Quote - I do believe that issue also has a copy of our Goblinz on the disc. 

--Rebekah--

May 2010 has Goblinz, the Render Studio Bundle, a few 3ds models and clothed male figure. I picked it up for Goblinz.

As a main computer, I wouldn't go the netbook route. You can get a more robust desktop computer for only a little more money and not be stuck with a small keyboard, less RAM, no DVD burner, and less computer speed. Right now, in the US, Staples is selling, for $299 (Office Depot has the same one with a rebate that drops the price by another $30):

Compaq CQ5300Y Computer, Q1859 18.5-in. LCD Widescreen. AMD Sempron LE processor. 2GB memory, 320GB Hard Drive, Lightscribe DVD +-RW Drive. Windows 7 Home Premium

I personally don't like Compaq computers, but you can always get more computer power in a desktop for less money than with a portable computer. The Compaq just happened to be the cheapest computer I could quickly find on sale in stores--to help illustrate that a netbook isn't necessarily a huge money saver.

With Poser, you want more RAM, more disk space, a faster processor, and a multicore processor to speed up renders. To back up Poser downloaded content, you'll want a DVD burner. There are portable burners for netbooks, but that's adding extra cost.

For portability, a netbook is my choice for mobile needs. I've been using Poser 5 on mine and it works very well with it. I'll never go back to a laptop again because I'm more than willing to trade off a smaller screen and keyboard for more portability and battery life and less weight. My computing needs on the road are less than they are when I'm home, so portability is a higher priority for me than other factors. Since I have wireless at home, a netbook is nice to be on the net while away from the desktop.

I send an email to the creators of freebies that I use and have only recently done the same with purchased items (which isn't easy with DAZ items since the readme does not provide an email address for the creator). With well over 10,000 downloaded freebies over the years and a picture output of a little over a dozen images, I haven't used very much of the content I've downloaded. Just because I haven't gotten around to using somebody's particular freebies doesn't mean that I never will. All the freebies I've found are very much appreciated. Of the people who have posted to this thread, Trekkiegrrl's balloon is the only one I've used and I did send her an email letting her know about it and she did comment on the image.

Right now, I've gotten back into boardgaming, so Poser has been pushed to the side for a while. I do think I'll be designing a boardgame map using Poser and other 3D freebie models and shaders. When I was looking at the map for the freebie miniatures game, Zombie Plague, I quickly thought that I could make a much more realistic and moody map using 3D content. While the map at the end of the below PDF has a certain homemade charm, it's also a bit too cartoonish and amateurish.
http://www.fortressfigures.com/zombieplague/

Just added Simon to my favorites. I hadn't seen his work before.

I've always enjoyed 3D products. The new 3D films are more immersive than their 2D counterparts. Even a 3D buff like me eventually stops noticing the effect and gets more into the experience of the movie. Past that point, it's hard to say what specific affect the 3D is having and whether removing 3D would then change the feeling of the movie.

I'll agree with Ebert that great movies, that were never made in 3D, were not diminished by the lack of having that extra dimension. I'd also say that, if they were made in 3D, they would still have been great movies and might have been a bit better had they been in 3D. The elements that make a movie good: writing, acting, and directing, are not dependent on technology. For a movie like Casablanca, 3D wouldn't mean much, but Titanic's scope would look good in 3D and the original Star Wars in 3D would certainly take advantage of the technology to be better. Using 3D, as a gimmick, does not make a bad movie better.

The new 3D movies are doing a better job of keeping the focal point fairly steady. I remember seeing Capt EO at Disneyworld and not being able to see the 3D affect because they kept zooming it in and out of the screen. I probably only saw the 3D effect about a third of the time and every time I started getting the 3D in focus, the movie would shift what I was looking at to another focal point. and I'd lose the 3D again. That's not happening with the 3D films I've been watching lately.

Quote - Since we are tossing polygon numbers around...
A generic character in shrek had 60k polys for head/body/clothing and 760k for hair/fur.

Keep in mind that it's a generic character in a full-body image. The same article does not state the poly count for Shrek, but does say that Shrek had:

180 animation controls in Shrek's face
836 underlying "shapers" in Shrek's deformation system
585 body animation controls
90 muscles

Shrek wasn't a lightweight model. I haven't been able to find an article on the web that verifies that Jar Jar Binks had less polys than V4. The search results I got mixed in personal models of the character with game models and Clone Wars models.

One of the problems facing Poser figures is that the models are designed for all uses, whether it be a full body image that wouldn't need a large number of polygons or large textures.

I fall into the camp that mostly uses DAZ human figures because they have a greater level of support. When it comes to nonhuman figures, I'm more likely to use a Sixus1 figure or a nonDAZ figure because there are more choices outside of DAZ. I don't have a store bias. I'll use what fits into my vision rather than force myself to a specific usage.

