Oh, before I forget: Appearantly her plastic surgeon was a pretty cheap one. Her boob-job was done pretty sloppy, leaving her breasts looking like soccer-balls. I would consider taking this case to court if I was her. :) Sorry, but the breasts do not look real. They actually look like one of these cheap boob-jobs you find in the porn industry.

Actually, I can't think of a collection of vertices as "a little girl". A collection of vertices is always what it looks like and nothing more. Sure, the original file may look like a little girl - but the result of the magnets turn it into something of a young woman. If it was the picture of a real woman, I would rate her in her late teens/early twenties. Sheesh... some people seem to actually think of the poser-figures as real people.

Normally, offset-printing is done either at 60 lpi (lines per inch) or 70 lpi. For 60 lpi you need 305 dpi (dots per inch) resolution, for 70 lpi you will need a resolution of 350 dpi. Do not hit to high on the dpis, or you may risc getting a moire-pattern in your prints. If you are aiming at a mathematical-raster-print, you'll need your pictures at about 400 dpi - the rest will be done by the RIP-software. You should render the image at maximum resolution possible in Poser (4096 x 4096 pixels) and cut and resize it to fit your printing-size + 3 mm on all sides (bleed) When converting from RGB-colours to CMYK, make sure to use a solution for art-prints or else your pictures will look flat and greyish in print. If you need any help in converting the pictures for print, I can help you. I am doing this kind of thing quite a lot.

I tried this before. CuriousLabs never even bothered to answer. I had to buy a new english version of Poser to be able to work. That's one reason I never updated to Poser 5 until my boss bought a copy in the USA. The german version of Poser is a piece of #*$%&!

The face is great, but the chest still needs some work. Male nipples are a bit further outward than female nipples and more on the outside of the breast.

And frankly said: I wouldn't want DAZ to do so. I have seen P5-users go mad over all the bugs that came with the cloth-room and the hair. And the few pictures I have seen using the P5 hair, none came even close to the usual transmapped hair. If DAZ has something comparable, than hopefully some plug-in or something of their own design. As far as I have understood the architecture of DAZ-Studio, you can add plug-ins to the programm. Wouldn't it be nice if you could choose between different hair- or cloth-plugins?

So what? There are tons of Poser 3 users, so we > shouldn't use transmaps either? Oh, and not everyone > has Vicky, so we better make Posette content only. Uhm... if you don't own Vicky, you may have missed something: Vicky and I think also Mike, were sold for just 8 Pound or so on the Cover-CD of the ComputerArts Magazine. So, if there is still anybody without those two models - hard luck. There are still a lot of back-issues available and the model is really worth it's price. On the other hand, it is called "DAZ"-Studio. Ever noted the "DAZ" in the name? It means, that it is not a CuriousLab-Product, but a DAZ-Product. So if DAZ supports Poser, this is a) a pretty nice move b)an intelligent business-decision, since it increases the customer-base. But most users here still seem to use Poser 4 - I guess many not even having bought the ProPack. I never bought Poser 5 since I never really trusted CuriousLabs to really update the product. When I heard that the memory-system got no update and there was still no hardware 3D-support, Poser 5 was no longer anywhere near attractive. And I do guess that most Poser-users see it that way. I know of cases, where people switched back to using P4. So why would DAZ support a programm which is not widely in use, riddled with bugs, has a memory-leak you could drive a car through, when there is a somewhat dated application, that is widely in use and there is a certain backward-compatibility. What would be more interesting for me, is if DAZ Studio supports such things as ERC, EasyPose and all those other little tricks you can do with Poser.

I would be happy if Poser would simply be brought up to date concerning it's memory system (aka "the leak") and it's display. A little hardware acceleration would work wonders on the programm. To me, Curious Labs has made me lose all confidence in Poser. I am waiting for DAZ Studio. DAZ has interest in their programm being good and selling more of their products along with this programm. I can't say the same for the company behind Shade. OK, they have their high-end-application and they have a connection to E-On. But what do they want with a programm aimed at illustrators and semi-professional animators? Don't get me wrong - I like using Poser (4) for illustrations - but I would never get the idea of using it for serious 3D-Animation. And Shade is not really a player in the big business outside of Japan. I do hope that E-Frontier will try to get Poser placed as an illustrators tool - and not try to change it into a high-end-application costing ten times the price of Poser 4.

