Had to try this, but it didn't work for me. Maybe only for US numbers? It may not be too sinister, of course. For quite a lot of web pages (particularly when buying something, or registering something) you have to enter a phone number. Bad security on someone's part perhaps, but not necessarily a conspiracy. Anyway, not good news, I agree.

Ah, I misunderstood. I thought you meant the fog in the volumetric atmosphere. I guess that what you have is indeed working as intended.

So the ONLY way to provide a valid criticism is to be able to show examples of one's own ability in regard to the criticized subject matter? That's ludicrous.

Well yes, in the sense that we are all critics all the time - we all say, 'that was a great/lousy movie/book/TV show/meal' etc. etc. Which is expected, and in any case we're entitled as we are the consumers paying money for whatever it was. However, I can't help feeling that someone entering a community devoted to a particular subject and criticising all the other people there, but without a track record of his/her own, whether good or bad, is unjustified and rather pointless.

It would be like me entering a meeting of parents and telling them how bad they are at bringing up their kids - the obvious question is, 'tried it yourself, have you?' (The answer is no, BTW :-)

Hmm, I can't reproduce this. Using V5, latest official update, and the default atmosphere which is then switched to volumetric. If I add white fog, I get white fog. Was your fog black on render as well as in preview?

Well, it's a point of view but one I find rather strange. You spend just 50 euro for software to create great images, find that it does just that, and aren't happy because it doesn't meet your definition of 'professional' programming?

You need to bear in mind that most Vue 4 users are probably hobbyists (like me) and for them Vue 4 does a fine job. If you want something to be used for professional purposes, would you not buy Vue Pro (or Vue Infinite, now)? I have no idea if Vue 4 Pro would do the things you want, but considering that the eon site says that that version is specifically intended for professionals, it seems likely that if you want to run Vue over a network that's the version you want.

It doesn't cost me anything to put images in the gallery or to participate in this forum, so it's free for me and everybody else. Certainly, these areas are free at the point of use, but they are in fact loss leaders. Rendo believe that expenditure by them on these items will tempt people to buy things from the MP, and they are probably right - well, they must be or they would have gone out of business by now! They are not providing these things as a free service to the community, but because they hope it will increase their profits. And none of us would quarrel with that I expect. But it's exactly the same principle as the department store which puts an attractive display in its window, or my local pub which gives free chips (that's 'fries' to the Americans here!) to customers in the evening - salty snacks make people buy more beer. The principle is the same: there's no such thing as a free lunch.

As someone who has written a number of chapters for edited books in my other life, IMO this isn't a very sensible business model. Normally, the publisher will set a budget for a book which will include the costs of editing, printing, distribution, payment to author(s) etc. and will rely on the sales to recoup the outlay and hopefully make a profit. If the projected sales don't cover the budget, the book doesn't get published.

Naturally the likelihood of sales will depend on the quality of the content, ignoring whatever promotional devices can be used to inflate sales, and therefore the publisher will want to attract the best authors (or in this case artists) with a track record of producing high quality copy to timetable.

The effect of the method used here is to offset the initial outlay and reduce the risk of loss by charging the contributors, but against that is the possibility - actually pretty near certainty having read the comments in this thread - that the best artists will not bother to contribute, because they don't need to. So you run the risk of the contributors to the book comprising the B team, as it were, with reduced quality and therefore reduced sales (and incidentally, reduced credibility if the exercise is repeated in the future). Doesn't make sense to me. (Speaking from the viewpoint of someone who no matter how many $$$ he forked out wouldn't get chosen!)

No problems with Firefox on winXP here.

Yes, agree entirely. This happens to me, too. Also, I can never remember if I have downloaded the updates or not. Last time I tried this, I obviously had downloaded it because I got a stern warning that I'd downloaded the file too many times and that admin had been informed! So an indication of the update date and last download date would be very welcome.

Yes, I got the same email and I hadn't bought this product either. But when I had a look at the available downloads in my account I found they had put 'Sassy Hair 2', which I purchased way back, in there. So I downloaded it again in case it had been updated (all 32Mb of it!).

Heading over there right now to sign up...

Thanks for the critique of one of mine, ynsaen. This is exactly the sort of thing I'm after (I also responded by commenting to your comments - I think that's the best place to do that rather than by IM, unless of course you have a specific beef with the author).

"Now, assuming the text box has enough space for such a lengthy assessment..."

If I saw any of the comments you listed here, I would take them as they are clearly intended - constructive criticism to improve the image. No problem there at all.

This is strictly a hobby with me, but as with any hobby, I'd like to be good at it (long way to go yet!). So I would welcome such points. How else will I ever get better at this?

So in fact the warning should read:
"Promotional image 2 and/or promotional image 3 may have been created in an environment where nude digital models may have been present, and therefore may (or may not) contain traces of nudity, which may be artistic. Or not."
Seems to cover everything...

I love the tree frog idea. Get the tiny bright blue and yellow ones, they can double as Xmas decorations. They're also deadly poisonous - a perfect gift for those pesky relations you don't want to see next year.