Attached Link: MAT Pose Creator help page

There are 2 possible issues:

1. The textures need to beneath the PoserRuntimeTextures folder. If they are not, the program won't "see" the files.
2. If the dress is appearing as white, is this due to a document window setting or is this how it appears when rendered?
   If the issue is due to a texture being outside of the RuntimeTextures folder, then yes, the MAT pose won't include the texture file and the object will be white.

Now I'm confused. What does a rat or Turbo Squid or reyes have to do with the latest free issue of 3rd Dimension magazine or us giving away a free De Espona ship for use in a contest?

What is the mystery freebie? Here's a hint: it's a De Espona model and it's for use in Poser. lol

Read the magazine and find out! :)

Getting back to the subject...
Can we give Renderosity a chance to unveil their new look before complaining? I'd be willing to bet that many people will like the new look.

Anyway, if you can't stand the colors of a particular site, set Firefox to use your own colors:
Go to Tools > Options.
On the Content Tab, click the Colors button.
Change the colors however you like. I prefer black text on a white background, with different colors for unvisited and visited links. (How many sites use the same color for all links, so you have no way of knowing which pages you've already seen?)
Uncheck "Allow pages to choose their own colors..." checkbox.
Click the OK button to close the Colors dialog box.
Click the OK button to close the Options box.

(You can also set your own font style and size by clicking the Advanced button, just abobe the Colors button.)

The changes will take effect when you reload the page or go to a new page.

As a word of caution: this option will block many background images and could disable any sites that use them (such as the product sales images on CP).

However, this caution is far outweighed by making your browsing experience "standardized" since your eyes don't have to re-adjust to every site that uses different colors for the text and background.

As an aside aside, an excellent example of a pyschopath/ sociopath is Hannibal Lecter, especially as seen in Silence of the Lambs. True pyschopaths are usually highly intelligent, but are lacking in empathy. This is why Lecter killed (and ate) his victims "and his heart rate never got above 84" (or whatever the quote is).

And, yes, the media uses this term for anyone who they consider "crazy".

Corporations can't be "psychopaths" since they're a corporation. ;)
However, too many companies are run by corporate lawyers who think the best marketing strategy is to sue, even if it means trashing the company's reputation.
And in the case of the RIAA, they believe the best plan is to legally extort money from their customers: the RIAA has told people that they can pay $3,500 for the RIAA to drop the case or else the RIAA will sue and the person will they'll have to pay for a lawyer, a legal defense, etc.
Anyway, back on the subject: in my conversations with TurboSquid, it seems that the admins are trying to protect customers from purchasing items (such as aircraft), only to find out that it wasn't properly "licensed".
They want to avoid a situation where someone makes a video and Lockheed (for example) finds out. The person may say he bought the "Military Attack Copter" (which has no copyrighted markings on it), but Lockheed may say it resembles their own helicopter too closely and that the merchant who made the product doesn't have permission from Lockheed to sell it.

What happens to the video? Is the person supposed to take it down? Can he get a refund from the merchant since he bought the product specifically for use in his video? Can the customer go after TS with some kind of claim about false advertising? In these days of anyone suing anyone for anything, who knows what could happen.

I use V2 all the time in P7 and I've never seen the spear-in-the-neck.
I've rendered small images (600x600 pixels) and large images (2250x3000 pixels), and I've never seen this in the render or in the preview window.

I would guess that this has something to do with your Preview settings. If one type (SREE) isn't working, try the other setting.

Quote - Someone in a blacklisted country could procure the 3D model and reverse-engineer it, and it could compromise national security.

This made my morning. Just the thought that any or our 3d models could be a threat to national security is hilarious. Thanks. :)

I mean, really- does anyone actually believe that a country like Iran could purchase my Blackhawk Helicopter model and figure out how the real helicopter works? All they would have is a shell- my model doesn't even include an engine!

Plus, if blacklisted countries want to see what US vehicles look like, all they have to do is turn on CNN or Al-Jazeera. The better-off countries may even be able to pick up the Military Channel on their satellite TV's. lol

A few more issues:

In regards to movies:
Companies (such as Chevy and Lockheed) can get millions of dollars' worth in advertising. Just look at the Chevy/ Transformers commercials on TV. In this case, Chevy could work a deal with the movies studio and neither would have to pay the other any licensing fees.

The "it's different" defense:
Yes, I could spend all day saying how my helicopter was built using an Airwolf plastic model and the "Airwolf Flight Manual". I'll freely admit that I've never taken any measurements from an actual helicopter, nor have I even stepped in a helicopter to research building a 3d model.
So, yes, obviously, my models are not exact replicas of the real world item. Are they close enough for digital artists' use? Absolutely.