It's not a "him" - they are selling these things as MMS-files for mobile-phones. And they only speak portugese... And my portugese is somewhat... uhm... rusty.

Well, actually it takes me about 3 to 4 hours to model a costume. It takes me up to 20 hours of work to get a halfway useful UV-Map for my models. (OK, I'll have to admit, that I am a UV-Mapping-Masochist. I hate UV-Mapping, yet I can't stand the thought of not having a good UV-template for my model.) Maybe you should start preparing the UV-Mapping in Max. I always start like this: I give the whole piece of clothing a material named "fabric" and the seams a material named "seams". Then I start selecting areas that can easily be mapped with a cylindrical projection and give them a material called: add-to-fabric_pro-cylindrical. If I see an area, where I know, that I will have to use a flat projection, I'll start looking for the areas, that will be distorted by the flat mapping and give them a material called: add-to-fabric_flat-mapping-sides. When I am done with distributing materials on my model, I cut them to pieces (Makes you feel like Jack the Ripper or the guy from Texas Chainsaw Massacre.) and export them to Wavefront OBJ-Format. Now I simply start mapping the different materials in UV-Mapper. In UV-Mapper, you can simply stitch the different parts of the map together, giving you a good map. After mapping, simply take all the "add-to-"-materials and apply them to the basic "fabric"-material. Works great for me - and I do think that my mappings are halfway useful. Personally, I use UV-Mapper Pro, which is one of the best solutions - in my opinion. We are all waiting for Verion 3 of UV-Mapper, but Saint Steve Cox's house caught fire when the electricity was cut on the east-coast this summer and Steve's got better things to do than programming this app... By the way: Ajax, did you receive my mail? I seem to be unable to send you any mails.

Ups, almost forgot: It's "Colour Wallpapers" and then "Fantasy"

Help what? Help sooth the hysteria of some people that their artwork is being stolen? I do not want to restrict my pictures to 800x600 just because some people are paranoid. If those people wish to protect their pictures, they should use watermarks and resize to 800x600 - but I will leave Renderosity the moment that such matters are forced on all of us, because some of us can't live with the thought of someone saving their files and taking a look at them on their harddisk or can't live with the problem, that some people steal artwork for their pages. This whole thing is a hot-air-debate, blown up by a few people. Renderosity always makes a big fuzz about their 144.000 or more customer base. Well, how many made a fuzz about stolen pictures? 100? That's less than 1% of the community. For those of us, who wish protection, there are possibilities: Watermarking or reducing the size. Those methods must be enough. I have no such paranoia and I wish to be able to upload my pictures any goddamn size that was possible up to now, with or without watermarking, the way I WISH THEM TO BE. Not the way that those very few people wish them to be.

Uhm... I tend to find this funny. You know, saving a picture that you found on the internet for personal viewing is absolutely legal in the whole EU. I have no idea how it is in America, but it is perfectly legal over here. But I guess, some of our copyright-overconscious-people here at Renderosity just started to call everything theft that doesn't fit into their own view of how laws should work. I am currently trying to get my fingers on a book about US-copyright, but I guess it is perfectly legal in the USA, too. As for your "anti-right-click"-measures: They are pathetic. If I wish to save the picture, it is no problem at all. If I just wish to view a picture, they are a nuisance. If I wish to scan the gallery, they are a veritable pain i.t.a. I also have to admit something: I have a almost complete gallery of hobbit saved to my disk. I do nothing with those pictures but look at them and wonder, how anyone can be so damn good with Poser. If this is illegal, I really wish to see the paragraph that this is based upon.

hm... I would probably take the job. But straightening these pants would be more than just a pain in the ass. Why don't you redo the whole pant with simple subdivision-surfaces?

Well, no officer in the Wehrmacht wore this kind of costume for sure. Women were active in the Wehrmacht, but only in non-combat positions. No officer of the Wehrmacht wore this amount of Swastikas. The arm-patch was reserved for SS-Uniforms only and for Party-Meetings of the NSDAP. No unit had Swastikas on their shoulder-flaps and only a pin was worn on the revers - by very fanatical NSDAP-Members. Soldiers uniforms had no Swastikas on their buttons. The hat is halfway correct for an Waffen-SS-Officer. From a historical point of view, the picture has not much to offer. Maybe for a fetishist, but most fetishists prefer correct uniforms. Why should I be offended? I am German, I am in the army - but I don't see why this picture should offend me.