Checked out your gallery, two pictures so far just within the past week. That's a short time. My recommendation would be don't focus on the numbers yet. Focus on what your want. What do you want to do with your pictures. What do you want to say to other's by taking the time to pose a digital character and put it/her/him over a background. If you're trying to make contact with other human beings by arranging pixels in some manner, that is what will draw hits. IMHO. Keep at it, its not an instant high.

It was tenuously mentioned that they thought she looked like Jewel, the singer. For the obvious reasons the maker can't make any such allusions and for paranoia reasons made clear in earlier parts of this thread no one wanted to come out and say it clearly. I just tried re-scanning the whole thing looking to quote the person but couldn't see it. It's way up there ^ somewhere.

Satire does hold some legal foothold, not being a lawyer I don't know how far it can go before it can become libelous or slander. Look at Spitting Image, or South Park, they don't even change the names of the people they're trashing. Political cartoons run everyday with easily identifiable characters and we know how flattering those are. : O Who did the Sean Connery 007 character I've seen floating around? Is that one of the movie guys mentioned?

No one can stop you from saying, I think that looks like Jewel, or I don't think it looks like Jewel, at all. You can pitch it pos or neg and still establish the subject of who it might or might not look like. Everybody still gets to have their opinion. Still too touchy to make a product and say, This is my new morph pak, someone said she looks like Madonna but I assure you I just spun some dials that looked good. You can still use that defense, just don't mention Madonna in your product description.

Line 1 of the copy: "ToolBox reads Poser file formats, including Poser 5 compressed files" In his defense, he's an independent working to fill a gap between software companies. I know nothing of his total support staff other than himself but I appreciate the desire to provide what's wanted and needed. As someone who has bought CR2 rigger and Conformer from him, they have greatly eased the pain of moving Poser files into Lightwave. That said it has not erased the pain. Tweaking some of the weight maps and rig once in LW has kept me from animating solely in LW. I, also want to be clear that I have to account for my own level of competency doing those jobs. So, I have both the 75% AND the 25% satisfaction rating. The main opportunity this product provides is to facilitate the making of products for poser, so you can bring in a figure create new morphs and/or create new clothes, and send them back to poser easily without having to buy LW for $1500. As a seperate game plan it can also be used to create assets for games, that's my understanding. I think it's too soon for a lynchin' but better proof-reading is in order.

P7 or P8??? Six isn't even released yet! "PLay nice with other apps." Oh, please, yes, let it be! Proffessional App vs. the Hobbyist? More modest proffessional uses absolutely but it will never stand in for the workers who need to create a battlefield full of thousands. I'm setting myself up for a fall there since I've already done my own large battelfield scenes but I didn't have them all in poser at once. And the hobbyist? Not a minimal market. It's like talking about all those Playstation hobbyists. Will that market grow or join the ranks of other hobbies that come and gone? Games, now making more money than the Movie Industry. Sorry, I went totally off topic. Gooooo Poser 10! I mean, 6.

Prince. He was waiting to get out of a contract with (?) Record Company and once the contract was finished he went back to Prince.

Yeah, I've been pretty happy with it for this project. I'm using it for both jet packs, the bullet hits, and the muzzle flare on the blaster and the chain gun. Also used Trapcode's Shine and Lux for some cast shadows and the headlights and search light in the final frame. Thanks for the interest.

Poser is probably one of the slowest paced computer games around but no less enjoyable. I'm sure I said that before but I was joking the first time.

Seeking a pure and perfect solution is just another name for never finishing a job. Oh, man! I should have that tattooed on my bezel! I'm no purist but there is something seductive that draws me and many others towards the idea of the one shot render. In order to get things done I am constantly urging myself to employ other software, or media! Remember photography? Yes to questions 1-3. You should really look into question #4. It could be your niche. : )

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=2069531

Speaking of ... thought you might find this relevent.

Yeah, well, OK, ouch! With a few minutes of dabbling it certainly seems easier to move the bone as the Dr. said or just keyframe the head to look at the cam. I know I don't like to go in the setup room and start mucking with bones but if that's what it takes... I also tried having the box point at the camera as it hovered above the head but that didn't seem so elegent either, although on paper it seems like it should work. Ah, well. That's all the bad advice I'll spread for today.

Yeah, I'm trying to keep it all in my brain and not go into to Poser to see how it works BUT I know it works with the eyes but there, the box is parented to the head and the eyes point at the box. If the head points to the floor when you say, "head point at Aux cam" my thought was just change the target and then if the head is pointing at the floor you can move it wherever until your head is back in the desired position. Parent the box to the cam and now if the cam moves it will take the head target with it. As for the order of rotation...? Ok, I'll go try it. Be back in a sec. or two.

Without changing bones, You could "point at" a small box prop, parent the box to the camera and translate the box up until the head was the level you liked it. I do something similar with the eys so I only have to move the box to move both eyeballs at the same time.

Just to stay with the lighting for a moment: Your light(s) flatten the image because they are shooting from the same direction as the camera. Move them off to the side at 45 angles. If it's two lights overlapping that could be why they are blowing out. No paint program is going to help that if the levels are all flattened at the top. You would end up with big flat grey highlights. The pose issue is a whole other kettle. good luck