Just thought I'd see what the rest of you thought about Postworking images. Hope I'm not opening a can-of-worms here! I do feel that using Postwork in images shows off the talent of the artist and NOT the power of the particular 3D package. If you had good postworking skills there really isn't the need for the advanced clothing room and realistic hair for say Poser - you could just paint them in. I think I would like to see more 'untouched' renders in the Gallery as it would inspire me to get the best out of the package. If an image is heavily postworked then I know with my lack of artistic ability I would never be able to produce the stunning images shown there. Actually when you think about it, Postworked images should really belong in a 2D gallery since strictly the image is no-longer 3D (3D implies you can reproduce the image from any angle) Certainly if someone is looking for a 3D package and wants to see what a package can do, there would be no point in looking at a Postworked image as it does not demonstrate the power of the package. As a case in point, when Curious Labs first released Poser5 they ran a competition to show off the power of Poser5. Believe it or not, the winning image, fantastic as it was, was rendered in Vue with imported Poser figures! I hope no-one bouught P5 on the strength of that winning image or they would have been sorely disappointed! The Gallery images at Curious Labs still feature heavily postworked images and I think this should be highlighted for any potential buyers! I know some of you will say that art is all about the image and not how it was produced but if that were the case, why split the galleries into the various packages (Poser, Vue, 3d Studio etc) - all images should be in the one gallery. Perhaps there should be galleries for 'True' 3D work witout ANY postwork. It would at least give some of us non-talented artists the chance of maybe getting in that Top 20 Gallery list! What does anyone else think? p.s. I've cross posted this in both the Vue and Poser Forums to see whether there are differing views although I must admit, there is much less Postworking goes on in the Vue Gallery and some of the images are pretty close to photo-realistic straight from the render output!

I have a foot firmly in both camps here. 1. I hate postworking because if I rely on it, I learn nothing about the capabilites of the software I use, and cover up all my shortcomings with paint. 2. I love postworking because it enables me to produce a finished image in a fraction of the time I would need to spend in order to achieve the same effect in Poser. Short answer is, it depends why I'm making the image. I'm not a 3D purist. To be honest, that's something akin to trainspotting, IMO.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Gallery

I see your point. For myself, the end image is the thing, not necessarily how you got there. So if you have postwork and it looks great - great, if you don't and it looks great - great. They're both great to me. I'm not going to split academic hairs on how you did it, as long as YOU did it. Then again I can see the value of knowing that image x is an untouched render as an exposure of what the given software can do, and what someone did with the given software. Personally I would much rather have as much work as possible done in the software, so it's always good to have people testing the limits and showing us what they learn. So I don't see the need for separate galleries, but it would be nice if more people gave more details on what they did to produce their images. We'd all learn more from that. Unzipped

People would still submit their postworked work to the Poser galleries because it gets the most traffic. And those people would never sacrifice losing those precious views by putting things in the correct categories. :)

I see a lot of good images in the galleries which would be much better with a bit more postwork. Of course in Poser4 the most noticable boo-boos are the elbow/knee folding. In Poser 5 the thing I notice most is 'hair floating' off the scalp which should be taken care of b4 rendering but could be touched up in postwork. As to representation of a product, most of the graphics in the store are marked as 'no postwork'...I never buy something on the basis of a gallery render. I go by the pix at the store w/o postwork and can determine from them how much postwork was necessary to make the gallery image look good. I enjoy the postwork process more than actually putting the image together...postwork is where you can put all your of graphic skills into play.

I don't generally do any postwork on my renders, but only because I'm not very good at it yet. I'm actually generally happy with the final render straight out of Poser, except for the usual problem areas of unexpected mesh kinks, spiky knees, elbows, etc. when there's sharp angles in the pose.

The closest I've got to it in any of my Gallery pics so far is the last one, where I had to render in two layers and use alpha channel masking to place the figure in the scene. It looks OK, I think, but I still wish my one-lunged little PC could have rendered the whole scene in one go.

FWIW, I'm not much of a 3D purist either, I'm more of a go-with-what-works (or -what-looks-good) type.

"I see a lot of good images in the galleries which would be much better with a bit more postwork" Oh god. Don't say that in any of the other forums around here. ;-) Poser is one of the only programs I know that relies so heavily on "overpainting" the final render. The software's shortcomings are a big part of the reason why. But another big part is that it appeals VERY MUCH to people who do 2D art for a living or hobby. The interface is amateurish compared to other programs, and it's very easy to get started using (try opening Maya or 3dsMax for the first time and see how long it takes to catch on). I'm not a 3D "purist", but I do like to see good renders done with no postwork. It shows what a program is capable of in the hands of a good artist. That's one of the reasons I frequent the other forums/galleries on this site as well. 3dsmax, Maya, and even the Bryce galleries are a good example of some great PURE 3D work. Rarely would you ever see an image postworked in those galleries.

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

"Actually when you think about it, Postworked images should really belong in a 2D gallery since strictly the image is no-longer 3D (3D implies you can reproduce the image from any angle)" Well I see your point nothing is truly 3D. When you work on your computer in a 3D program you are approximating 3D space in 2D and previewing the results on a 2D monitor; the same applies for the visual mediums of film and broadcast. Even the film itself is heavily color timed to produce a more pleasant effect. If you can't grasp an object in the real-world then it's not 3D. If a person wants to showcase their modeling skills they can use a flat grey shader on their model and render in radiosity. If an artistic wants to demonstrate their entire skill-set and what they can do to improve and existing image that shows off talent. As a former VFX supervisor for film I can tell you that we never released a shot straight from a render - compositing (2D) was not only a necessity but is the most efficient means to merge, color correct and time various 3D elements. Nothing that looks good is real only imagined by the artist.

"As a former VFX supervisor for film I can tell you that we never released a shot straight from a render - compositing (2D) was not only a necessity but is the most efficient means to merge, color correct and time various 3D elements." Yes, but that's not exactly the same "postwork" that is being discussed in the cases indicated here. I do (and have done) animation for television, and still images for magazine ads. The work that's done for television (or movies) has to be perfected as much as possible in the 3D environment as you probably know already, since painting over imperfections in photoshop, like can be done for still images, is not a realistic possibility. ;-) I think the main issue is the degree of post-painting versus 3D render, and how that effects the final claim. In other words, if 90% of the "work" is done in photoshop, does it cease to be a Poser image or 3D render? I think in some cases it does. We all know that 3D isn't REAL 3D, but it's still constructed in a computer environment that represents 3D. So the issue becomes how much of an image is showcasing one's talent with a particular 3D program, and how much is their talent with photoshop or the like.

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

I personnally postwork an image until I get the look and feel I want. I don't do images to show off what my app can do, and I frankly don't care what someone uses to make his picture,it's wether or not it touches me. I'll grant you that it often is a lot easier to adjust lighting in Photoshop than to tweak a light array. But again art is not a question of being a better dial twiddler than the other guy, it's the emotional response the artwork ellicits.

Dominique Digital Cats Media

To me, the final image is all that matt3rs, and how you get there is of little importance. My art teacher from art school said "Da Vinci used every tool available to create his artwork including cutting apart dead bodies. And YOU balk and using a xerox or scanner?" An artist SHOULD use every tool avaialable to them. If someone paints kickass hair, then why even bother with jerking around learning poser hair? That's what's great, and makes every artist's work unique.. we all have different talents.

Way too many people take way too many things way too seriously.

"An artist SHOULD use every tool avaialable to them. If someone paints kickass hair, then why even bother with jerking around learning poser hair?" Well, you're absolutely correct. The final image is what matters. BUT... this website makes it a point to break galleries down into software genres. Why do that if all that matters is the final image? The point is, is a work that is essencially 90% photoshop really a POSER image? Does it belong in the Poser gallery? Many if not MOST of the users here do not like it when an artist uses another more powerful application to render their Poser figures (note that such a thing is NOT allowed in the Poser monthly challenge). Yet it's perfectly acceptable and applauded when someone simply paints over a naked poser figure - background and all. I don't know. If the site wasn't so fragmented into which program you use, I would agree that the final product is all that matters (and in the real world it IS), but in this community, does that - no, SHOULD that apply equally? That's the question as I saw it.

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

I use lighting, directed views, misdirection, and elaborate explanations in lieu of postwork..;)

I wish I'd said that.. The Staircase Wit

anahl nathrak uth vas betude doth yel dyenvey..;)

The point is, is a work that is essencially 90% photoshop really a POSER image? Does it belong in the Poser gallery? Many if not MOST of the users here do not like it when an artist uses another more powerful application to render their Poser figures (note that such a thing is NOT allowed in the Poser monthly challenge). Yet it's perfectly acceptable and applauded when someone simply paints over a naked poser figure - background and all. I don't know. If the site wasn't so fragmented into which program you use, I would agree that the final product is all that matters (and in the real world it IS), but in this community, does that - no, SHOULD that apply equally? That's the question as I saw it." Hmmm.. well then the problem to me, is the perception problems of the viewer. If they ONLY want to see bare Poser renders, then that is their problem, not the artist. The artist determines what is a "poser" render, and what is, say, a "lightwave" or "Vue" render. I think the catagories are more to generally make it easier to see what work can be done with the various programs and tools available. I don't think it needs or should be anything more, or less then that.

