I don't think labelling and pigeonholing people into categories and using somewhat disparaging language to describe them is at all the way towards healing a divided community. All it does is demonstrate disdain for the people so labelled. And THAT is divisive.

Edit: Most of the people who may seem to belong to a particular "tribe" actually don't. Razor labelled me as a "DAZ hater" the same month that I spent over $2500 at Daz3d.

If you want to heal the community, you have to get to know people for who they are, not for who you think they are based on one or two posts.

Well, I don't think you should lock threads, particularly the most active. If a thread is very active, it's clear that "there is nothing left to discuss" isn't true, or else the thread would die all on its own.

This is how you kill a forum. Lock the threads that people are most interested in! I mean, seriously. You can't coerce, persuade, or cajole people into actively posting in threads that don't interest them. If nothing else, surely you've noticed that by now.

Instead, if you have a problem with specific posts in a thread -- say so. Not a general, "everyone please be polite" post, because that really doesn't help anyone. It's like critiquing a picture by saying, "Well, some of the pictures posted in the gallery could be better." If you want to be helpful, you MUST be SPECIFIC. And if a post violates the TOS, don't punish everyone in a thread by locking the thread. Delete the violating post and inform the user why it is a violation of the TOS. (Even Daz does that.) Otherwise, locking a thread is like closing a subgallery just because a few naughty images were posted there.

And if there are no violations of the TOS, then there is no reason to lock an ACTIVE thread, is there?

I mean, you may not like what's being said in the thread, or may not find it interesting. But it's not the users' job to entertain the mods with exciting forum posts. What matters is what the USERS want to read and respond to.

If I come here to respond to a thread and I find it locked, guess what? I'm not going to make a brand new super nice and positive topic. I'm going to go away.

And I am not picking on you: This problem has been plaguing the forums for years, and got particularly bad in the last few years in the Poser forum. And you wonder why the forums are so quiet compared to before? The answer is that as long as threads get locked -- some times at the first sign of discomfort -- one person, not even a mod, but a user, can silence EVERYONE ELSE.

Just a suggestion.

LPR001 posted at 9:07PM Sat, 27 February 2016 - #4257552

**Links to known, safe, established websites are not being banned. If you want to link to a tutorial on YouTube, Vimeo or Lynda.com, info/install guides pages on Smith Micro or DAZ, and links of that nature are accepted. ** If you have a blog and want to share your tutorial then pick the link up from the host ie YouTube etc and that would be fine. Since the majority of videos are hosted by the majors and streamed to your blog I don't think anything has changed with the tutorials as far as being made available.

I don't think Renderosity ever intended to have a rule where anyone was expected to miss out on the valuable resource of learning their craft.

3DFineries posted at 9:08PM Sat, 27 February 2016 - #4257520

It is all off-site linking to competitive sites. Not just in the free section but also in signatures & posts, so if you have a link your signature expect a message as soon as we can get to it. Additionally, offsite linking to other marketplaces or freestuff sites are not allowed within the forum, gallery, or forum signatures. For example: Links to competing stores like Daz3d.com, RuntimeDNA.com, etc are not allowed. However, links to non-competing stores like Etsy.com or Ebay.com are acceptable.

And please don't shoot the messengers. We're just doing our jobs by following the rules. Please & thank you.

I don't want to shoot the messengers. But I do wish you would talk to each other, decide what the rules actually, really, truly, finally ARE, and then let us know. As long as, you're contradicting each other -- in the same thread, even -- how are we supposed to have any idea what's going on?

There's nothing worse than having one mod say, "Yes, that's fine," and then have another turn around and delete something and then give you a warning as well, as though you're some kind of reprobate who refuses to abide by the TOS.

Anyway, I am not going to post help to newbie users if I am going to be hamstrung. If I can't link to tutorials -- no matter where they are --, if I can't link to freebie scripts and other products that help to solve a problem or are necessary to perform some function, then I'm not going to post any help because it's just not worth it doing dances around a TOS that is against everything the World Wide Web stands for.

Linking is the FOUNDATION of the web. It's what makes the internet the super connected source of information and sharing that it is today.

To be sure, a marketplace's Google rank is, in fact, still largely determined by the number and quality of its links. But any site that limits the outgoing links, in a misguided effort to prevent the loss of sales, is going to lose far more than it gains.

If I link to a tutorial on Daz in a forum post that helps a newbie, the newbie will watch or read the tutorial -- and they MAY decide to browse the Daz marketplace. Or they may bookmark the tute, close that tab, and return to Rendo's forums to thank the person who made the link.

If I can't link to that tutorial, but must, instead, give directions about how to search for it, that newbie will almost certainly end up on Daz's marketplace while they are looking for the tutorial -- and they are far more likely to get distracted and stay there.

Moreover, for every outgoing link to a freebie maker's site that Renderosity loses, it will also lose a quality incoming link. What is a quality link? It's a link to a site with a closely related topic or within the same industry.

Sure, links to Etsy and Ebay and so on are permitted, but Google has told us themselves that links both to and from sites which are unrelated to the topic or industry of the site in question are not considered "quality links". They are, in fact, more likely to drop your ranking because Google perceives lots of unrelated linking as being link farming. So, yeah, ban the quality links, encourage the low quality ones. See what happens.

