3ds files are at
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/3d_resources/3d-models-index.html
http://www.jrbassett.com/html/IndexPic.html

There might be more at a simulation site called orbiter.

There are some good results in this thread.

http://forum.daz3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=57975&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60

James Cagney

http://forum.daz3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=57975&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=80

http://forum.daz3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=57975&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=120

Pamela Anderson

There are a great deal more mediocre results in the thread. Faceshop is not a one-button instant celebrity solution. For people that don't have fygomatic's skills, the program might help provide a good starting point that a lesser skilled artist could not otherwise achieve. I've seen a lot of negative reviews of the program, but have also seen good ones. Quite a few negative reviews came from people who are quite capable of producing good Poser art, so the negative reviews should not be taken lightly.

Abalone's website used to have a demo for the program, but no longer does. That makes this an iffier program to try out, though DAZ does have a good return policy.

People have gotten good results with Faceshop, but I haven't used it. Search for threads here and at the DAZ forum to see what others have doen with the program.

Quote - further, you often don't have anything to learn without updates, new rigging, etc.  I mean, the difference between Poser 4 and Now is HUGE, and that's new toys.  Agreed?

A few years ago, there was a thread where everybody was posting their first Poser image and their newest to constrast what they learned over the years. While I agree that Poser 4 and current versions are worlds apart in terms of capability and realism, the biggest change I saw in most people's works was an increase in artistry. Their work was better less because of better software than that they got better at composing images and posing figures. The years of using Poser improved everybody's artistic sensibilities.

Older images had the straight on camera angle that is the Poser default. Poses were stiff and lifeless or downright physically impossible to replicate in real life. Faces were emotionless defaults. A lot of early work was outright awful. The newer images were more dynamic with interesting camera angles, more fluid poses, and expressions in the faces of the characters.

It takes time and practice to improve. The newer versions of Poser allow much better work to be created entirely within Poser. If the artist hasn't got a lot of earlier artistic experience, the end result is still going to be bad.

Here's an example of an early Poser/Bryce image created by Martin Murphy. It stands up well to things that can be done in Poser 8. Had Martin been using Poser 8, he would have had to do less postwork and would have had access to more existing props that would not have had to be created in other modeling programs. The dress would still have required postwork to have the specific flowing characteristics that are in the final image. There is only so much that can be done with the literalness of 3D work.
http://www.artsforge.com/martin/queen.html
In the end, better tools only facilitate creating better images if the artist has the skill to get there. Without the artistic skill, the better tools are just helping people create better looking garbage.

I'm not sure how many people will want to revisit earlier works. In my own case, I tend to want to do more new images than want to fix old ones. As is, so much of my time has been devoted to other interests that I'm not even getting new artwork done. Other people may want to try this.
 

There are basically two ways to apply textures to objects in Poser. The oldest, most traditional way is to create an image file on top of a UVmap that precisely puts all the texture details exactly where wanted. This texture can be created in Photoshop or any other image editing program. It's usually saved in a JPEG format and attached in the Poser material room or can be saved as a Pose file and applied directly from the Poser library.

The newer method is to apply a shader/procedural texture that is mathematically defined in the material room. It's created entirely within Poser and doesn't involve Photoshop (though can accept images in its nodes to provide other texture effects). This texture gets saved into the material library and doesn't get saved as a JPG. It stays wholly in Poser. The exact format of the saved file (mc6, mt5) is only dependent on the version of Poser it was saved in and isn't something you need to be concerned with other than compatibility with Poser 5 (which cannot use mc6).

For the most part, shaders are used for background and common elements in an image, such as wood, rocks, gems, metals, leather, latex, etc. Detailed ornate textures for clothing are best left to standard Photoshopped image files. The advantage of shaders is that they take up less memory and are easier for Poser to render. Shaders are also easy to apply. Just select the object that the texture should be applied to and click the desired shader from the library.

Hopefully this helps. I've tried to keep it simple and there are certainly exceptions to just about everything I've said, but this is essentially how I use the two.

The free version limits render size to 800 pixels which is getting small nowadays.

Your laptop may have power saving features that have lowered the brightness/contrast to extend battery life.

Attached Link: http://poser.smithmicro.com/comparison.html

There's a feature comparison chart to show the differences from Poser 8. It would have been nice to provide links to each feature to further explain the advantages. There are a lot that aren't explained at SmithMicro, such as:

Parameter change indicator
Recent Render palette
Conforming with scaling
Auto conform on drag and drop
Joint strength indicator
Full Body Part Morph Import

Most of the above features sound as if they will eventually get folded into the next version of Poser since they don't seem to be high end features as much as enhancements that Poser ought to have.

And here I thought you were looking for a gold material.

Lots of people at boardgamegeek.com have vouched for it. Only the first item is $3. Every subsequent deck is $7.

I've been spending time looking up good rated print 'n' play games there to see what else I might want to order. Unfortunately, once things start going beyond a single deck, it starts getting expensive. Some of the games use four and more decks and that starts putting prices up to what a full-fledged commercial boardgame costs. I haven't placed my order yet.

I haven't read their FAQ, so I don't know what restrictions they might have.

I found another thread at Boardgamegeek where somebody said that the sale does apply to the cards with different images on the front and back. I haven't done enough Poser artwork to take advantage of it.

Don't forget that, with Poser 7 and higher, the Morphing tool allows moving vertices directly in Poser.  I haven't gotten around to using it yet, but have seen some fairly impressive results achieved by others.

Take a look at the sticky at the top of the forum for Material Room, Nodes & Shaders - Tutorials and Discussions (Bookmarks - Updated)

There's a section with tutorial links for creating car paints and similar procedurals that will do what you want.

Quote - Actually, back in the day, Hollywood made things look really clean, especially sci-fi...

Most scifi art of the time depicted pristine worlds. The future represented hope for a better time often without war and disease. We live in a more pessimistic world now and the future looks like more of the same and probably worse. Even before Star Wars, Alien, and Blade Runner, science fiction authors were already turning to less optimistic visions of the future.

Galleries used to have a public address for individual artists, but that's gone away. That's a shame because it discourages casual browsing by people that aren't Rendo members. It makes it that much harder for Rendo artists to be noticed. Artists have to start a gallery elsewhere to be seen.

People don't like to register for sites when they only want to look at something.  It's a bother to do. Most registrations are a double step effort--registering at the site, checking email, and clicking a verification link to confirm a valid email address. Unless there's something at a site that I really want, I won't bother going through all that stuff even if it only represents five minutes of my time. I don't need another password to remember. I certainly wouldn't register for a site just to look at images.

Once I start get back into creating new images, I'll have to start another gallery at a more public site.