Way too many people take way too many things way too seriously.

"The work that's done for television (or movies) has to be perfected as much as possible in the 3D environment as you probably know already, since painting over imperfections in photoshop, like can be done for still images, is not a realistic possibility. ;-)" You're kidding right? Inferno and Henry are both real-time broadcast/film quality painting and compositing systems. You can do EXACTLEY what you do in these systems that you can in Photoshop. I them everyday; Henry for broadcast work and Inferno for 2K film res files.

"I think the catagories are more to generally make it easier to see what work can be done with the various programs and tools available. I don't think it needs or should be anything more, or less then that." Well, that's the point then. If someone paints over a Poser render, at some point is ceases to showcase what can be done with the tools in Poser, and focuses more on the photoshop skill of the artist. That's all good, but it's not showcasing what can be done in Poser aside from using it as a painter's stencil. So again, why then is there a double standard here? Why are there specific galleries that are program-specific if people are allowed to freely cover up the capabilities (or lack thereof) in a specific program with work that's done mostly in another program? And why then are renders done with Poser figures using other apps frowned upon in those same galleries that applaud excessive photoshop work on their renders? I don't mean color correcting a render, I mean totally painting a render... such as hair, background, clothes and more. I wouldn't even care if this wasn't a site that broke down galleries into specific applications, but still allow Photoshop use as if it's something that comes bundled with Poser.

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

"You're kidding right? Inferno and Henry are both real-time broadcast/film quality painting and compositing systems. You can do EXACTLEY what you do in these systems that you can in Photoshop. I them everyday; Henry for broadcast work and Inferno for 2K film res files." Of course you can do that if you have the budget, but many, if not most studios tend to perfect things as much as possible before final render so as to save on the excessive postwork expense. Blur Studios and Animal Logic for example do tons of composit work for film and tv, but tend to do the majority of the FX and shading directly in the 3D application. Animal Logic recently did a few scenese for Discovery's Extreme Martial Arts that was a combination of composit and actual 3D environments, but rendered completely in 3dsMax using Vray render engine. PS: by expense I mean time as well as $$.

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

If maxxxmodelz has his/her way, I think nobody would post in the poser gallery. Most of my images are 80% poser 20% photoshop. I only have 1 image in my gallery that's pure poser. I guess I can't post in the photoshop gallery. But if I can't post in the poser gallery either, then I think I should leave renderosity and let the purists have their ways. If you sell a product, it is recommended to post a pure poser image. But in the gallery I don't think some black and white ideas about the purity of a render is just ludicrous. Come on, artists live in a gray world. Black and White worlds are for mathematicians and suits. Just my 2 pennies. JV.

Software: Daz Studio 4.15, Photoshop CC, Zbrush 2022, Blender 3.3, Silo 2.3, Filter Forge 4. Marvelous Designer 7

Hardware: self built Intel Core i7 8086K, 64GB RAM, RTX 3090 .

"If you spend too much time arguing about software, you're spending too little time creating art!" ~ SomeSmartAss

"A critic is a legless man who teaches running." ~ Channing Pollock

My Gallery My Other Gallery

" If maxxxmodelz has his/her way, I think nobody would post in the poser gallery." Nonsense. ;-) I'm simply asking why it's OK to postwork with Photoshop, but not OK to render in another app. The galleries are one thing, but the Poser Challenge for example is another. There's no specified limit to the postwork allowed in the challenge, but it IS specified that you can't use another app to render. If the point is showing off what you can do with Poser, then isn't "sweetening" the imperfections using Photoshop as much covering up one's abilities as rendering in an outside app? Particularly when there's no set limit to just how much postwork one is allowed to do. But I digress. It matters not to me since I haven't participated in the challenges, but I like playing Devil's Advocate sometimes. ;-)

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

I stop participating in challenges. They just don't appeal to me anymore. I think putting restrictions to what one can use to achieve one's vision is just not fun.

Software: Daz Studio 4.15, Photoshop CC, Zbrush 2022, Blender 3.3, Silo 2.3, Filter Forge 4. Marvelous Designer 7

Hardware: self built Intel Core i7 8086K, 64GB RAM, RTX 3090 .

