A total of 215 products snicker Erm, are there any free ones in there Clint? After all, the guy /was/ asking for "free" characters. grin

Oh now...I'm usually a very happy person. Not going there.... nope nope nope, not at all. I really don't think that would be a good thing. smirk if you stay gone to long everything changes Yeah, I sorta noticed that. Sometimes on a daily basis, and not always for the better. But that's another, seperate debate entirely. I'll leave you in peace to enjoy what's left of your day and go harrass someone else for a while. Have fun.

Heh, I doubt you're that happy Clint but thanks. :) Not so much back as I never really left, I just limit what I do and where I do it more these days. Probably much to everyone's relief. Still, I just can't avoid the Rhino forum, Xurge and Teyon are such great fun.

Woohoo. That worked. Thank you Clint. Now I know what caused it, I fixed it. :)

Flash banner on the side bar? Oh cool.. yeah, that might be it then. I'll re-edit my settings to reflect that. Thanks. No it's not because of security issues that I block them, I just can't stand things that flash, blink, shimmer or do much of anything. If I want animation I'll go to the movies. :) Also, on dial up this site is heavy enough to load without interminable banners that do nothing for me except clutter the page and give me a headache.

If it's the flash banners, how come it's only just started happening today? I've had those banners blocked since you guys introduced them and have never seen an error message, and I've even been posting here quite recently. Today I'm getting that on every single page.

I hope I'm right as well, it would be pretty damned nice. I don't do very much animation - almost none in fact, but I can see a wide variety of bonuses to being able to animate Daz content in other applications. I don't think we'll be seeing Daz content models rigged for other applications though. Allowing for how much work is involved in rigging a humanoid figure the cost of development or perhaps resale would be prohibitive for many. One can hope though. Alternatively if they can figure a way to translate existing rigs from either Poser or Studio to other applications that would be acceptable. Looking at the way Messiah integrates with Lightwave and the animation abilities of that program it would be rather cool to see Studio heading in that kind of direction. Until then I guess it'll just have to be done the hard way.

Allowing that Daz have relatively recently got into application creation and provision it's unsurprising that they've not looked before at this sort of issue. In the past Daz were purely a content provider and that was partly due to contractual obligations to Zygote when they broke away. For the first while of the Daz company's existence they weren't allowed to compete with their home company Zygote who are general 3D providers. Daz were "just" Poser content. Now that Daz have grown and I presume the limitations placed on them has expired we're seeing a bit more growth in other directions. It wouldn't surprise me overly to see a set of filters become available over the next 12-18 months for Daz content to be used in other apps. It's entirely possible that they'll tie those filters into Studio. This depends a great deal on costs to make compatible plugins/filters for other software. It's relatively certain that they will provide a Lightwave filter either similar to the Bryce one they just released or tied more integrally to Lightwave. 3DMax, Cinema 4D etc may follow later. This depends on a few things. The demand for a type of filter, availability of programming knowledge to create it, cost, licensing, whether any of the brokers who can program are going to work on one, ability of the Studio SDK to integrate with other software and probably a dozen things I haven't thought of. In all honesty this is something that should probably be brought up in the Daz forums, or emailed directly to the development team at Daz. They have/had a survey for 3D software that people use, I assume as an effort to see the kind of spread of demand that's likely to be needed for filters. Currently there are obvious limitations to what Daz can achieve as most of their stock is Poser oriented and doesn't use the extra features that will become available in/for Studio. There's no "simple" way to work with Daz models in any software really, but that depends on whether you mean just setting up and rendering or animation. Setting up models for other software will always be a pain because cameras and lights operate in as many different ways as there are 3D applications. This results in those things being non-transferable between apps. Similar problems arise with texture mapping. Max does things differently to Cinema, which is vastly different to Rhino as it is to Truespace and Lightwave. In that respect, setting up a model in Poser or Studio and then transferring it to another application creates unique and often troublesome problems in assigning materials correctly, changing highlights and specularity, interpreting reflection, bones and joint parameters etc. etc. I agree with you that it would be nice if it could be made easier to use Daz models in other applications - especially alteration of poses or animation. I personally find it annoying as heck to go through the routine of sucking a model into Cinema and then finding I have to alter the pose. The curious labs plugin is nightmarish as it constantly references files it shouldn't need to reference and there's no way to dynamically alter a model and have that update in the second screen. If Daz can find a way around that problem alone I'd be a very happy camper, but I don't see it happening soon. If Studio manages to consistently export objects with correct texture references and paths then things will start to become easier as fix/export/import is speeded up. But it sure would be nice to just dynamically work with one app and have it update across to the render app. Perhaps when they finally figure out neural processing and we can all jack into the computer things will be easier. :)

***"first, remove the pizza from the wrapper..." "but why?" *** Because "people" are inherently STUPID, fucked in the head and ignorant. Also because there is a compensation culture that is out of control in the US and infesting other countries faster than bubonic plague, driven by ambulance chasers with no regard for common sense. So, in an attempt to foreclose certain idiotic law suits, basic common sense instructions are placed with most items.