I used to make a living doing search engine optimization. I've seen sites buried by Google and for no other reason than that they tried to create a walled garden. Walled gardens are okay if you're Apple or Facebook. But if you have fewer than several hundred million users, setting one up is like cutting your throat. Google is deeply committed to the FOUNDATION of the world wide web -- that is, the LINK: they made and continue to make their living from it. And any not-enormous site that tries to go against the philosophy of free information flow through the technology of the LINK is going to be hurt by Google.

My $20's worth. Take it or leave it.

adh3d posted at 2:34PM Wed, 24 February 2016 - #4257161

** Where will they put them, then?** The answer is here , for example.

I really, really hope not. How can you provide customer support or help users if you can't link to offsite sources like freebies that help solve a problem or tutorials hosted by another site? The TOS here makes this place uniquely unqualified to serve as a customer support site for complicated software.

EldritchCellar posted at 2:16PM Wed, 24 February 2016 - #4257227

I think they were probably just pinging this thread so that it would stay alive so that people can see how much of a meanie eldritchcellar is (of which I care not a whit). I also think that glmmrmaid is simply an alt of some forum member that has similar reasons for resurrecting this frankly pointless regurgitation of the same old crap thread. No reason to be paranoid moriador! :D

Well, tbh, I'm sick of these "everyone be nice" posts by mods. If a mod has a problem with a particular post, they need to say so if they want to be taken seriously. :D I always assume that, in the absence of a specific target, that the post is directed at EVERYONE, but especially the post right above it. LOL.

3DFineries posted at 2:13PM Wed, 24 February 2016 - #4257068

Please be polite folks & be mindful of others. Thank you.

Where exactly am I being impolite? It would be much more helpful to know exactly what you're objecting to than to read a broad statement directed at every participant in the entire thread. We can't change our behavior if you won't tell us exactly what we're doing wrong.

As your post comes directly after mine, I have no choice but to assume you're talking to me, but don't quite have the whatever it is you need to say so directly.

Boni posted at 2:05PM Wed, 24 February 2016 - #4257105

Thank you 3dFineries. I was just about to add the same comment. This is a helpful thread and we need to share this information.

I'm sorry, when I said, "It's silly to limit the tools you use and then complain about what you can't do without them," was that being unhelpful or too harsh or personally insulting? Because if we have to sugar coat everything, that won't be very helpful either.

If you're curious why this addon ever got created, I believe it started with Cliff Bowman's Genesis exporter (from the days before the DSON importer). The problem at the time was that Poser did not have subdivision yet, so the Genesis figures -- while they worked as native Poser figures and the clothes kinda autofit when you used Cliff's script -- did not look very good in Poser. Snarly wrote the subdivision addon -- I think -- as a way to bring subd into Poser for the purpose of rendering lo poly figures, which is why it has the option to have the subdivided prop delete itself when the render is finished.

Actually, I don't know about editing obj files. But doing so wouldn't enable me to spawn a prop from a posed figure, in any case, would it?.

The way Snarly's subd script works is that you select an asset (figure or prop) and then choose the level of subdivision. Then you check whether you want to maintain hard edges or not, and whether or not you want to delete the created prop after render. When you press the subd button, the selected asset is subdivided and converted into a static prop, and then made invisible, so that the new prop appears in place of the old prop or figure. If it's a figure, the created prop contains all the groups in a single obj (unlike spawning props with the grouping tool). And if there are any props parented to the figure, you have the choice to have those included in the new subdivided prop. All materials and shaders are preserved (except I think, unless there's a new version, that it may wreck Superfly specific shaders).

Since it only takes a couple of clicks and it doesn't muck up Firefly materials, it's much faster than exporting as an obj and then importing again. Moreover, there's an undo feature. so if you do something like decide you don't want to include parented props or change the subd level, you can undo and redo.

I use it to create static props of posed Genesis figures and sometimes their clothing so that I can load dozens of them into a single render. I also use it to increase the resolution of dynamic clothing -- after the sim -- to make the folds nice and smooth without increasing the simulation time. But I think you can see how you don't always want to subdivide everything when you use it to convert to a prop. So it would be very nice to be able to choose a subdivision level of 0. Unfortunately, the lowest level is 1.

Edit: I forgot to add, like all of Snarly's miracle scripts, it also brews a perfect cup of tea, predicts the local weather with a high degree of accuracy, translates documents into Brythonic Celtic, and if you check the box by the heart icon, it prints a flattering compliment on your screen to improve your self-esteem.

Way, way better than export/import and text editing the obj.

Edit2: In a pinch, I have used it to spawn props that I don't want subdivided and then used Game Dev's poly reduction on the subdivided prop. It works, but isn't quite as optimal as -- maybe -- it could be, if only Snarly had known how incredibly useful his addon to Poser actually would be.

Boni posted at 10:38PM Tue, 23 February 2016 - #4257010

There is a lot intense opinion involvement ... please ... let let this go and return to helping our members. There is little we can do to avoid conflict if we continue.

