Output: "Number of vertices read is 0" -- which makes me wonder if the Hex obj export for Mac is what is screwy. Quick edit: actually... maybe not. There are 'v' lines in the Hex exported obj.

I may still be doing something screwy, but I'm still getting all 'f' lines and no 'v's that I can see in the output file version. I wish I could offer some sort of clue about the how and why, but I'm clueless there.

I pay for web site hosting/domains/etc., and most of the places there are commercial websites, so that's not so much an issue for those who do the same. Your hosting contract will generally contain that information. Free web sites sometimes have rules about commercial image hosting, but they tend to experience so many limitations in terms of functionality that I'd be surprised to see vendors using them for their image hosting. You'd be over your usage limit with most such sites within days anyway, I'd think. Also bear in mind that there are a lot of complaints about people who do this at all -- it can be murder on dialup connections. (Personally, I try for a happy medium, and fully accept that I probably annoy everyone in the process. chuckle) Promo images are one of those things I've seen a lot of complaints about in general, and a lot of them ask for one thing which someone else complains about a moment later once it happens. (Just like almost everything else. grin) It's hard to say if there will ever be any "standard" presentation because of that, and the number of factors to consider. There's still a difference on various monitors, yes. I noticed that a lot of things looked fabulous on my friend's monitor that hadn't even caught my eye on the graphics beast at home. Admittedly, I didn't look at any of my own stuff on it, so I can't really say how it compared.

Promo images are a minor nightmare to create, in all honesty. I came up with a 'formula' for doing mine for character sets finally, but it's still a nightmare to actually do it. The nudity issue is a real one -- and it can apply to 'anything that might maybe be considered underage', which I don't blame the admins here for using as their approach. There's other things to consider, too. It became all the more evident to me that monitor settings make a huge difference when I peeked in from vacation from a friend's laptop. Things that look great on my massive graphics-calibrated monitor may look like garbage on a smaller screen or with other settings, and vice versa. There's also a limited amount of official image space we're allowed, so people are going to make sure they get the essential basics in (full front, back, and side view) as well as the other elements they're including, which can be trickier than it seems at a glance.

Does the skin have displacement set on it? If so, it might be displacing beyond the normal bounds the spacing between it and the brows allows for, and 'covering' up the brows as a result.

Oh mercy... I forgot all about the made for TV ones. That opens up a whole new category of awfulness. Much like the camp horror stuff, those tend to get renamed and sometimes slightly recut and repackaged.

There's also BetterZip for the zip files. It works very nicely, in my experience -- though I do install into a temporary folder before shuffling things off to the runtime as a general rule.

The thumbnails? I really wish I knew. They may show up fine on an Intel Mac -- no clue. I just know they're not the shrugging guy, but just round spots of nothing on my system. (One of the very last non-Intel Macs.)

Deep Rising wouldn't be it. Full of cheesy effects from top to bottom, but generally hilarious. It also has a cast count higher than three... er, when it starts, anyway! I'll check with the movie geek when he comes home tomorrow night. He might have an idea which one this is, or at least more titles for consideration. If it was one of the massively low-budget horror flicks, it may have changed titles half a dozen times, so it may be harder to find.

The new Macs will be running OSX. Intel Macs cannot run OS9 ("Classic mode"), which is one of the older Mac OSes. Unfortunately, some of DAZ' installers rely on Classic mode to function; they are primarily the ones for older items that haven't been updated to work under OSX. .exes don't run at all on the non-Intel Macs, though I'm not sure about the Intel Macs. I believe there are ways to do it, but it may not work 'out of the box'. I don't believe the MacConverter is required any longer in OSX -- at least I have never needed it. For .rsr to .png conversion, there is a nifty little application called xShruggy that handles it, and is, IMHO, well worth the small shareware price they ask for. The DAZ items that don't have pngs usually don't have the rsrs either, though, so you may end up making your own icons for those items.

Do you have a square, flat-ish pillow prop somewhere you could scale down and stick a displacement map on for the raviolis?

grin No rotten veggies here. If someone is looking for something specific it is almost impossible to find on a 'oooh, what does this button do?' interface. They're good to learn on, though, if you can make the mental connections between 'shiny button' and 'performs this function', because then you can look for it by function on other software.

I'm actually one of the shameful weirdos that likes the Poser interface, too. It appeals to the 'OOOO, what does this shiny little button do?' that goes on endlessly in my brain. I do get why a lot of people find it counterintuitive, however. A lot of other interfaces, to me, look like work. I don't know how to explain it other than that, but I do find that my creativity is strongly linked to my sense of "play", and it ends up making a huge difference in the final result as well as my enjoyment while working on a project. The interface on the ZBrush demo I tried, for comparison, made my inner child shriek wildly and hide under the bed. grin

"Everybody|Nobody (pick one) does [completely random thing] and therefore, Users|Customers|Vendors|Brokers (pick one) are [bad thing]." If I see one more iteration of this, I'm gonna need a drink of something much stronger than coffee. Bonus irritation points if this is a matter of taste issue. Extra triple bonus irritation points if the statement is patently false and would be proven so if the people spouting off these sweeping universals looked around a little bit before making them. Equally irksome, similar: "I do things this specific way, even though there are a dozen totally valid ways to do it. Anyone who doesn't do it my way is [insert laundry list of bad things here] and they should be Pelted with Rotten Eggs|Eaten by Rabid Badgers|Be Reincarnated as a Celebrity's Vanity Purse Poodle." Alas, the software can't fix this one, I fear. (Not a flame about any other post in this thread in any way at all just in case anyone's taking it that way, it's just the #1 thing I had need to vent.)