The Sony Bono extension of the copyright period was very recently upheld by the Supreme Court.

One free modeling app is anim8or (anim8or.com), which I've never used, but which some here seem to like a lot. Eovia.com also offeres an earlier version of their amapi modeler through various sites, such as bakhter.com. There are tutorials on these apps on the web...you could click on the tutorial link at the top of this page, then to offsite links, then click modelling to find a few of them. There's also an amapi forum here at R'osity, and I'm pretty sure folks there create tutorials. There may be other free modelers, but none leap to mind at 1:20 a.m...well, there was Blender, but i think it's gone the way of the dinosaur;-)

Hey, now that I've gone there myself, I had a problem downloading Tenten J for the Mil PT. If you have a problem also, here's how you do it: (1) go to the D/L page at Poser++; (2) click on the picture of Tenten (not Tenten J); (3) when the pop-up window appears, the URL in your regular browser window will end in ...tenten.html; (4) edit that URL to end with ...tentenj.html; (5) download.

Attached Link: http://www.eurus.dti.ne.jp/~masasi/

Poser++...follow pigfish's directions when you get there.

ockham posted while I was writing. I must say I haven't run into too many figures or utilities that require Pro Pack...but again, this may be due to differences in what ockham and I do with Poser.

It depends on your intended usage. I don't own Pro Pack myself, so I'm going from memory as to its features. If you don't plan to use other programs, that would be one reason to not buy Pro Pack, as one of its big features is the ability to host Poser scenes in other, more expensive programs, such as Lightwave. Pro Pack offers motion blur to create more realistic animations...but if you plan on using Poser for still pictures or more cartoony animation, maybe that's not a big selling point. Are you thinking about using some of the free 3D modeling programs to create your own special Poser characters? If so, it's easier to set them up with Pro Pack. Pro Pack allows mutiple views of a scene on screen, which is another animation friendly feature. Pro Pack also allows you to export your output to web-friendly formats like Flash. Match these sorts of considerations against what you want to do with Poser, and it may help you decide whether you want or need Pro Pack.

Attached Link: http://www.daz3d.com/pages/faq/faq.html

If you take a look at the DAZ license agreement, particularly the introductory paragraphs and definitions, and paragraph 4, I believe you will conclude that the rules are generally those described by the others in this thread. The intro specifically states that it's okay to make images based on DAZ products. Paragraph 4 states the rule about not distributing things from which the DAZ product could be reverse engineeered. And DAZ *does* prohibit selling textures based in any amount on their maps. What you have described generally seems well within your rights under the license, but if you have any doubt, run it past DAZ,; I don't think they'll have a problem with it.

Usually, not a month goes by in this forum without a post by someone who wants to proclaim (for reasons unknown) that pictures made with Poser aren't "art." Or from someone who uses a high-end 3D app proclaiming that Poser is a "toy." I have long made the analogy to photography, largely because it is the metaphor used by most 3D apps. And while Poser is much cheaper than 3DMAX or Maya, it is much more expensive than a pencil and a number of cameras. Moreover, while there are people here with arts and graphics backgrounds, I would not be shocked to discover that some segment of people who work in these fields will reflexively put down work by non-professionals and may even feel threatened by the power that technology puts in the hands of everyone. I'm not saying this is true of the person you showed your work to; I don't know. I do know that in my chosen profession (the law) is largely set up to discourage competition, to the point where some state bars were sued for violating antitrust laws. Go to your gallery, take a look at what others have said about your most recent pictures. It's pretty clear to me that people got what you were going for. Of course, I could argue that you need please no one but yourself, but to the extent that you have been posting pictures to communicate, you are succeeding. Of course, many of us here have plenty of room to improve (I sure do), but that can be part of the reason to keep going.

Actually, the TOS provides that: "Members/Users will not use this community for; Any practices that affect the normal operations of the community..." Moreover, the terms of the Gallery state that: "The Gallery provides members a place to post their original Computer Generated art." (Emphasis mine) Spam-posting the work of others in the Gallery is contrary to the terms of the Gallery and affects the normal operations of the community by needlessly increasing the bandwidth demands on R'osity's servers (imposing a cost on the owners) and by making it more difficult to navigate to original images in the Gallery. Furthermore, some members and users may choose to bail on the Gallery for a while, rather than wade through multiple postings...which hurts all artists posting to the Gallery. In addition, if the issue is not resolved, it would seem to be an open invitation for others to do the same, thereby multiplying these problems. Given the alternatives posted above, it would be my hope that the admins would contact those involved to resolve this issue informally.

XP has also been better for me. In fact, in situations where I would have had to crtl+alt+del out of P4 under Win98 (e.g., doing a full morph injection on V3), I can crtl+alt+del and watch the CPU usage in the task manager for a bit to see whether P4 is releasing resources, then jump back into P4 when CPU usage backs off from 100%.

IMHO, these are much improved in terms of camera angle and lighting...more dramatic, without being overly so. The light coming through the window now projects Vicky's shadow onto the back wall reinforcing her isolation (though I would think the same light would cause a small shadow to be cast by the picture frame also). The new placement of the couch is a bit odd from a realism perspective, though I am assuming this was done to help achieve the light and shadow that I do like. Also, from this angle we now see a bit more of the floor, and the flat black seems unusual. But those things are minor nits in comparison to the improvement these renders represent. Finally, this may be solely my personal taste, or it may be that you have yet to focus on this aspect, but the expressions on the models' faces are very understated, particularly Victor's. When I look at these renders, I'm not sure whether he's sad, mad, or reflective. I mention this because I know your portrait work is very expressive (again, without overdoing it). Again, these things may just be me, but maybe some will provide a spark for you.

I agree with what's been written about camera angle and lighting, etc....but I would add that you should think about them holistically. Think about the mood you're trying to create, then try to match these elements to the mood or style. For example, once you know the mood, you could start with a camera angle that helps convey it. Once you have the angle, you'll have a better idea of which lighting enhances the mood from that angle, and so on. The lighting coming in through the window is a nice touch in this render, but you'll have to judge whether it works from a different angle. Plus, you may think about where the other light is coming from. Usually, interior incandescent lighting tends to give things a slightly yellow tinge, if you're striving for realism. If you're going more for something evocative or dramatic, perhaps a tint that matches the mood...a chilly blue, a sickly green, an angry red or orange... Once you have those things worked out, you'll have a better idea about whether you need to adjust bumps, textures, or colors. In the context of this render, with this angle and lighting, the problem with the red couch may be that it is sort of a standard red that really sticks out in relation to the other colors and textures in the scene. You could try either darkening the color to match a darker mood, or lightening it to compliment the pink in the woman's shirt. Hope some of that's helpful...still digging your latest gallery piece;-)

Fabulous! Add my thanks to those of rockets. Marking my calendar;-)

You haven't heard of Hi-heel sneakers?

I wouldn't claim to be an artist, but I would claim to be a lawyer (within my jurisdiction, of course). As far as U.S. copyright law is concerned, a modification of an original mesh, no matter how extensive, would still be a derivative work and thus infringe on the copyright of the creator. Of course, as a practical matter, it could be possible to so drastically alter a mesh that the creator might never suspect, let alone be able to prove the infringement. To give an extreme example, if someone took the P4 nude woman and modified her into a coffee table, deleting thousands of vertices in the process. Moreover, in such an extreme case, despite the myth of percentages, there is a "de minimus" rule that might be invoked as a defense. But the post above giving the hands example is correct; the hands were spotted right away. A complex mesh like a human figure is likely to have a number of unique points and relationships, including flaws in design, that are likely to be spotted in a similar derivative work.