A major Poser content marketplace is closing down, and we're not even allowed to talk about it?

Official Poser forums need to be completely divorced from the brokerages (and probably run by Smith Micro), else we risk being unable to discuss topics of utmost interest to us, as Poser users, as is clear, in this very thread.

EldritchCellar posted at 1:36PM Tue, 23 February 2016 - #4256680

Moriador said

"It worked, but not perfectly. A couple of roofs had some bad polys, which I fixed by spawning a prop of just the roof and then subdividing it... But aside from a couple of very minor errors with some polys and the total loss of all shaders, Stonemason's props seem to import into Poser quite well."

Just a little heads up about this workflow recommendation, it may or may not be relevant depending on the particular model. Stonemason made this following statement to me about general use of his models in Poser in relation to his modeling techniques...

"...but for the past 7 years or so I was using smooth groups in the obj(that's the one thing Poser had over DS that affected my workflow,the ability to read smooth groups), I rarely add control loops,and to that end subdividing one of my models in poser would just make it a mess."

Might be a useful bit of inside information from the technical standpoint. Posted originally here...

https://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/?thread_id=2892221&page_number=25#msg4237595

You are quite right! Subdividing in Poser makes a complete mess of just about any prop, which is why I used Snarlygribbly's subdivision script to subdivide (you can choose to maintain edges or not, and it's also great for subdividing entire figures plus conformers and parented things and welding them into a single prop in one quick step. I kinda wish there was an option to do this without actually even subdividing.) I thought I mentioned that, but apparently... oops....I forgot. I did note that I also only subdivided the roof, after I had spawned a separate prop for it using the grouping tool.

Everyone told me to use the morph brush to fix issues, too, and I resisted because it was messy and useless. LOL.

But I persisted. I started by dialing down the strength and area of the brush before using it, and then gradually dialing it up again. Once you get used to the fact that you need to adjust the settings on the brush for each part of each mesh, depending on what you plan to do, it becomes a lot easier. I then spent a lot of time experimenting with all the different options just to see what they did. Now I can fix just about anything on a character's body. Faces are still a big challenge for me, especially low res faces. But I no longer have to worry about crappy bends in still images.

Given all the other stuff you can do with the morph brush, you're seriously limiting yourself by not learning how to use it. Like an artist who refuses to buy a particular pigment of paint or type of brush, it's silly to limit your tools and then complain about what you can't do without them.

It's not nearly as difficult as rigging a whole character. It just takes a bit of practice. (and ctrl-z is your best friend).

Glen posted at 1:04PM Tue, 23 February 2016 - #4256699

Thanks folks, but I don't have DS and don't know how to use it at all. I'm totally lost with that. I just wish things weren't made exclusively for one or the other like this, there's nothing else I've found that comes close to replicating a typical British railway scene. Oh well, time to move on, I guess. :(

I wasn't born knowing how to use DS either. I had to learn how to export things. Learning how to make great renders in DS would probably take years. Learning how to export props takes about an hour or two of experimenting, at most. Then, once you can do it, you quadruple the number of items available to you to render. Me, I think it's a worthwhile trade.

Just think, if you'd given up on doing everything you didn't already know how to do, you'd still be in a crib, unable to walk or talk. That's no way to live when you have the option to try other things.

You could try using Dimension3d's DSON loader script, that we're no longer allowed to link to. There's nothing tricky with this script: you put it into your main Poser runtime (that is inside the directory where the Poser executable is), and then you use it by clicking Scripts menu in Poser and choosing the DSON loader from the drop down. If you copy the script to the runtime while Poser is running, you need to restart Poser before trying to use the script, or it won't show up in the drop down menu.

You could export out of DS itself in FBX or collada or obj form, and then import into Poser.

If all of those options seem too complicated, then I'd suggest the easiest solution of all: using DS for those scenes that use DS assets that haven't been converted for Poser.

The DSON core installer is used by Daz Studio. All files for DS4 and up with have a DSON core installer. Unless the product mentions Poser Companion files or Poser Core Installer, then it won't open in Poser without the use of D3D's DSON loader (or making your own PCF's) -- exactly as hborre says.

I don't have the Mars Habitat, but I did buy Streets of London. I didn't use the DSON loader to get it into Poser because I wanted native Poser props. Instead, I exported the entire scene from DS (as FBX) and then imported into Poser. This way, all the props were correctly sized and in the right places, and all the textures were properly attached..

It worked, but not perfectly. A couple of roofs had some bad polys, which I fixed by spawning a prop of just the roof and then subdividing it. And, of course, none of the shaders survived. However, I very much wanted the props, and I'm totally happy with my purchase and with the conversion into Poser.

Whether it will work with other products, or will work as well as you need it to, I can't say. But aside from a couple of very minor errors with some polys and the total loss of all shaders, Stonemason's props seem to import into Poser quite well. Rigged figures, however, may not. Your mileage may vary. If you don't have a tolerance for some errors, or are not willing to fix them yourself, I wouldn't recommend this method.

I didn't even try using D3D's script.... Hmmm. Perhaps it would have been better to use it to get the props into Poser, and then spawn props from within Poser, in order to get PP2's.