Then why does the name of the figure, which I've highlighted with the green box, say Michael 5?

If it's not Michael 5, then you would have had to rename the figure, and if that is the case, you should have mentioned it.

You didn't set the Diffuse to 0 though, that's why it isn't working.

Quote - Most of us would probably USE Genesis if it wasn't for Smith-Micro trying to "do their own thing" and not conform to the popularity that is DAZ3D models.

NO, no, no.

Smith-Micro realized that it would be foolish decision to tie their product to whatever parts of DAZ Studio that Genesis requires. Doing such a thing would leave them always two steps behind DAZ in introducing new features, and possibly limit their ability to innovate in different areas.

And with DAZ's ability to release a major update to D|S whenever they feel like it, Smith-Micro would either have to follow that with their own (not insignificant, and probably money-requiring) update, or hold off until their next planned Poser version. I don't see Poser users being fond of either option. And either way, Poser would always be lagging behind D|S in implementing features.

DAZ Studio exists because DAZ3D didn't want to tie their fortunes to the fate of Poser, which was rather questionable at the time. Asking Smith-Micro to incorporate the features into Poser necessary for Genesis would be essentially the same thing in reverse.

So why was it acceptable for DAZ3D to be independent of Poser's future but not for Poser to be independent of DAZ Studio's?

Quote - I enjoyed Poser but I can't ignore that the development team is now ruining it for all of us that would rather use it.

As someone who's been using Poser for only about 10 years(longer than some, not as long as others), I think the Poser dev team is doing an wonderful job in improving and expanding on Poser's functionality. I love Poser Pro 2014, and wouldn't consider going back to say, Poser 5.

Quote - Come on, stop caring about what others will think, we are in the forum with people who know more Poser in the world and only a couple of short answers, it seems they are more concerned about the "what will they say" than in being members of a free community looking forward to to share knowledge

it is as if someone asked me how put bold text in word, and instead of telling "select text and touch the B" I answered "I can not answer you because IF  your office is not legal you can not do it" , Just relax a little and enjoy the ride

To me, this kind of comment completely unnecessary. You asked how to do a specific thing, and people responded that it's not legal.

And we do have to care about what others think, because Renderosity cares what others think, and polices their forums. For example, posting links to warez sites, or suggesting someone use one will likely result in a banning, because it promotes illegal activity. And if Renderosity didn't work to prevent it, they would be seen as allowing it, and would not only lose vendors, but the US Government would likely shut them down.

People advised you that sending the mesh isn't legal because they don't want you do get yourself into trouble. Not for any other reason, so don't get pissy.

Now, as to your question, you could take the initiative yourself and do some searching, not only here, but also through Google, for "Creating morphs in Poser" to find what you're looking for instead.

It'd be a whole lot faster than waiting for someone do do it for you.

And we seem to be experiencing the standard procedure for Renderosity when they change something:

Promise that any issues "Will be looked into"

Fix a few somewhat major problems in hopes it will mollify people

Ignore the larger issues until the furor dies down and people either leave or return to business as usual.

"The more things change, the more they stay the same."

Poser Pro 2014 has the ability to combine material nodes (so say, bagginsbill could put all the nodes that people shouldn't mess with unless they know what they're doing into a single "master node") which won't work in earlier versions of Poser, but that's it for non backwards compatibility.

One other detail is that Poser 10/Pro 2014 will render faster on a machine than Poser 9/Pro 2012 will, due to enhancements in IDL calculation and other render engine improvements.

Quote - As it is my choice I don't complain if some files are not in the place I want them.  Come to think of it I don't really complain if I don't like a product I just don't buy from that vendor again.  The only feedback I give is to credit the use of the product if I use it in a gallery render.

The only problem with that approach is that unless you let the vendor know why you won't purchase from them again, they'll not consider that maybe they should change.

Would you change a part of your personality that people didn't like, if no one told you they didn't like it?

As far as MAT .pz2 files, I seem to recall it being mentions (by bagginsbill I think) that .pz2 files also contain information for stuff relevant to poses; like animation info, rotation, and translation data. Data that is completely unnecessary for a MAT file.

Attached Link: IDL and You

The poll results could be updated at about the midway point between Poser releases.

Advertise the poll on the major Poser website front pages, and Smith Micro could send out an email mentioning it.

And like most polls, the point isn't get assume you've gotten everyone, but to know that you're only looking at a cross-section of the user base. Also, all it would be is an infographic, vendors are free to do what they want with the data, even ignore it if they so choose.

Quote - ...as the number of Poser users that read forums is a very small minority.

Do we have concrete info on that? Has Smith Micro released Poser sales data? Maybe the Poser community is smaller than people assume, or the number of Poser users that read the forums (any Poser forums) could be larger than expected. Remember that there are people who read but never post as well.

Quote - And in Poser 9/ Poser Pro 2012, Smith Micro made the materials library available without needing to go into the Material Room.

Actually, that was Poser 8/Pro 2010, though the point still stands.

You know, it might just be a good idea if someone could to a poll, that would have the greatest chance of catching the largets number of users, to find out which version of Poser a person uses the most. The results would have to be made publicly available to benefit vendors.

But it would let people know just which version of Poser has the largets number of users, and they could tailor their products to that version (with extra files to handle features that later versions have as well).

Conforming clothing rules for the same reasons that MAT Poses still exist: people are trying to make their products compatible with Poser 4 or are still making products with Poser 4.

Quote - We apologize for the delay but as we've always tried to do in the past, we will take into consideration all feedback and do what we can to make all happy!!

No offense to you  personally, but we've been told things like this with the other site changes, and little to none of the concerns or complaints were ever met with anything other than "this is how things are going to be from now on" or the absolute patronizing 'we know better' tripe of "give it a chance, we know you'll come to love it."

I am disinclined to think that any of the issues not related to actual bugs will be dealt with, at least not until the next site "upgrade" (really a downgrade since just about every one has resulted in fewer features) rolls along in a year or two.

The one you linked to can apparently be overclocked by the Intel Turbo Boost Technology to a much higher speed, which would be sufficient for Poser (I'm using a 3.4 ghz i7).

Last I heard, Poser doesn't use the graphics card for anything other than Preview mode. So really that card is overkill for Poser.

The rest of it looks good, though the CPU does seem a bit slow without using the Turbo Boost.

Quote - Roll back the marketplace to it's previous useable state, admit that the job has been bungled.

Read, digest and act upon the points raised in Feniers' excellent post (page two of this thread.)

Follow the Golden Rule: Do not, under any circumstances, upset your customers!  And quite frankly, these "Improvements" have upset quite a few

Unfortunately not going to happen.

Renderosity seems utterly incabable of even conceiving of the idea of admitting they messed up, and are even less likely to return to the previous version that worked well enough.

It seems that with each "upgrade" (that being a very subjective term...) this site loses functionality. How long before we can only view Renderosity instead of use it?