One thing I have found is sometimes if you have the clothes parented to the figure
before you run the simulation this will happen.  Try parenting the clothes
to Universe and see if this helps.

Quote - There are no causal relations in the site design and internet routing.
I do not renew Limited-staff until the submarine cable is restored.
Please obtain it slowly.

Just want to say thank you for all your wonderful gifts.

Quote - Before deciding to use Vista get yourself aquainted to the annoying protection mechanisms that simmer under it's hood ... http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

Interesting article.  Another reason to hold off on buying Vista.

Quote - > Quote - I myself tend to skip a generation.  I started with DOS, then when I abolutely had to,

went to Windows 3.1.  (skipped 3.0).  Then when I absolutely had to I went to
Windows 98 (skipped 95).  Then when I absolutely had to went to Windows XP Pro.
(skipped NT, ME, 2000, et al).  So what ever comes after Vista is the one I
guess I will install.

 

You will probably have to wait a long time. MS has gone to about a five-year cycle on OS development, so whatever comes after Vista won't be until about 2011 or so.

Quote - <<From what I've read so far, the only advantage that Vista seems to have over XP is that they're redesigning the UI or something. I don't care about that at all, and disable all the cute UI animations and effects. I want power, not stuff to take away my power.

I've also read somewhere that Vista is a sort of "in-between" release, very much like W2K easing user transition from Win98 to WinXP. Supposedly whatever comes after Vista is the sh*t. Also, if Vista uses the same code base as W2K (as XP32 does) then there's even less incentive to upgrade.>>

See, this is why I usually skip  a generation on Windows.  If it's just until 2011, I can wait.
That's not really much different than the time frame from Windows 3.1 to Windows 98
or Windows 98 to Windows XP.

(BTW, just to show that sometimes an old version is still good enough, I have a 386 computer
with Windows 3.11 installed on it that I use to run a milling machine at work.)

I myself tend to skip a generation.  I started with DOS, then when I abolutely had to,
went to Windows 3.1.  (skipped 3.0).  Then when I absolutely had to I went to
Windows 98 (skipped 95).  Then when I absolutely had to went to Windows XP Pro.
(skipped NT, ME, 2000, et al).  So what ever comes after Vista is the one I
guess I will install.

Quote - > Quote - if giant breasted neandertal Victoria 3's dominate.. So be it, after all where did we buy the kits to make much of this "pronography"?  Most likely from your stores...

If it's good enough to sell, isnt it good enough to show?
(Hopefully thats not bannable, but these days..)

I just want to point out that you can show them all you want in your actual image.  All Renderosity is saying is don't show them in your thumbnail leading into the image.

This change does not affect the actual image. It only affects the thumbnails in the gallery.

The problem with that is I find renders of figures with breast so huge they need a wheelbarrow
to carry them to be boring and stupid. So when I saw a thumbnail of them I would just skip
over that picture.  Now I have no way of knowing if it is a normal looking woman or a silicone
freak just from the thumbnail.

Quote - Having followed this thread over the last few days I feel I need to say:

Renderosity 'Allow' you to put your artwork on this site, they do not charge you for the privilege.
Therefore you should simply do as they ask, at the end of the day you have no right to do otherwise, bitching/whinging and moaning about it won't make any difference - if you don't like the new rules - go elswhere - it IS that simple.

I'm not exactly 100% keen on the new thumbnail guidelines myself, but at the end of the day it's easy enough to make a thumbnail that follows the new guidelines, and I'm not willing to let a little thing like that spoil my appreciation of the wonderful community that is Renderosity.

Sure - Tits get hits - and lots of art involves nudity, but is there really any need for such a thing? It isnt a competition about who gets the most hits - it's all about ART and sharing that work with the rest of the community. I know some of my pictures have nudity in them and I haven't changed the thumbnails as yet, and I'm not going to apologise for that - it will be done.
**
Apologies if what i've said offends anyone but its the simple facts of the situation.**

The old love it or leave it argument.  Let's all Sieg Heil der Furher or off to the gas chambers for you.

Quote - > Quote - Hi infinity,

Yes, male chests are fine :-)

Am I the only person who finds this an absurd double standard?

Nude female chest=Unacceptable.

Nude male chest=Acceptable.

There is technically nothing a female chest has that a male chest does not, you can even have a male with "breasts" if he's overweight enough. So why, why, why, is a man's chest acceptable when a woman's isn't?

Not that I have any real issues looking at a man's chest (I see mine without clothing on it every single day), but this double standard is ridiculous.

Both should either be acceptable, or neither.

Forgive my rant, but this attitude of "this one thing is a no-no, but this other thing, which is almost the same, is perfectly fine"  really irks me. :cursing:

And what about gay men? Shouldn't  pictures of gay men's chests be banned, because
this could arouse other gay men?   I know on one TV show there were some men in a
swimming pool, and they pixilated out the gay man's nipples, but didn't pixilate out
the nipples of the straight men.  So I think this should apply at Renderosity too.
No gay man nipples.

So what's the advantage of using Internet Explorer to download files over using Firefox?
I hardly ever use IE anyway, because Firefox is easier to use in general, and less prone
to picking up trojans, worms, virii, etc.  And I have never encountered any download
limits with Firefox.

Quote - My father always said that woman should have breasts in the back.

But basically that's what the butt is. Or more acurately, the purpose of the breasts
is to simultate the butt, after people went from rear entry sex to frontal sex.

Quote - > Quote - All Renderosity is asking us to do is to make a tasteful thumbnail that doesn't have "in your face" boobs, butts and genitals.

Why is it so hard  to crop a tasteful portion of your image that is 200 x 200 pixels and simply upload that when you upload your nude image?

Quote -
One day Renderosity is going to get so sick of dealing with these types of issues and the revoltes that happen when they try and make a change to better the website and make it appear more professional and tasteful, that they may  one day decide to stop allowing nudes in the gallery period!

to make it more clear, "more professional"  and "tasteful portion" and "tasteful thumbnail"  all say that thumbnails without nudity are "more professional" and "tasteful," while basically saying that ones with nudity are unprofessional and tasteless.

Not necessarily.  It could be saying that a thumbnail with nudity could be professional and tasteful, but that a thumbnail without nudity would be more professional and tasteful.
Think of it this way.  A wool shirt is warmer than a cotton shirt, but that doesn't mean
a cotton shirt couldn't also be warm.

Also if you are using  the DAZ figures, they  have an inhale morph.  You could turn that morph on
and off to simulate breathing.

I like the figure itself, and like the way it bends.
But I do feel cheated by the morph package.
V3 has far more morph options.
That's my only major complaint.

Hopefully the V4 plugin for 3D Universe/DAZ's Universal Texture Converter is going to be released soon.  It works great for converting V2 and V3 textures, so a V4 plug-in would be a nice addition.

Why would you want to install Poser 5 over PoserProPak?
You would be better off installing Poser 5 in its own separate
directory and then linking Poser 5 to your ProPak library.

To do this, once you install and open Poser 5, got to the right of the
screen and keep clicking the libraries up arrow until you get to the root directory.
You should see Poser 5 and Downloads folders.
Then click on the plus sign at the bottom right of the libraries list.
 The pop-up window will then let you link to the ProPak library runtime.