If that is the case movida, then it appears that you aren't really into using the software. Find another program that does similar - or even better than Poser (if there is one) and I'd bet it has (or will have) copy protection out the wazoo. Pretty soon every program around will have some sort of copy protection - whether it works or not - to stop the casual copying and make it one step harder for the crackers to crack. So YOU won't go through that every time you reformat. Well, I will because to me it's not a great hassle - it's a minor annoyance. I do understand why you're "sick of dongles and all the related crap." I don't particularly like them either. But unfortuately in the real world there are dishonest people who steal from the honest and hard-working among us. To offer no copy protection at all in my opinion is ludicrous. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens to Curious Labs after they begin releasing Poser and the PP with the registration key. My guess is that they'll be fine - because there will be people like me who understand why they are doing it, sympathize with their reasoning and will continue to buy the software as long as they put their hearts into it and make it better - regardless of whether I like going the extra 9 yards (or two minutes to send them an e-mail for the registration key) or not!

Okay Anthony, how about the rest of the post? And as I said, other software manufacturers have had similar systems implemented for a very long time. Does that stop their users from using the software? I sincerely doubt that people outside the US DON'T use Lightwave or Onyx TreePro or Archvisions LW RPC plugin simply because they have to get a registration code. That is an excuse in this "have to have it right now" world. They waited a short time for delivery of the product they can wait another short time for the registration code - or call in the middle of the night (or whenever) while CL is open for business. And if they don't have a phone, well, they probably don't have a computer. I have a friend in the Phillipines that bought Onyx TreePro a few months ago. He called them during their business hours and got the registration number. He only just got an internet connection. The fact is, if you're really into using the software, you'll go the extra nine yards!

Cheers, I can see alot of people thinking just as you do. And I do completely understand the frustration and annoyance. But I have the strangest feeling that as soon as CL comes out with Poser 5 and you see all of the incredible upgrades it has - upgrades that may make Poser 4 look alot less attractive - you and a great many others will end up saying that the copy protection isn't that bad and considering how much more you would be getting... it's worth the added aggravation. I may be wrong - but I'd bet against that. I guess we'll ust have to wait and see.

System configuration? As far as I can tell, and taking into account my other programs that use a registration code assigned to my computer, configuration has nothing to do with it. I can move, secondary and tertiary hard drives, zip drives, CD-Roms.... anything - it doesn't affect the programs requiring a registration code. I know that Lightwave and Onyx TreePro run fine no matter how I change the configuration. I am not completely sure but I doubt that the CL protection is any different. I may be wrong, perhaps we should ask CL to clarify? "That is likely true for the majority, normal people with one computer, which is a desktop, and on the internet, and in the USA... Not everybody is like that." And what do these people do with other programs that require that sort of start-up? If they're serious about using the program then they will "bite the bullet" and do the extra work. I don't like having to do it either but it is a fact of life. Perhaps we should ask CL to have a toll free number to register for those who do not have internet access? That would solve that particular problem.

Curious Labs is NOT going too far with their software protection. I have an incredible amount of software that has dongles, registration numbers and machine checks. What they are doing is NO BIG DEAL. It is one extra LITTLE hassle that other software manufacturers have implemented a long time ago. To clarify, below is from a previous thread: I think that most of us agree that most copy protection doesn't work. Just about any programs that people want can be found on warez sites. Perhaps copy protection at CL will only slow down the "warez pirates." It will, however, almost completely stop the "casual duplication" of software for friends - someone who might buy the software but his/her friend has a copy that they put onto a CD-R. That is a lost sale for CL. I would bet that if Lightwave or Max had absolutely no copy protection at all there would be a hell of alot less sales for both companies. What do you think? The fact is: having no copy protection at all is not smart or feasible in todays environment. Perhaps some of the people here are correct - software protection is a myth. I, however, believe that it does stop some people from using the software without paying. And yes, it will be an extra hassle for those of us legitimate customers - but not enough to say "I won't buy their program anymore." They are seeking a way to protect their investment and I do not believe that anyone posting messages in this forum would not do the same (or similar) for themselves if the roles were reversed! Imagine seeing all of your hard work on a warea site for free. I'd be sick. I would say that next time there will be some sort of protection. It probably won't stop them completely, but it will slow them down. Just think about it. For one extra task to complete (ie. register via e-mail) we have a great piece of software! So it won't be as easy as it was before. Well, would you rather have this extra little aggravation and have this great software or no hassle at all - and NO SOFTWARE! I'm used to the hassle as are a great many others. It's part of everyday life. No big deal.

