28 threads found!
Thread | Author | Replies | Views | Last Reply |
---|---|---|---|---|
danamongden | 1 | 96 | ||
danamongden | 9 | 200 | ||
danamongden | 22 | 1079 | ||
danamongden | 3 | 94 | ||
danamongden | 5 | 193 | ||
danamongden | 9 | 295 | ||
danamongden | 7 | 279 | ||
danamongden | 3 | 97 | ||
danamongden | 2 | 32 | ||
danamongden | 4 | 49 | ||
danamongden | 6 | 78 | ||
danamongden | 8 | 68 | ||
danamongden | 6 | 101 | ||
danamongden | 10 | 101 | ||
danamongden | 20 | 380 |
197 comments found!
No, the alpha channel was the depth cue. The other channels were the actual image, i.e. object brightness was affected by texture, lights, etc.
Now, if only I could get it to work beyond the simple cases. Maybe this is just a wish-list for Poser 8.
Thread: Z-Depth Masks in P7...and... | Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL
Quote - it appears the depth-cue thing must have some bugs. for example, in your scene display (pose room), when you drag your mouse pointer over the depth-cue icon, what name or title appears to the left of the render tab?
The title of the file appears there.
Note, however, that when I press the icon, I do get the depth-cueing effect on screen. It's just being exported to the TIFF, either from preview or from P4-render, at least not with the complex scene.
Thread: Z-Depth Masks in P7...and... | Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL
Strange... using the simple scene of boxes, I got this to work using P4-renderer as you describe. However, when I try a complex scene with multiple figures & props, it returns to being just a b/w mask with no grey scales. All the guides are off, and the depth cue is on.
I should say, however, that I did get one patch of grey at first, and that was in the figures eyes, but when I put on a different eye texture (a simpler one w/o shaders), that turned to white in the mask.
Any ideas?
Thread: Z-Depth Masks in P7...and... | Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL
There is no check in front of the Display->Guides->Ground Plane. So, sounds like a bug in the windows version. :(
Thanks anyway!
Thread: Z-Depth Masks in P7...and... | Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL
The ground plane is disabled. That is, I have the ground prop turned off on Visible, RayTracing, Casts Shadows, etc. I also have ground shadows disabled. And I turned on the "3-ball icon" for depth cueing.
And the TIFFs alpha plane is still black/white w/ no gray. I'm getting the fade-out on screen, but no fade in the TIFF's alpha channel.
Is there some other way I should be disabling the ground prop?
FYI, I'm running Poser 7.01.109 on a PC, and I'm examing the TIFF with Photoshop CS/2.
Thread: Z-Depth Masks in P7...and... | Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL
Quote - shed, click the depth cue icon (3 balls) so that they appear to fade out. render (ground display disabled) and export image as tiff. in photoshop, the alpha channel will be the depth cue mask.
I tried this, but I didn't get quite what I expected. When enabling the depth cue I do see the object fading into the background, and that effect is preserved when I export it to TIF. However, when I look at the alpha channel, all of the objects are pure white with the background as pure black. There are no shades of gray to indicate relative depth.
Did I miss something, or was I expecting too much?
Thread: Favorite blur for faking depth of field? | Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL
Quote - render a z-depth pass & use that as a depth map with Photoshops lens blur
Ok... how do you "render a z-depth pass" in Poser?
Dan among Den
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
Quote - ... say there are 5 violating thumbs (I'm just picking a number to make my point) that have to be dealt with in one day, 4 of those are blantent nudity very clearly and one might be something that might have been unintentional. My point is that the majority of violations are clearly nudity and the low minority are not as clear..not the other way around:)
For my own information, are these typically first-time offenders, or are these more typically repeat offenders?
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
I agree that the artist bears the responsibility for the thumbnail they upload, but I contend that most thumbnail violations are not willful violations but innocent misundertandings of the policy. My experience was such. I still believe that my original thumbnail (see earlier in the thread) was in compliance.
So, instead of focusing your enforcement technique on the thumbnail itself, you seem to prefer an enforcement policy that is more akin to punishment. I have made suggestions on ways to enforce without such punishment, but you do not seem interested in pursuing them. Instead, you point to the 99% compliance as support for your technique.
Note, as always, I do not question your comittment to the smooth operations of the site and to the implicit support of artists that results. I just feel that in this case you are choosing heavy-handed enforcement when it is not necessary, and it is engendering ill-will needlessly.
At this point in the discussion, I feel we're rehashing the same issues, so I intend to take a break from it for a week or two. I only ask that in the meantime you do give my suggestions some thought.
Dan among Den
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
Thank you for being honest.
And I note that nowhere in your reply do you mention the artists' concerns about having their image suspended and missing out on the time window for receiving comments. Rather, you make it quite clear that you prefer to use the heavy club to enforce this. Thus, I continue to feel that you and the staff are not very concerned with the artists' feelings as you implement this policy.
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
Stacey,
While I am in that minority, my main complaint is NOT with the policy itself. It is your site, and you would be within your collective rights to make whatever policy you wanted, even over the objections of a majority of the users.
