, since even though he had thousands of people following his ideas on what to change all of those articles were changed back and locked until the furor died down. 

All that was changed is they made a new article on Wikiality to show the attempts but it's more of a myth then an actual practice. I suppose it's a better story that way to believe it.

The point being that's it should be art that's well crafted instead of those that aren't seems to be lost on those with prejudice against certain programs since prejedice in any form is based on ignorance and emotional bias.

The predujice against Poser doesn't seem to be limited to still images either. I was submitting animations I did with Poser figures, combined with 3D Studio objects, Bryce, layered effects in Flash and put in a video with Premiere to a cartoon site. 

The guy who ran it told me he didn't accept "Machinima"  it seems he had lumped it in with stuff captured from programs like the Sims, World of Warcraft and Second Life. Even when I told him it wasn't done any of those it was all original done with 3D rendering programs, he still wouldn't change his mind about it because it looked all the same to him.

The trouble is that those who have such a bias towards Poser don't really care how well it was done since they've already made up their minds on the what methods they'll accept. That's why it's useless trying to argue with them.

Very good doesn't seem to be any factor here. Unless you give any comment other than "Nicely Done!" or "Cool Image!" you're considered a troll. It all depends on how popular and how much you give others glowing praise, that's how much you'll get on yours back. It doesn't really matter what the image is on it's own here. If you're not willing to play that game this isn't the place to post your work.

Quote - And this is significant for what reason??

You don't count several deaths in rapid succession as significant? 1st E.P. Marshall dies, then Anna's son and then herself with all involved in a battle for millions of dollars and that's not enough motive? I suppose what you would need is for Deep Throat to whisper "Follow the money" in your ear to consider it significant?

If it was just from a drug overdose wouldn't you think it would have been easy to establish in the initial autopsy? They didn't find any obvious cause of death and have to do more in depth tests. I would call that evidence that it was of more significance than just a case of self destruction.

The question in the thread was about the various reasons for cropping thumbnails, the answer being it was a matter of personal taste of each artist to determine how they wanted to present the thumbnail to the audience. The recent change in the thumbnail policy is directly related to that since it also involves the personal taste of the artist to choose what they want to put in the thumbnail.

If they put more effort into alternatives, like tailoring the nudity filter to allow for some more degree than an all or nothing choice then it might be less hypocritical but that is hard to account for the range of what offends some people or not. That only affects the people who choose to use the filter in their profile.

That doesn't compare to trying to force what your personal taste is to affect everyone. It's like when you see a channel on TV that has some stuff you like but other stuff you don't and instead of changing the channel to avoid the stuff you don't like, you force the cable company to change it to get rid of the stuff you don't like so that everyone can't see it either.

Which is a lot more hypocritical?

Quote - So, nudity should be an all-or-nothing shot?  If I wanted to view explicit nudity/erotica, there's always r'otica or raunchy minds.  However, those of us (it's not just me, btw.  I just happen to be yelling loudly) who do choose to view nudes....well, it's all about that wonderful word: choice.  That's what the nudity flags are for...for those who choose not to view those types of images.  However, for those of us who, when the whim carries us, choose to view them, we want it to be our choice, not shoved down our throats. 

That's my whole point is that it is about choice. How is taking away the choice and having no nudity shoved down others throats increasing it? Is it because some hypocrites want to have their personal taste forced on everyone? Nudity shouldn't be an all or nothing shot so why force a certain opinion of what they consider to be appropriate onto others? 

That's what the nudity flags are supposed to be for, not to CYA because you think you'll get into trouble for any flash of skin and to give those who don't want to view nudity a choice not to see it if they don't want to.

So how is forcing everyone to have no nudity in the thumbnails giving them a choice? That sounds like an all or nothing shot to me.

I always thought the lengths that people like boobrepli and willdial wento were funny because they were outrageously out of proportion. Does that mean that I was going to force them to dial back to a more sane level? No, because I tolerate their personal taste and gave them the choice to do their images the way they saw fit. I wouldn't want them to dictate what I put in my images either.

But that doesn't seem to apply to some on here that think they have a right to enforce their personal taste on others and take away their choices. To use your analogy again, if you didn't like the people on the beach, instead of going somewhere else, you got some security people to come and throw them off the beach.

If you were to submit your art to a local gallery for years and suddenly they changed their policy to something different then you'd wonder why if it was alright before then why is it so bad now? Other places might have stricter rules, but that's not what I agreed to when I signed up in 2002 so that doesn't really apply here.

The debate won't improve your renders and certainly the curtailing of choice won't but what good is putting all that time and effort into making a killer render if you aren't allowed to show it here?

Quote - The other assumption is that those of us with our profiles set to view nudity want tits shoved in our faces.

It's like going to the bookstore to buy a Playboy and being given Hustler and Barely Legal instead.

But which is it? If you want to view nudity then why complain about the degree that it is shown? If you didn't want an either or choice to have nudity or not then why force it on everyone else with no nudity in the thumbnails at all? Isn't that a bit hypocritical? Where is the degree of tolerance shown in that?

 To use your analogy it's like having the the bookstore replace all the Playboy, Hustler and Barely Legal with Maxim and FHM because someone didn't like the Hustler and Barely Legal.

If you meant my sig picture, then TYVM for saying it was cool, it's got a link to one of my shops on CafePress. It's not that your opinion shouldn't count, but that it should not be forced onto others that don't have the same opinion. Would you want others opinions forced onto you?