Okay. I think that most of us agree that most copy protection doesn't work. Just about any programs that people want can be found on warez sites. Perhaps copy protection at CL will only slow down the "warez pirates." It will, however, almost completely stop the "casual duplication" of software for friends - someone who might buy the software but his/her friend has a copy that they put onto a CD-R. That is a lost sale for CL. I would bet that if Lightwave or Max had absolutely no copy protection at all there would be a hell of alot less sales for both companies. What do you think? The fact is: having no copy protection at all is not smart or feasible in todays environment. Perhaps some of the people here are correct - software protection is a myth. I, however, believe that it does stop some people from using the software without paying. And yes, it will be an extra hassle for those of us legitimate customers - but not enough to say "I won't buy their program anymore." They are seeking a way to protect their investment and I do not believe that anyone posting messages in this forum would not do the same (or similar) for themselves if the roles were reversed! Just think about it. For one extra task to complete (ie. register via e-mail) we have a great piece of software! So it won't be as easy as it was before. Well, would you rather have this extra little aggravation and have this great software or no hassle at all - and NO SOFTWARE! I'm used to the hassle as are a great many others. It's part of everyday life. No big deal.

I honestly don't understand what the problem is here. Companies institute this sort of copy protection all of the time. We (a company of one) have: -World Construction Set - comes with a dongle (costs about $650) -LightWave - comes with a dongle and you need a registration number (costs about $2000) -Mimic - Poser plugin that requires the CD in the drive EVERY time you run it (cost about $180?) -Onyx Tree Pro - comes with a dongle and you need a registration number (costs about $500) -RPC Lightwave plugin - you need a registration number and it will only work with THAT machine (cost about $200) -assorted Lightwave plugins - many are attached to the LW dongle and are VERY difficult to switch to another dongle should the original one fail(check out Dynamic-Realities) -Poser 4 & ProPack (cost about $220 & $150) The dongle breaks - it can take a LONG time to get the replacement. The registration number can also be a pain to get as well. These programs listed above are EXPENSIVE. Poser 4 and the ProPack are quite a bit less - but for what they were designed to do they do it VERY well. It's not easy to create human models. I work mainly in Lightwave and it's great to go into Poser and modify characters and bring them into Lightwave - and now with the ProPack, integration is significantly easier. Now imagine you are one of the 25 employees at Curious Labs and you feel that unless you deter (somehow) piracy or even slow it down - you won't be around to implement the next version of Poser or the Pro Pack? I think I would want to implement some sort of copy protection - something that wouldn't double the price of the software. I doubt that there is really anyone out there if faced with this situation who would say NO to copy protection. Concerning the problems that many here may have about "not really owning the software since CL has the key" - it's the same with alot of high-end software. And if CL does end up going out of business, Steve Yatson of CL has already said: "I have already stated elsewhere on this forum, and we will publicly state on our Web Site that if something happens to CL we will post a free updater to eliminate the copy protection." Steve Yatson, Product Manager, Curious Labs. The e-mailing for a registration number is a minor irritation - one that many companies have instituted for a VERY LONG TIME; once again, my humble opinion. We can all continue we these sort of threads but the fact remains that every software manufacturer has to deal with piracy one way or another. The protection that Curious Labs has decided on (IMHO) is not "over-the-top" or uncalled for - they feel that they need to do something. It's just what they've decided to do. Would I prefer no copy protection? YES! Will I stop buying their product BECAUSE of the copy protection? NO! Every one will have to decide on their own what they intend to do. I'm used to this sort of annoyance with other software - it's because of the world we live in. Why should Curious Labs be any different? Until the human race becomes completely trustworthy and honest it probably won't change. Now anyone have any idea when that will happen?

One thing, Crocs have thinner snouts (side to side) than Alligators...

Actually, I'd like to see Anthony's lawnmower... but if you need one quickly, check out 3D cafe. I think that's where I picked up one or two. And if you read this Anthony, don't let us stop you. A really detailed gas lawnmower would be great!

Attached Link: http://www.techtv.com/products/hardware/story/0,23008,3307115,00.html

I have a PII with 96mb of RAM; an Athlon 750 with 768mb of RAM and an Duron 600 with 512mb of RAM. Both Athlon and Duron machines have NEVER crashed when I'm in the middle (or end) on renderings. As far as I'm concerned, the Athlon is the better choice simply because it's less expensive. For me there are no stability issues at all. At our office we had a P3 733 with 256mb of RAM and an Athlon 750 with 256mb of RAM - both rendered the same Lightwave scene which took about an hour on the P3; 49 minutes on the Athlon. No crashes on either machine. Regarding the P4 - the price/performance is downright pathetic. In ZD test the P4 performed faster than the P3 - but not enough as expected. The P4 1.4ghz performed only slightly better than an Athlon 1.2ghz. That should tell you something! I agree with PJF - don't waste your money on the P4. For a more up-to-date look, check out the link.

Check out this site by Scott Ayers: http://skyscraper.fortunecity.com/tyrell/769/index.html The actual model is on sale at the Renderosity Store - I think.

Hi Lady Cherry! I completely understand why you feel the way you do. Basically, what you said in the "Attached Link: Awful comment not needed!!" is totally correct. Niti is apparently a rather young child who has not been taught respect. He/she probably shouldn't even been looking at your image since it's labeled nudity - not for children! Be that as it may, he/she did not use any profanity and while he/she did not offer any "constructive" criticism I don't think that banning would be helpful. Not being one of the forum moderators Jeff H. or Scott A., I of course could not speak for them, but I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion. Hopefully in time this person will realize the immaturity he/she is revealing and will cease this sort of nasty ranting in the (near?) future. If you don't have anything nice to say Niti, don't say anything. Critiquing art and listing what "you feel" would improve it can be done in a non-vicious manner and ultimately be very constructive for the artist - whether or not you like the piece of art. That aside, I personally find you image well done. The skin texturing is very good (in my opinion), the wings are excellent and I especially like the nails! Good luck and best wishes!

Hi Techyman! I read your postings in the LW section and obviously here. I have LW 6.5 as well as Poser and the Pro Pack. They're a great combination. I haven't done anything extensive yet at all but from what I've been able to do, everything transfers over smoothly and animations work well within LW. I also have Mimic and along with a short walk cycle from Poser, everything worked in LW - the lipsynching and the walking. I believe that you will probably have to tweak your characters a bit listening to what others have said in this forum but nothing too involved. I definitely recommend LW 6.5 AND Poser along with the Pro Pack - and Mimic too! Good luck!

Thanks Gail - and everyone else! I think we're going to buy Vue3 and give it a try. Fortunately it's not nearly as pricey as World Builder or World Construction Set so we can (somewhat) afford to buy and really test it. I (and we) really do appreciate the responses. It's good to know alot of people "out there" work with this program and are open to giving advice and help. Thanks!!!

My THANKS(!) to everyone for responding. One of the guys I work with (and is also interested in buying Vue3) was testing a few different methods and found out that by simply subdividing the pologons in Lightwave before importing them into Vue 3 solves the problem. The initial problem must lie with how Lightwave creates polygons. I do have one more question. When importing several different objects separately that make up a whole (such as a house; door, roof, walls, etc.) Vue3 won't place them as they were situated in Lightwave - I think it puts them at a center point. Aside from moving them around in Vue3 or making one large object in LW, can anyone think of a workaround? Thanks Again!!!