And just in case you mean the racial case brought by nine Chinese and African Americans for a "beating", that case was dismissed too.

http://www.asianam.org/updateon.htm

edited to add In 1994 Denny's restaurant chain paid out 54 million USD in racial related charges because they made black customers pay before they could eat. Again, irrelevant to this thread but...

Message edited on: 08/18/2004 23:38

the ALTERED VERSION would, in MOST CASES, become the property of the person who altered it. No it wouldn't and the law is quite clear on this. You are wrong. It's a simple matter to check it - against current international copyright laws even, let alone more localised laws - I suggest you do so. As for refusing service, I can't comment regarding US law, but in the UK you'd be wrong, very wrong. A company can refuse service to whomever it chooses to refuse it to - with or without a deep and involved explanation. The only cases where this can be a sticky point is in the case of race or gender. In the case of "Denny's" you might need to be more specific. The only cases I can find relate to accidents in a couple franchises and one which is a racial situation. In that case it is entirely irrelevant to this thread because Daz are not refusing service based on race. Denny's Race Discrimination Case http://racerelations.about.com/library/weekly/aa032700a.htm and http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/9/19/201745 But, as there is more than just the restaurant chain I'm extremely curious what you are on about. In the second link the case was dismissed.

Oops, sorry Cooler, cross posted. :)

if you alter something in any noticeable manner, regardless of who created it, the altered version automatically becomes yours, with which you can do whatever you want And it's deliberate misinformation like that which causes so much bloody trouble. There are a whole bunch of merchants in recent months who would disagree with that statement alone, before we even get to the point that it's WRONG. quoteOnly the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create a new version of that work. Accordingly, you cannot claim copyright to another's work, no matter how much you change it, unless you have the owner's consent.*** Want to check that? http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ14.pdf

That's sad news indeed and I'm extremely sorry to hear it, John was a great guy, one of the few honestly nice people around. My condolences to his family.

Lillian, that's fair enough regarding sending people links. But nobody sent me one. I posted a link into the Poser forum. Some people who clicked that link to download the files I was offering left that information in my logs. It is my understanding that you cannot post in the forums unless you are logged in, to log in you must accept cookies. The people who responded to the link to freestuff I posted had to have been logged in to reply, six of these left session id and key info in my server logs just by clicking the link I posted. Others I presume were lurkers who clicked by visiting the thread without posting to it. That link took them directly to a freestuff page on my server. I don't understand how that can happen by your explanation of how it works. By rights that info should not have shown up in my logs. The users didn't visit my site and leave that information there in a link, the server log got it - presumably from their browser. Perhaps you're missing what I mean by server log. This is an activity logging facility that tells me what browser visited and what sections of the site were visited. That's all the information it gathers. Browser type/name/version and pages visited. That's just plain weird, but if my server running a browser track log managed to suck that info in without even trying, what about those sites who deliberately harvest user info? I don't believe that forcing people to enable cookies on this site will cure what I've seen. It may, perhaps, possibly cure the IM/Forum link problem that many have experienced, but that won't stop the information being transmitted to other servers. Please understand. Nobody sent me a link, I did not send anyone a link. A remote site server picked the data up by people clicking an externally referenced link. For instance. I post a link here to my site. People click that link to see what's at the end. By simply clicking that link and visiting my site some of them are leaving the session ID and Key recorded in my site usage log. ***But, the down-side is it would create another uproar that we changed something *** That unfortunately is always a risk, especially on a site like this where changes don't always make immediate sense or appear particularly useful. But what I'm trying to explain here I believe needs to be investigated fully and changed, regardless of the potential outcry because it's a security hole of fairly awesome proportions. I've not tried to use the information I found as I'm not that way inclined but if being logged in as somebody allows access to their accounts, merchant data, merchant forum etc, the implications are staggering.