Actually, in some cases, the models are slightly "wrong" so they can work in a specific program. Does a real Blackhawk Helicopter have "body parts"? Of course not, but you need them on a Poser figure file so the parts will move.

Plus, does anyone really expect a digital model to include every single nut and bolt from the real vehicle? Can anyone accurately model (and texture) the interior of an F-22 aircraft when it's probably classified as Top Secret?

However, using this defense means that you have to take the case far enough to actually use a defence. Lockheed, like all corporations, can easily out-spend any person before the case even gets put on a court docket (if a court will even hear the case).

So, even though I never claim that my models are perfectly exact replicas, can I afford the $10,000 or $20,000 (for example) to hire a lawyer and file a legal defense? Can TurboSquid afford to do this?
Do anyone of us want to put up with the stress of fighting a legal battle over the sake of some digital models? Yes, there's the principle of the issue, but still.

Anyway, it wasn't my intention to start a debate on whether Lockheed can or can not copyright the design of their aircraft. Maybe they can't own a copyright since the design of an aircraft is for the US government or maybe they can since they put their time and enery into research and development.

I posted the message to let everyone know that Lockheed had filed a takedown notice at TurboSquid. Will they come after other sites? Will other companies do the same thing? Will we finally see a crackdown on all "looks like" products?
And will the 3d industry become like the plastic model industry, where any "looks like" product must be officially licensed and royalties must be paid to the original company?

Companies like Lockheed aren't spending their money trying to make the coolest designs- their research and development is all about how to make the best, fastest, most powerful, and most effecient machine for their clients. In many cases, the client is the US government.

I can understand how a company like Porsche would want to copyright or trademark a distinctive look of it's car, but does this same idea apply to the look of an F-22 fighter?

And taking that extension further, did Michael Bay have to license the design of the F-22 from Lockheed when he used actual F-22 fighters in Transformers? Or was he safe since he used fighter jets that were owned by the US government? Would his use of blowing them up "disparage" the F-22, which is the common complaint against allowing people to make their own models.

Did he have to get a license from Lockheed for Industrial Light and Magic to do their special effects work to transform Starscream into an F-22?
Though, in all likelihood, the F-22/ Starscream is probably covered under the license between Hasbo, the toy maker, and Lockheed.

Of course, this raises another point: how many licenses does Hasbro have in its "Transformers" line of toys? I know a lot of the later toys were officially licensed by GM and Chevrolet, but what about the earliest toys? Did Hasbro get licenses for a Transformer that turned into an an airplane that was obviously an F-15 or a car that was obviously a Porsche?
Or was Hasbro safe because this was 20 years before companies realized they could issue cease & desist orders to anyone making models that looked like their products.
So, is this where digital products are heading? Will digital model-makers need licenses just like Hasbro and Hot Wheels and Matchbox?

I assume that the for-sale Star Wars items will only be removed when Lucas serves them the same takedown notice as Lockheed.
But, I only know about the notice from Lockheed.

EricJ is correct: Max and Lightwave users expect to pay more for their models. (Not as high as some of the prices at TurboSquid, though.)

Many people have said that the Poser market is under-valued, especially when you can get high-poly models at DAZ for $1.99 in their Platinum Club or get sets of models for 75% off at Content Paradise.
How many times have merchants talked about the fact that some Poser users complain that a good-quality, $10 product is too expensive or that is should be offered for free? Many times, the Poser version comes with features that are unheard of other formats (MAT poses to apply textures, 4 or 5 (or more) sets of alternate textures, geometry swapping, etc).
If anything, the Poser version of a model should be much more expensive than the Studio Max model which does not include MAT poses and probably does not include alternate textures.

The Poser 4 render engine does not support ray-tracing, which is needed for true reflections. Poser 5 (and above), Vue, Lightwave, and Studio Max all support ray-traced reflections.

There are a few cheats for Poser 4: I explain some of them on my website: How to Make Reflections (in Poser 4).
I also have a tutorial on How to Make Reflections in Poser 5 (and Above) and How to Make Realistic Poser Image Using Reflection Maps (which uses the Reflect node).

You should always use relative pathing from the Runtime folder. That way, anyone can install the files into their Poser folder, no matter where it's located. Some people install Poser to the default c:Program Files, some people install it to their "e" drive, and some people install it to a separate folder just for graphics programs.

For example, you should zip your files like this:
figure.cr2 in RuntimeLibrariescharacterNew Figures

And, for example, the referencing within the cr2 file should say:
textureMap ":Runtime:Textures:MyFolder:MyModel:Texture1.jpg"

Try a search on Content Paradise for ship.

Attached Link: Star Wars freebies at Vanishing Point