There is definately a downside to having access to so much 3D content. Older Poser users are more likely to have learned modeling and texturing because they had no other choices. In some ways, that's bad because the average Poser user today is overall less technically proficient than a Poser users nearly a decade ago. Today's Poser/DS user can concentrate more on artistic creations than creating content. There's a bit of a balance there.

It's no sin not to master modeling and texturing. Look at the credits on any film with a lot of CGI and all the jobs are broken up into different specialties. The person animating a model isn't the same person that made the model or the same person that textured the model or the same person that rendered the model or the same person that created the backgrounds. There is more satisfaction in creating everything used in an image. There is still a lot of satisfaction in creating a good image even if all the parts of the image weren't made by the artist. A cook doesn't have to be a farmer to make a good meal (though the cook would be absolutely sure what's in the food if the cook grew it).

DAZ models are more popular simply because they developed a momentum early on when the native P4 models were comparatively primitive to Millennium characters that they developed a little later. That eventually created a market for those figures that nobody has broken yet. It doesn't mean it won't happen someday.

Don't forget that Poser has a longer history. Poser 5's material shaders have been around since 2003. DS only comparatively recently got them. It'll be a while before people become more expert in the DS shaders. Up until DS3, DS hadn't had enough features to compete with Poser, so it was more a starting point for creating art. Once somebody got proficient in DS, they often bought Poser to go further.

It'll be interesting to see how much further DAZ will go to divorce their content from Poser. It doesn't seem that as much Freak 4 content is being produced as was made for the original. I'm curious if the same will happen with the Mil4 Kids.

Frankly, SM needs to fix scaling in Poser. It's been a known problem for quite a while. They don't have to do it to accommodate DAZ, but they need to fix it because it's a flaw in the program. A lot of new 3D graphics users are starting with the free DS and, as that program has gained more features, the need to migrate to Poser gets smaller.

Whlie I don't like DAZ introducing Poser incompatible content, the concept of basing new figures on a single mesh is good because it simplifies sharing clothing amongst the figures.

I have the orignal DAZ kids, and the Mil3 Kids, so I'm in no desperate need to buy lots of content for the new ones if they won't work in Poser. Maybe I'll someday have a compelling reason to learn DS, but that time isn't now.

Attached Link: Free Poser figures

Although I cannot disagree with you, it's important to also remember that our primary audience for our artwork shouldn't be the Poser community. The average person wouldn't recognize Vickie, a particular hair, or clothing mesh/texture. That doesn't excuse an expressionless face.

Wardrobe Wizard helps adopt clothing to less used figures, but if it's another standard human figure, it's a lot of extra effort that may or may not work well. Unless there's something unique about that other figure that the artist needs, it might not be worth the trouble. I wouldn't want to expend all that effort simply to force myself to use another figure without an artisitc reason for doing it. The decision should be whether a man, woman, child or creature will be used, and then search for whichever has the right outfits. The decision shouldn't be to use Judy and then spend a lot of time converting stuff for Judy unless there's something about Judy that's more appropriate for the work being created. I could see doing it for Miki because that figure is still the best looking oriental figure. I can see using WW for child figures because they have less native clothing. The same goes for toon and nonhuman figures. This is less a matter of promoting DAZ than being practical.

I've provided a link to a larger list of free character/creature/animal figures available for Poser.

I have bought clothing for characters that weren't made for DAZ and will use those other figures when I want to use that particular character/outfit.

Forget V5. I'm still waiting for the Millennium Sphere.

Attached Link: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/help/what-does-end-of-support-mean

Microsoft does eventually stop updating old operating systems and XP is currently supposed to end in Apr 2014.

The combination of skeletal structure, musculature, and fat do a very good job of making individual faces very unique. We meet thousands of people in our lifetimes, but find very few that look alike. We may all have similar facial muscles, but we don't all have the same smile.

Poser expression morphs aren't moving 3D muscles, but are moving vertices that don't have to slide over anything that preserves the overall shape of a celebrity likeness morphed head. It would take a lot of effort to create a Jessica Alba likeness and make it still look like Jessica Alba when she's smiling. The odds are pretty good that new morphs would have to be added to do the job.

As good as fygomatic's likenesses are, he still uses a limited set of angles and expressions.

Poser heads are hollow shells and not skulls with muscles and skin over them. The best likeness ever created will slowly become unrecognizable as expressive dials are changed because those dials will be adding an expression for the original underlying figure (V4, V3, etc.). To truly capture a likeness, a person would have to create expression dials specifically for that likeness to retain the resemblance beyond the initial emotionless morph.

Amazon is selling season sets of I Spy for under $12.  It's well worth the price.

Attached Link: http://www.celestiamotherlode.net/