Do you really have to pollute this thread by discussing these things here? This is OffTopic, even though it is related to the topic...

Quote - Sometimes Im amazed at internet forum interpretations.  I read the OP, and completely understood it.    It's a pretty interesting topic actually and as far as I can see it has nothing at all to do with whether or not said image was allowed at rendo, or CP.
It's about what makes beauty and how to aspire to that within the realm of acceptable age appearance.

Thank you! Finally, someone got the point! How do we pursue surreal beauty, if pictures like mine (where I simply tried to make as beautiful a face as I could make)are refused? The most beautiful face imaginable and "computer-makeable" will have an "apparent age" of appr. 14 years, if we are to believe the scientist. What could the harm be in attaching that face to a body that is clearly that of an adult woman, as I did? Anyone will be able to see that the "person" depicted is "adult"! "what makes beauty and how to aspire to that within the realm of acceptable age appearance" - sums it up pretty nicely! Any thoughts on that, folks? What do you think of my three principles?

Where DO you post them, Diolma?

And please don't discuss CP in this thread... Do you wish for it to be shut down?

Quote - And as far as becoming enemies is concerned I'm afraid I'm entirely too busy to aquire any new enemies at the moment.  Also if you have an interest in becoming my arch-nemesis you'll need to fill out all the required applications and talk to the HR department about it, but if I were you I'd consider carefully before applying.  Not that I'm much to worry about overall, my only super power is the ability to irritate my children to no end.  But the arch-nemesis job doesn't pay much, the hours suck and worst of all they don't offer any health benefits whatsoever :)

Stepdad

LOL :) Excellent! Let's be friends, instead. Sorry for interpreting you the way I did... I often have the problem, particularly when writing in English, that I can't convey emotion as precisely as I wish. I suppose I had better learn to use emoticons more often! Or I should learn English better, I suppose. That there is no objective standard for beauty, I agree. But there is considerably stronger consensus than most people think. Have a look at the statistical measures in the German researh I quoted above. People agree about who is beautiful and who is ugly - at least we mostly do! I happen to agree with you about Ms Roberts and the horse-thing giggle. Her eyes can be radiant, though! I also consider Sandra Bullock quite homely, for the same reason. I'll get back to you on the legal issues. Right now, I have to pay the bills :)

Quote - There's really no point in discussing the theory. Plain fact is that we're living in a phase of extreme puritanism [snip] In a phase like this, you simply can't expect a small company like Rendo to sacrifice itself on the altar of Heroic Freedom. They must operate within the existing limits. And all of us who derive some pleasure or income from the continued operation of Rendo must understand those limits.

I understand those limits. I will respect them. But have you heard of a professor called Timor Kuran? He has a theory about how "phases of extreme puritanism" and other large shifts in what people in general appear to think come about, how they are sustained, and how they lose momentum. "The hidden complexities of social evolution" he calls it. We all place different value on expression, on social status, on conformity. Expressing how you really feel about something gives you certain benefits and leads to certain social repercussions. The benefits of expressing your true feelings - like the fact that you like to ogle naked girls in lewd poses, for instance - is mostly that it makes you feel good to stand up and express yourself and to speak truly. And then there might be the odd external positive effect, like someone sending you a couple of such pictures to your PM box or something like that... The social hit is self-evident. We all know how "coming out" (in some respect) can affect your social life, if you come out on the side currently perceived as "dirty" or "in the wrong". This means that many won't express themselves truly. They surrender themselves with private truths and public lies. It might be something as innocuous a 46 year old Texan housewife who privately enjoys using a vibrator for masturbation. When the topic comes up, she will frown and call such things "unnecessary" and "perverted". In fact, forty Texan housewives might all agree, if asked in public, that such things are positively disgusting, despite the fact that they all privately agree that a little time alone with their vibrators is a nice way of relaxing on a thursday evening. Such social constructions and shackles surround us everywhere. They sometimes fall like dominoes, when someone dares speak out. Probably, that is what happened around 1989 in eastern Europe... But I'm not asking Renderosity to be a figurehead for 3D-CGI porn that looks suspiciously like underage material, like some modern Larry Flynt. I merely want to bring the topic of "apparent age", facial beauty and 3D up to discussion, and see if it leads to an interesting discussion. Where better to do it than here, where people are confronted with the issue on a daily basis? //Wikman

Again, while I see your point Acadia, I'm not interested in discussing the moderation of this website. I'm OK with it. I'm interested in what you feel and think about the ethical, artistic and legal issues raised with regards to 3D-CGI, facial beauty, "apparent age" and "babyfacedness". "The determining factor for age is most often decided based on the face", you write. Do you mean only here on 'rosity? If we take a wider perspective, I would like to ask two questions: 1) Do we work that way, as humans? Is that how our perception of apparent age works? 2) How ought good laws be written on that topic, regardless of society? Ought good laws be based on arbitrary judgement, as that "I know it when I see it"-judge put it?

Ummm. To quote the witch in 'Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves': "Something vexes thee?" :) It might be some subtlety of language that I don't fully master, since English is not my native language, but I can't see how you can construe my answer as "shooting at the messenger". I did not answer you with any vehemence, did I? If I said something terribly offensive without realizing it, I apologise! To meet some of your points: 1) I have not complained for a second that my images were removed. I understand. I respect the decision. I will not complain. In my reply to the moderator who removed my images, I wrote: "I fully respect your decision, and will refrain from posting more pictures of my Utopia character on Renderosity", and in my first post above "I fully support/respect their decision, and do not wish to discuss the moderation per se". Please, Stepdad, try to see that I wish to discuss the problem of "apparent age" from the perspective of the science of facial beauty - and particularly that "exceptional beauty" automatically seems to mean that we perceive a face as young. 2) I have a blog, my own website, where I post my images. I also post them to various imageboards. If there are risks involved, I am prepared to take them myself. That's one more reason why I don't object to the moderation of my images. I'm quite fine with it! Let's look at the bigger picture. Let's not look at Renderosity, but at what would constitute "good laws" in any society. I'm from Sweden, and I shudder at the very mention of the nigh on medieval legal system of the U.S. ;) I suppose it would be interesting to bring up such issues as the possibility of "crimes without victims", but my main point was that there is a problem in that "peak CGI facial beauty" automatically means that the model will look 14 years old... How ought we deal with that. And by "we" I don't mean just people here at 'rosity. Can we disagree without becoming enemies? ;) That usually means a better discussion...

Personally, I feel that "erring on the side of extreme caution" amounts to falling in line behind the moral majority and that it crosses that border into "moralism" and "moral panic". My three principles above, when used in conjunction as described in #3, would be cautious enough IMHO.

Like I wrote, I don't wish to discuss the moderation of Renderosity. Rather, I want to discuss the issue that making truly beautiful faces seems to be out of the question, it the face needs to look 18+ at all cost.

Quote - What I'll usually do is create a master skin shader with SSS. Then, in the shader editor, instead of the default linking to the same texture map over and over again, I'll simply link to the new reference shader. To answer your question directly, yes. You have to do it for each domain. However, the shortcut above is a way to prevent reapplying the same edit over and over. Mark

Here is where my grasp of the program and of the proper terminology comes up short. I think I understand something of what you are saying, but I can't quite picture how I could go about accomplishing this. Could you explain in more detail, and perhaps show me a few screenshots of the process? I would be forever indebted to you if you could help me with this one!