As for our angle on nudity, it's really simple.

Yes, it really is.   That was largely my point.   Enforcing the TOS should not involve interpretation of the TOS on the part of moderators.   They should mean exactly the same thing to everybody here.   Plainly, however, a handful of moderators are applying idiosyncratic interpretations of the TOS.    Members are having to be extra-cautious in the use of tags, to avoid being unjustly penalised for supposedly demonstrating untagged nudity or violence, only to find that other moderators have seen fit to become ultra-pedantic in their application of the TOS, telling the same members off for using the tags too freely.  

Self-evidently, the problem here lies with the moderators and with no-one else.  

Some moderators are ridiculously zealous when it comes to applying the "nudity" tag.   Their subjective interpretation of nudity, on occasion, bears no relation to any dictionary definition of the word, but the warning e-mail from Renderosity is fired off on their say-so, complete with the implicit threat of expulsion from the site in the event of repeated "violations".   Where the original "violation" is entirely in the mind of the moderator, it's pretty predictable that anyone who doesn't want a repeat e-mail is going to err on the side of caution and is going to apply the "nudity" tag, even where it is not necessary.   Now we find that those posting images can also be hounded for applying the tags too widely.   The argument is that applying "nudity" tags to pictures which contain no nudity debases the meaning of the tags.   Plainly, that is nonsense.   Anyone who is already deterred by the tag will continue to be so, albeit sometimes unnecessarily.   Unless they defy the tag's warning, how will they know that it doesn't really apply?   Those who have not been deterred by the tag before will not be deterred by the tag now and may, as someone else implied, be disappointed to find no nudity, but I fail to see that that is going to deter them from clicking on other tagged images in future.    If those who should not, or have no wish to, view restricted images are deterred, I fail to see a problem, from Renderosity's angle.   If the owner of the image is prepared to sacrifice a proportion of his/her visitors, that's his/her choice.   The real solution to the problem is in Renderosity's hands and it comes down to the question of enforcing nudity rules and violence rules consistently and genuinely in accordance with the TOS, which is not happening now.

I've had that with URLs in the forum and I still don't know why it happens.   I carefully copy the intended URL, but all the important bits get stripped out, when I come to paste it.

KFG, that's a very nice render, indeed.   I have generally tended to think of IBL, up to now, as something for an "outdoor" render and, if intending to do an outdoor render, I have tended to do it in Vue.

I have never understood the point of that step in the DAZ installation, where it prompts for the application, because the next step asks for the actual installation path required, anyway.   The application prompt doesn't appear to change anything, from the Poser point of view (and, if the only option available is "Poser(All files)", how can it, since the poser.exe may be in a whole range of different directories, even before the matter of the drive letter is considered?).   No installation path gets automatically located as a result of the application selection.    I long ago gave up allowing the DAZ installer to search for a poser.exe;  life just isn't long enough (and how come it always found Poser 2 - the first Poser I ever had was 4?).

If a scene is obviously set outdoors (and I'm assuming a planet with a basic minimum of one sun, here) and there are eight different light sources, that would be too much lighting.    Also, though, a professional portrait photographer, in my admittedly very limited experience (people don't ask to take my photo all that often), makes do with a lot fewer lights than some Poser lighting sets that I have seen.  

It is possible to kill the "realistic" effect by having too many light sources.

I think Bill Gates used to compare the automobile industry unfavourably with Microsoft.   It was something to the effect that, if the development of cars had kept pace with that of computers, cars would travel at umpteen thousand miles an hour and would go a zillion times around the globe on a single gallon.    Somebody added, "Yep - and they'd crash five times a day, too."

Now, you don't see those every day.

Shortly after my last post, I found Windows offering to format my most recent external hard-drive, because it had stopped recognising it.   I suppose I should be grateful that it gave me the option to decline...

There is only one safe way to store digital media and that is to copy the binary by hand on to vellum and then to store it in an old monastery.

Never mind how long it will take to fill up.   Your real problem is that any hard drive may die at any moment.    You need a back-up and a back-up of the back-up and...

WWW.PHILC.NET.   See under Catalog ===> Uniforms.

And here I was, thinking that this was the Poser forum.

*My Poser 7 programme shuts down when it is set to OpenGL in the render preview settings. I'm using the latest driver for my Nividia 880GTX graphics card which I've downloaded from the site. It works fine when I alter the setting to SreeD but that makes it heavy to work with. I can't think of any explanation. Can anyone?

Using the latest Nvidia driver won't necessarily help matters with OpenGL problems (although it may be vital for some other application).   I have known one driver update to resolve problems between OpenGL and an Nvidia card, only for the next driver update to re-introduce the problem.  My current computer, however, doesn't have an Nvidia card, so I'm afraid I can't comment on specific drivers. 

Poser Pro comes with the Poser 6 and Poser 7 content, so the adult female figures included are the ugly Jessi from Poser 6 and the much better Sydney from Poser 7.   V3 and V4 are compatible with Poser, but not part of it.   They are available form www.daz3d.com.

There is a fair amount of stuff out there for Sydney, often sold as "G2 female".   Content Paradise may be a better place than Renderosity to look for material for Sydney.

As well as the suggestions already made, have a look at samildanach's vendor page (those underscores really are in the name):

www.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/index.php?vendor=42236

Browse down to "Android Blues 2" (for V3) and "SkyTemple".  

Possibly not exactly the genre you're looking for, but very good sci-fi models are available from coflek-gnorg's store, too:

www.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/index.php?vendor=206662

Bazze's cars (link above) are free downloads, for non-commercial use only.   Like all his models, they are excellent.

Otherwise, there are some fine car models available from www.vanishingpoint.biz (also at CP) and from DAZ3D (search on "Dreamscape Creations").

They do tend to be either classic, or exotic (or both), though, rather than familiar, everyday types.   I suppose that that's because creating a model of a Toyota hatchback takes just as much effort as producing a model Ferrari F40, but, in 3D-Land, it's the Toyota that is the niche product.