Wow, that was fast on the response. This is the first problem I've had with the renderosity store and I must say that I'm impressed with the speed and manner in which it was handled. Thanks again Yvette

I've already stated that rules and laws are not generally rational or self consistent. Also, with regard to child pornography, we ARE under McCarthyism now. Read almost any computer or tech news and you will see every day arrests and convictions for using computers in connection with child pornography. Child pornographers are the new bogey man to scare the public into all sorts of restrictive laws and this is one of them. However, while McCarthyism was eventually declared to be A Bad Thing, that did not return the broken lives of the people who ran afoul of it. Many many innocent people were harassed, jailed or worse. If Renderosity makes firm rules known now, the operators will not become one of the broken innocents in the future. While that does lead to a restriction on artistic freedom, that is the price that must be paid on the internet today.

People who follow all laws and rules frequently do look like idiots. Laws and rules are generally not very self consistent. While banning the exact picture that you posted will obviously not cause any trouble, you have simply taken the covered by body parts to its logical but silly furthest extent. The intent of this rule was probably to prevent images with underage (appearing, since they are not real) models with hands or feet strategically placed to block the bits and pieces. Unfortunately, we must respect the letter of the rule, not the intent, to be in compliance with it. While most poses with body parts blocking a child's bits and pieces would not be considered child porn, some foaming at the mouth radical with an agenda could probably find images that could be interpreted as child porn in court. I don't really like this situation myself, but the penalties for child pornography are so life destroying that you can't really blame the operators for erring on the side of caution. If a bad image is posted and prosecuted before it is pulled, the operators could point to the policy as a means of (some small) defense in a courtroom.

Why are you complaining? The new rule is to protect Renderosity itself. While there are always ways to interpret a rule or law in a manner that seems illogical or silly, in this case the rule is in place to protect the site and its owners and operators from outside law enforcement taking an interest in and possibly prosecuting for violation of child pornography laws. I really think that not being able to post an image that shows a minor's bits and pieces is a fair tradeoff to prevent later claims of child pornography. You may complain of silliness, but I think that the reasoning is justified.

I like them. The flame shirt texture especially is hot.

Awesome image. This is the kind of grass I was looking for. I don't think that 2d picts work well with animations, do they?

Man, where were your images when I was looking? I spent almost two hours looking for good examples of transparency and didn't find any. Your gallery is full of them! Thanks for your input, it looks like I will be going to CompUSA later today.

I can confirm InBlack's statement. I had the exact same problem with Victoria 2.0 and high resolution textures on a Win98 computer with 640 MB (that's 640, not 64). I changed my operating system to Windows 2000 Professional and haven't had the problem since then. I do have some minor problems with parts of the interface disappearing from time to time, but if I minimize and then maximize Poser, the interface shows up again. I paid $219 for Windows 2000, but you can find upgrades for a whole lot less if you shop really well. I wouldn't have done it, but I had just bought the Pro Pack and a bunch of models and textures and really wanted to get it to work right away.

How about two week themes? I like the idea of themes, but don't always have the time to do them in just a week. If I can't get them done in 14 days, though, I jsut can't get them done at all. what do you guys think?

Actually the smile is not the problem. The photo Sarah has hair and the model is still bald! Just composite in hair and you should be fine. :)