I want to comment on what might be a touchy subject. There are always multiple ways of looking at the same situation. I don't know if what I am about to say has a solution, I'm not sure it does, I think perhaps its just the way it is. I have been an artist all my life. I started drawing when I was 5. Started painting when I was 12, had a paper route so I could buy paints and canvas. Artist always need inspiration. It is the life blood of an artist's creativity. I have over the years periodically gone to art museums for inspiration, studied the artwork of the great masters. Now study the artwork of others through the internet. I look at the websites of vfx studios and zbrush for inspiration and to see what is possible, not Renderosity. I understand Renderosity is a format for hobbyist. I get that! I have been a member of Renderosity since 2004 I think, and I cant say that the overall quality of peoples artwork has really improved during that time. The joy of art and creativity is the work you put into it and witnessing the improvement in your own skills. Poser and therefore Renderosity and the artwork displayed by members on this site have a history of not showing a great deal of improvement over time. I mean that's fine, people do this for fun, I get it, but somewhere lost in the mix is the inspiration to do bigger and better things. Individuals who aspire to be artist must challenge themselves to get better! That does not seem to be a common thread here. You look at zbrush art and you are just blown away by the artistry and skill. Poser users are lacking this level of inspiration and I believe it is hurting the entire brand. Whats the solution for a hobby based endever ? I'm not sure. Part of the history of Renderosity is allowing amateurs to present their work and that's a good thing! On the other hand it doesn't represent whats possible to achieve. I guess the only solution is for everyone to work to improve their work, that's where the fun lies. Stop posting really crappy embarrassing stuff. Take pride in what you do. Compare your work to really good stuff before you smear it all over the internet.

If you spend any time taking sculpture classes in zbrush etc. And view the vfx development of on screen characters both human and animal, the underlying bone structure and musculature is always developed first. Poser characters have always been like a plastic shell with no underlying structure. The unrealistic joints and folds like at shoulders and under knees as an example, are testament to this. It seems to me that characters should be developed that reproduce all the relevant muscles and bone structure and that posing is accomplished by actuating every relevant muscle to achieve that pose. The skin should then react to that underling muscle. Once the pose is achieved the underlying structure could be deleted.

I have read with interest all the previous entries on this topic, so I will throw in my 2 cents worth. I grew up in a time when we built things! A hobby to me was building model cars or planes. Then computers came along and we were all fascinated with what computers could do. My first computer was a vic 20. Then a commador 64 with 64 k of memory. Building things in a computer was a logical extension, combining the interest in building things and what computers could accomplish into one. So just being able to do stuff with a computer was fascinating. Younger people don't have that sense of wonder regarding computers. Video games is were its at, providing play/ instant gratification! Model cars and planes, model railroads are pretty much much a thing of the past. They still exist but to a small interest group. Times change, generations of people have different interest. It seems to me for a product like Poser to have continuing relevance it must cater more to professional game development.

I have substance painter and substance designer and B2m, after you have worked with them for a while you begin to realize you can accomplish the same thing with photoshop.I like the Allegorithmic Suite of tools and use them often, but sometimes I feel I have more control with photoshop. Part of that I'm sure is I have been using PS for decades.

thanks for the feedback

thanks,I'll check it out

thanks, Im saving out my texture files, but haven't purchased a zipping program yet.

Thanks, I appreciate the info

Thanks for the reply, I purchased recently Algorithmic Live and from everything I have read when using IDL, AO becomes ever more important, I'm getting old and having trouble keeping up with the constant changes

 The reason I ask the question is, I want to establish a pixel per foot texture density, so that I have the same relative pixel density for items of various sizes.

This however would make each texture a unique size. In other words, say I want 275 pixels per foot of texture and the surface Im texturing is 25 ft.

25 x 275= 6875 px 

I would recommend using a program that you can paint directly on the model, Z Brush, Photoshop extended, mudbox something like that. I used to try and match textures on UV maps untill I got Z Brush. I would never go back, its a total pain trying to match textures on a UV map

Thanks very much, "10.0.4.27796" is what is showing

Thanks

Static architectural items

there are no 3rd party morphs