Rather, my main complaint is with the heavy-handed action you take in response to a thumbnail violation, i.e. pulling the image itself. I have made the suggestion that you pursue another approach, one that addressed just the thumbnail, not the image that was actually in compliance.
One suggestion was merely to replace the violating thumbnail with the generic Content Advisory one. JumpStartMe2 replied that, "...we have no problem placing a standard content advisory for violating thumbs, but because we have to do this manually, we have allowed members to grab a copy of this thumb and use it if they want...but you have to upload it..it wont be done automatically by the generator." So, that seemed to be acceptable, except that it was work, and had to be done by hand. And yet, the violations are still currently handled by hand, while causing much more ire than I believe this solution would.
I then suggested a more automated approach, one where the thumbnail itself could be flagged as being in violation, allowing the gallery code to show the Content Advisory thumbnail automatically when appropriate. However, you shot that down as being too low of a priority for the programmers compared to other ongoing projects. When I reiterated my perception of its importance, your polite dismissal translated to: We've already decided, so please be quiet now.
Thus, I am left with the perception that you have already made up your minds not to address this issue of how you deal with thumbnail violations, and that you don't particularly care if the artists are upset.
Nor am I swayed by your statistics of sitewide happiness as justification that we're all happy with this policy. Around the same time you did this, the gallery performance picked up significantly. Ditto with forum performance. All in all, you and your team have made excellent progress on improving the usability of the site, and you have been properly rewarded by a swelling of traffic and site use. However, to point to that success as a sign of approval for the handling of thumbnail violations is inappropriate. I could just as easily say that the site success is a sign that my art has improved. Correlation is not the same as causation.
You also say that it's such a small, trivial percentage of thumbnails that run into violations. If it is such a small number, then doing the work of replacing the offending thumbnails with the Content Advisory one (rather that hitting the "Suspend Image") button should be a small enough workload to handle though existing mechanisms. Or, if there are indeed too many to do that feasibly, then this really SHOULD be a priority to address in an automated fashion.
In the meantime, I know artists who continue to think that you do not take their position into account. You can say you do, but your actions indicate otherwise. You eventually responded with a good solution to the whole image-resizing uproar, but you're not giving me any hope that you will do so here. So, let me ask you straight out. Is it your ongoing desire to always treat thumbnail violations by suspending the image itself, or do you desire to find a solution that allows the image to go on uninterrupted while the thumbnail is suspended separately? If the former, then I would be interested in how you justify that sanction with your statement of taking the artists' feelings into account. If the latter, when might we see some progress?
Dan among Den
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
Stacey,
I have read the policy. I am questioning its logic, or what IMO is a lack thereof.
You spoke in an earlier message of trying to keep things looking professional, but I believe that the staff's application of this policy leaves much to be desired. It makes the admins look capricious and petty, especially when the only feedback mechanism is the heavy-handed suspension of the image.
However, it's your site and therefore your rules. I will abide by them. Still, the way the admins have handled this leaves me very disatisfied with the staff performance of Renderosity. Since the departure of artists seems to make little impact on things, I will not threaten it.
But... I do spend a decent chunk of money here, and I will have to review that practice. I can buy many of the same products elsewhere, and until the staff can find a better way to handle this situation, I will be making the effort to do just that. When I can, I will urge others to do the same.
Stacey, you have been polite, but by and large, I get the feeling that the admins here have made up their minds on this issue and its heavy-handed application and just don't care what the artists think about it. Only real change on your end will sway that feeling.
Perplexed and annoyed,
Dan among Den
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
I always thought that the policy on the word "Nudity" or "Censored" in the thumbnails was to state that you couldn't just obscure the nudity with the word, something that was a somewhat common practice prior to this policy. It seems illogical to make the words themselves forbidden.
As to why I might want to make such a thumbnail rather than use the generic "Content Advisory" icon, perhaps I want to have an identifiable "content advisory" icon, which I believe is what the artist in question was trying to do. Much like many artists sign their names or add a logo to their icons to make them more identifiable as their particular art, I might want to do that for a thumbnail. That way, if I cannot make a meaningful thumbnail without including any of the nudity from an image, I could at least brand it with my own personalized "content advisory" thumbnail. If I had made a similar icon that merely stated "Content Advisory" rather than "Nudity" or "Censored", would that be allowed under this logic? Or is any such text disallowed?
For that matter, if I uploaded an image that was nothing but the word "Nudity" and allowed the site to generate an automatic thumbnail, (i.e. it would just scale the word down to the 200x200 box), would such an image be pulled for a thumbnail violation?
Dan among Den
Thread: New Thumbnail Policy - Please read | Forum: Community Center
Can you tell me if this thumbnail would be acceptable, or if it would violate the "no nudity in thumbnails" policy, and if it does violate it, what is the logic for such a policy?
Dan among Den
p.s. Congratulations -- so far this week, two of my favorite artists have headed off for other pastures.
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
Thread: Z-Depth Masks in P7...and... | Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL