Yes i turned them both off. Still nothing.

Ive tried making the feet invisible, but then the stumps stick out like this.

Actually I'll probably be happy using her without clothes for a while and showing off that incredible stomach. :)

Thanks a lot for the help, just wanted to know some things before I went ahead and bought her.

Any idea if Jim has released/will release clothing morph targets or conversions for vicky's clothing packs to work on SMV?

Theres nothing wrong with her nose -- it looks a hell of a lot more realistic than posette's nose.

I think a lot of people here, as usual, are diverting attention from the real topic to one as genrealized as "should vicky have genitals". I see nothing wrong with labia or more detailed genitals. The problem is this: I have Eve. I think its a great model, with some amazing morphs. But has anyone else noticed that she has almost as many morphs for her genitals as she does for her face? Do we really need dozens of open vagina morphs for poser models? I dont think so. Im sure that open vagina/anus morphs are a hot seller at Renderotica, but I dont think they have a place in art. If you are using these models for realistic images or artwork, I understand why you would want more realistic looking genitals but why do you need an actual morphable cavity other than for erotic images/porn? Judging by the galleried most-viewed images (yes Im generalizing, there are exceptions) the majority of people come here to view naked women with large breasts in suggestive poses. While I have nothing against nudity or the trend in the galleries (to each his own), I do have something against people trying to justify having fully morphable and poseable vaginal/anal cavities on their poser models by saying that its necessary for 'art'. And yes, Michael does have genitals. But they arent morphable or poseable. They are there because there would be no way to create realistic nude images of him with just a texture/bump map. You dont need body cavities to create realistic nude images of Vicky, just a pubic hair texture/bump map or a transparency prop, with perhaps a morph to suggest detail.

Jaager you made it my affair when you posted a quote which, in my opinion, is an open insult. I merely stated my opinion. In your own words I am entitled to do so. "I am glad...." "I don't see..." -- Those are opinions. So before you try and quash someone else's opinions and ridicule them for posting them, be prepared to take some flak yourself.

Well, I didn't mean to start an argument. I simply made a point that in the type of art that is posted here at Renderosity there I cannot concieve a use for anatomically correct genitalia. Save the polys and use texture/bump maps and perhaps a pubic hair prop. I responded because I took Jaagers post as a personal attack on me. As for porn, thats the only use that I can see for poseable genitalia and a 'cavity'. If someone can prove otherwise then I will gladly admit that I was wrong. I haven't purchased Natalia, but I do own Vicky, Vicky 2 and Eve/Azura. I think Eve is an outstanding model, but I dont see why the poseable genitalia is necessary for ART. But sex sells -- it has always been the largest market by far. I just hope that Victoria (by way of Daz3D) doesn't jump on the bandwagon. So I knew when I posted that I'm one of the tiny minority that think this has no place in art.

Attached Link: http://www.100best-free-web-space.com/Top10_space.htm

I just signed up with Webjump after reading your post. I admit it looked good in the beginning, but after uploading my site I noticed a few annoying things about it. The speed is awful: a simple page with approximately 15 thumbnails (150x150 pixel HIGHLY compressed jpegs) takes minutes to load on my T1 connection. There are ads everywhere: most sites have either a pop-up ad or banners, webjump has BOTH persistent pop-up ads and a large explorer bar banner at the top of the page. After giving it a fair try I don't recommend webjump at all. I found a link that reviews free website hosts and rates their advantages/disadvantages. Check it out, I hope you find something useful: http://www.100best-free-web-space.com/Top10_space.htm

How mature, Jaager, implying that because I dont see why you need posable genitalia on a model that I am somehow lacking or inexperienced. But when you quote me, quote the entire sentence. "I DONT SEE WHY YOU NEED POSEABLE FEMALE GENITALIA UNLESS YOU ARE DEPICTING SCENES OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE." As to meaning that it should not exist -- I didn't say that it shouldn't exist, only that scenes which require posable genitalia have no place here. Read the terms of service. "There probably is much "more under the sun, than you have dreamed of.." W.S." Perhaps you should heed your own advice and stop obsessing over body cavities and poseable labia on 3D models and get out a little more, no? dcort: name one instance where, in art, we require poseable genitalia on female models. And no, I don't consider pornography an art form.

I'm glad that there are no lower genitals on Vicky. You can achieve sufficient realism in artwork with texture maps and pubic hair props. I don't see why you need POSEABLE female genitalia unless you are depicting scenes of sexual intercourse. Try Renderotica.

Download a freeware app called DocMemory. Create the DocMemory bootdisk, boot up your comp with it and check your RAM. It does thorough tests on your ram (with 128 itll take about 10 min to run through them a couple of times). The problems youre having could be caused by bad sectors in your memory corrupting your data.