My blunder, I'm afraid STORM. I'd mistakenly got the impression from another thread that you were admin here, and were speaking as such when you started this thread. In the light of my new information, I apologise and withdraw the term 'outrageous'. I replace it with 'misguided', but without the 'borderline' prefix. :-) You seem to have developed a selective memory when you imply that this thread has somehow been turned away from an alleged simple subject of the pricing structure for Zygote's Victoria model. In your original post, you wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> ...I can't help comparing and contrasting the wonderful reception all of this is getting here (not to mention the huge amount of free sales publicity for Zygote) with some of the critical threads on fellow Artists from this community selling their stuff in the Renderosity Online Store. Here we are questioning and debating the morality of commercialism and its effect on Free Stuff and this Place or even if the Store should be here at all?... ...What I just don't understand are the completely contrasting reactions (my own included when I questioned commission levels) to the Online Store and to Victoria... <<<<<<<<<<< You started it! You chose to make the comparison, and that's what I addressed that in my first post. Other mention was made of Zygote vs Renderosity Online Store: Bast wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Competition is good. The store we are making will give Zygote a run for their money. <<<<<<<<<<<< My post also refered to this. Fair competition is good, but I don't believe the store is fair competition. As for Vickie's pricing, well I can only conclude that you haven't got much of a clue about what's involved in creating a figure from scratch, or about the balancing act involved in marketing a product. Nor has Bast, for she is utterly deluded that what she makes is remotely comparible to Zygote's creations (it is Zygote's creation, LOL). Zygote's operation is professional and upfront. The Renderosity Online Store is amatuerish buggering about in comparison, and if it was fairly competing on a level playing field, I can't think that Zygote would do anything other than smile.

LOL, I am a force of world destruction. Thank you Bast, for that and the other amusing remarks (but didn't someone say something about civility ruling?...). I can assure you I'm just me, and have no association with anyone else in your imaginary clique. I have no secret identity, and I can tell you that I am as suspicious of community leaders who operate a 'personality empire' as I am of those who take on an overtly commercial mantle. As for your statistics, they are like so many other sets of statistics generated for the purpose of backing up a preconceived standpoint. They are highly selective, and in that sense they do lie. It possibly says something about the mindset that is developing around here that your stats refer only to material items. Those who are good at making things are quite likely to be high contributors to both the store and freestuff. I can't speak for anyone else in your list of venomous, spiteful haters, but I'm afraid my creative abilities are not remotely approaching the standards that others might be interested in. I'm only really able to offer limited advice in written form. There is more to contributing to this place than offering things in freestuff. So I'm afraid in that respect your statistics are irrelevant. To make your statistics more accurate and more relevant, you should include contributions to freestuff by members of this community who don't feel the need to sell anything at all. Of course, a normal webpage as used in these forums isn't long enough to accommodate all those individuals... If you also included those contributions that don't consist of material items, you stats would be even more accurate - and even more difficult to present. Bast wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Since this interesting thread has now devolved to yet another way that our clique of haters can blaspheme the workers... <<<<<<<<<<<< I'm afraid this thread just sat there asking for a contrary viewpoint (and those who choose to express contrary viewpoints do not deserve to be labelled haters and conspirators). Personally, in the context of this place having a shop stuck on its back, I found STORM's comments about Zygote's clear and upfront commercial enterprise to be borderline outrageous, even allowing for the humorous presentation. Right, Im off to blow a few world landmarks to bits and pieces.

Storm wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> I can't help comparing and contrasting the wonderful reception all of this is getting here (not to mention the huge amount of free sales publicity for Zygote) with some of the critical threads on fellow Artists from this community selling their stuff in the Renderosity Online Store. <<<<<<<<<<< You illustrate the difference very nicely in your statement. Zygote sells its stuff in its own shop. Everyone knows that Zygote is a commercial outfit. They started that way, and continue that way. The Renderosity Online Store has set up shop in what was otherwise a user community, and has essentially turned that community into a promotion for the shop. I really don't think many people object to Poser users selling their creations. I think you'll find that the root cause of the strife is that they are selling them smack in the middle of this user community! I don't remember seeing this level of controversy when artists started selling stuff away from this place. Members of this community can take or leave Zygote's stuff as they see fit. Many of them obviously don't even know who Zygote are! What you refer to wrongly as 'free sales promotion' is in reality 'word of mouth'. People here can slag off Zygote's stuff as much as they can praise it. It's the best and most honest type of 'promotion' a company can hope to get. There is a fundamental difference in the way the Renderosity Online Store is set up, because it is automatically 'advertised' due to being placed in the middle of a useful and popular community. But the community is made useful and popular by everybody who contributes to it for free, not by dint of having a shop in it. This means that every member of this community ends up promoting the store (for free) every time they post a tip or put something in the freestuff. Yet the profits of the store are divided between only the artists and the storeowners. It doesn't surprise me at all that some people see a clash of interests. But, maybe it's a good thing that people who come here thinking they are part of a user community begin to realise that they are in fact visiting what has now become a business website...

Caveat emptor. :-) If the 'advertisement' for the product doesn't tell you what you want to know, you could always drop a line to the vendor and ask. Failing that, I offer you my conclusion gained after much experience with interpreting promotional material: if it doesn't say it does it, it most likely doesn't do it! Like certain 'select' stores, the new online store (whether it's here or, preferably, at 'arm's length' ;-)) might choose to operate on a 'standards' basis. They'll most likely do that if it increases their profits - i.e. by consumer demand. Whether to or not is usually a question of quality vs quantity. So you're right to put forward your suggestion, but would have been wiser to start a new thread - most folk have given up on this one! Civil, moi? Arse! :-D

It is possible, 'cos I just placed two in a scene to check. All was well. Sorry, apart from the usual 'Poser patch' and 'Millie update' suggestions, I don't have anything to offer on this.

It's not just the quality of your work that scares me, it's the rate you can churn it out. Amazing.

I don't think so. If my memory serves, there seemed to be a communication problem of some sort between the Poser team and the Lightwave team when the program was launched. There is a successful process of bringing Poser meshes into Lightwave (though it's for version 5.x) but I've lost the link to the tutorial in a disk crash.

Er, 3DSprite, I don't think you are in a position to call my, or anyone else's, concerns unfounded. I could say that your confidence is unfounded. But, of course, I won't(ish). ;-)

Thank you for your civil reply, edarsenal, to my passionate and to the point post. I'm grateful that it hasn't been deleted, but find it somewhat amusing that the thread has been shoved out of the main forum once a vociferous opposing opinion was put forward... I think you have completely misunderstood what I meant by clumsy and unprofessional. I'm not referring to the structure of the store (which seems absolutely fine to me). What I'm saying is that it is a clumsy and unprofessional thing to do to put the store in the middle of a user community. As a business, Renderosity Online Store has unfairly awarded itself a substantial customer base by taking advantage of a user base that was established for entirely different purposes. It hasn't earned itself any 'goodwill' of its own, through its own merit. Despite that the fact that you and your friends/colleagues own the hardware and domain for this site, and are therefore legally entitled to do what you want with it, you have to acknowledge that this place started out as a voluntary online community run by users for users. Although the logistical side of things is very important, it is still the fact that it's the users who make the place valuable to - the users! Let me relay an anecdote from my past. I was on the elected committee of a local astronomy club. The club was run by its members, for its members. During one committee meeting, the club chairman tried very hard to turn advertising in the club magazine into a money making operation. The profits from this were to go to the person who sold the advertising space (no prizes for guessing who that was). The idea was thrown out because it was entirely inappropriate, and morally wrong. The club magazine's circulation had been established by the hard work of the members. Quite a lot of non-members subscribed to it (at cost) because it was full of interesting stuff provided by the members. The chairman was told that if he wanted to publish a magazine, he should do so from scratch with his own efforts, and not take advantage of the efforts of those who had made their contribution for completely different reasons. (He lost his position next election). Although the situation here isn't technically the same (this isn't a democracy), morally it is very similar. Renderosity, originally Poserforum.com, was an online community run by Poser users for Poser users. Even now, your title artwork calls it '3D Artist's Community'. But lets come clean; it isn't technically a 'community' anymore, is it? Although nearly all the members of this 'community' still participate on that traditional basis, the fact is that Renderosity is now a business for those that own it. If revenue-raising activities were solely for covering costs, then the place could officially be a non-profit organisation. I'll bet money that it isn't a non-profit organisation. It's probably fair to say that it isn't a big profit organisation either, but that's not the point. I've little doubt that the owners wish to make it more profitable. That would be a nice idea if only those profits weren't being generated on the back of freely given input by the people who regard the place as a community. As businesspersons, you would be much more professional if you kept the profit making operations at 'arm's length' from this place. You should have set the store up with a different name (it could still be on the same hardware) and linked to it in the same way that other businesses link to it. Although the end result would be the same (good product making money for good producers) it would have been much more diplomatic and considerate to the vast majority of people here who come to this place as 'just' a community. Despite the fact that I am seriously in favour of free enterprise and making money, I believe it is entirely inappropriate for a place that presents itself as a community, was established as a community, and as far as participants are concerned is a community, to have a shop opened up directly within it, using its name, which is run for the benefit of only a few. I respectfully implore you to consider placing business activities at 'arm's length' from the user community.

Selling things, or not, isn't the point. Selling things here is the point. Like I said before, I'm all in favour of the free market, and for artists to make money doing what they do best. But business is business, and should be kept separate from social groupings founded for other purposes. If anything, that's just simple professionalism. Allerleirauh's analogy is almost there (with some reservations) , but a more accurate one would be a group of people taking advantage of their positions in a neighbourhood association and using the whole thing to their commercial advantage. An online store could have easily been set up in a different (virtual) place, with an ad-banner link from here for those who choose to follow it. The money making activities could have remained the same, and jolly good luck to them. It's a very important point of principle. It's irrelevant if the profits of the shop are ploughed back into this site, or spent on fast cars and beer. Why? (before reading on, please bear in mind that I have no axe to grind on the 'split' issue, and don't have any agenda regarding the other place) Why is because this place didn't start off as a business, it started off as a user community. The user community was founded as an online self help group. Free for any Poser user to join up and participate. The makers of the Poser program added the poserforum.com URL to the package as a link to a user community. Nearly all of the user base here comes here via that link, expecting to come to a user community. Although the effort put in by the people who run the internet side of things is extremely important and valuable, it's still the fact that the most important people in a place like this are the users who openly exchange ideas and items. They are what make the place worth visiting. They are the whole point of the place. As originally founded, that is. By the placement of the new online store right slap in the middle of this place, and it being called the same as this place, the user community has effectively become the front window dressing for a gallery shop. Every occasion somebody in this community takes the time and effort to answer a query, post a technique or make their work accessible, they subsidise that shop. They are essentially giving money to the owners of that shop. Why? Because the customers of that shop wouldn't visit if it wasn't for all the open exchange they otherwise come here for. The shop has burst out and clambered up on the back of a place that was established for other reasons. That place is already showing the strain. So open a store - fine. Top dollar enterprise, etc. But as far as this place is concerned, put an ad banner to it like all the other businesses that advertise. Make it stand on its own two feet. If the stuff there is good, word will spread. At best, the Renderosity Online Store is a clumsy and unprofessional effort created by owners who haven't thought things through long enough. At worst it's a parasitical cynicism of the most cheapskate, scurrilous kind. Either way, it makes the place an easy target for its enemies...

I'm all in favour of the free market and for artists to make money from their work. I also have no problem with a gallery or reseller choosing their own rates of commission (if artists don't like it, they don't have to submit). My big concern is that this place (Renderosity) is now essentially just a shop window. This forum (founded by someone else, incidentally) was designed to be, and has been, a community centre for users of Poser. This is supposed to be a place where people can freely and openly exchange ideas, techniques and, indeed, actual items. While it can be fairly said that these activities can continue, the fact that a five figure user base which has been established on the basis of them has now suddenly become a five figure customer base reeks of utterly cynical manipulation. If anyone wants to set up a store, fine. But don't do it the back of a place that is used by its members for completely incompatible reasons. Do it somewhere else! Or be prepared to get accused of being a bunch of unscrupulous, money grubbing charlatans. This has to be the best thing to happen to Poser Forum Online (Poserforum.org) in a long time.

LOL, I was going by a long distant memory. Sorry, I've no idea what the situation is with the AAC now. Last I heard the personality difficulties with the founders had pretty much killed it off. But for all I know it could be thriving. I just hopped from one nerdy hobby to this one, stopping off at Hi-Fi along the way. :-D

She looks very good! I kick myself for not keeping that magazine cover I saw which showed the makeup in very high detail. I'd like to have a go at this myself.

Unless you are considering a special effect such as jval is describing, I would do the following: Set the face camera at the 'portait' focal length (in my case, I choose 85mm, like my favourite Contax Zeiss lens). Set the main camera's focal length suitable for the requirements of the scene you're working on. When creating a character (using morphs, etc) it is important to have a standard viewing reference, one that isn't going to add any apparent distortion to the features. I use the face camera as this reference, and it stays the same for all characters. This leaves the main camera free for general viewing of the character, or for positioning in the final scene. I've found that anything wider than 50mm and longer than 100mm gives the impression of distortion. Wide angles make noses and such seem bigger than they are, while longer focal lengths will make them seem flatter than they are. I've always worked in Poser like this, and have mentioned the process various times at various places. I guess you have to be famous for anyone to notice what you say, LOL! ;-)

Small correction ScottK: 120, or 'medium format' film requires a longer equivalent focal length than that of a 35mm film camera lens to give the same angle of view. An 80mm lens on a medium format camera is regarded as a 'standard' lens, in the same way as a 50mm lens is regarded as standard on a 35mm (small format :-) camera. A portrait lens on a medium format camera will therefore need to be around 30mm longer than a portrait lens for the smaller film.