"If you spend too much time arguing about software, you're spending too little time creating art!" ~ SomeSmartAss

"A critic is a legless man who teaches running." ~ Channing Pollock

My Gallery My Other Gallery

Stealth1701 - I agree with you completely. Long time ago I tried to run a campaign against postwork in the Poser Gallery - it failed. I never use postwork, because it does not show the capabilities of the real 3d program its often only used to hide flaws or to add effects which are not in Poser. It usually takes me several months to get where I want, and I have projects sitting on m y HD for more than a year. This is the header of the Poser gallery: "This gallery is primarily for images rendered within Poser itself. Images of Poser figures rendered in other applications are still welcome, but what's the challenge in that? See how well you can do using it's basic rendering tools!" Postworked pictures should go into the Mixed Medium gallery, this is where they belong.

Hi Well I certainly seemed to have opened up a can of worms here! However, I think a few people here are missing the point of the discussion and my original request. I was NEVER saying that postworked images should not be allowed and I agree that artists should express themselves with whatever mediums they can to achive the final result - some images even NEED postwork because the concept and mood would be impossible if the renderer produced phot-quality images . BUT, I think there should be a section that allows PURE 3D work to be posted. Isn't the ultimate goal of a 3D program to allow someone to produce a photo-realistic render WITHOUT postwork? Why should CuriousLabs have any motivation to produce Poser6 if the majority of people are willing to make up for its shortcommings by importing into ANOTHER package like VUE or with some clever use of Photoshop. Also, the reason why I as a Poser user, look in the Poser section is to see what I can do with MY package. Although its great to view the fantastic images, postworked or not, I will never be able to achieve some of the images myself because I don't have the artistic 2D talent. Lets give credit to those that manage to push the 3D packages to their extremes and give credit to those who obviously have talent in the 2D arena. I definately would like to see competitions where NO postwork is allowed. I too have stopped entering comps for this reason. Why spend hours composing and lighting a scene when someone else wins the prize just because they are a better painter and can use Photoshop better! Like I said before, postworked images belong in a 2D gallery and not under the specific package sections- or could we at least have 1 new sections where we could put all Pure3D images?

So what are we actually saying counts as postwork? In my last gallery image I took a Poser 5 render and used Photoshop to add a montage background and to perform some desaturations/sepia/graident colourings to the image - I was trying to get the colouring of a faded Victorian photo yet the sharpness of a modern photo - I could not have got that effect in Poser alone. Surely the degree and nature of the postwork defines which catagory it is in - and whether the artist has declard what he/she has done.

Elgyfu - this is a good case in point. If you had used Poser4 could you not have achieved the same results since you only used Poser for the actual person in the image? Would people have rushed out to buy Poser5 thinking it offered Sepia effects etc? I'm sure your image looked fantastic but I think it ceased being a POSER image the moment it was imported into Photoshop. If I had a Poser figure, imported it into 3d Studio to add some detail then rendered the final image in Vue, which gallery would it go in? My agrument is that it should go into the Vue Gallery as that is where the fial render was done. Alternatively if it was then removed from Vue and had lots of special lighting effects added it should be in the Photoshop or mixed medium gallery. Again I'm not taking anything away from the image itself - just where it should be posted. This of course exludes that all important copyright signature which obviously does have to be done using a 2D package ;-)

The question is, is poser a standalone program. the answer is NO. Poser renders are dark, overly saturated and blurry. Rendering and displaying raw poser renders just ain't the way to go. At least have the decency to run some adjustment layers and unsharp mask. Thats just meeting the standards of viewability and effective visual communication. So postwork is not just a good idea, its a NECESSITY. But I don't think thats the kind of postwork we're talking about. We're talking about the fantasy airbrush fluff that dominates the Hot 20, DAZ and CL galleries. Personally I can't stand that "art" and I find it about as exciting as a Barry Manilow record. If someone takes a naked, untextured poser figure, renders it and then postworks it to death THAT AINT POSER. Its something else, kinda like those motivational posters in your guidance counselor's office or breakroom at work. Now if you wanna talk about some real deal ALAN ALDA photorealism, thats what Im all about. Give me Alan Alda digital clones, or don't waste my time. C'mon people, make that face room work. And use some hot GI lighting while you're at it. :)

.."Isn't the ultimate goal of a 3D program to allow someone to produce a photo-realistic render WITHOUT postwork?".. And here I was thinking it was to create an image. Never could understand why this is an issue for some. You use the tools that let you realize your own individual vision. The galliers are used to display that vision,not to show off what one softwear can or can't do. Perhapes people that are more into the softwear than artistic fulfillment,would be happier posting in the ProductShowcase gallery (or hanging out at the softwear's website and talk "spec's"). If you feel satisfied that your untouched Poser render fulfills what your trying to say to the viewer,...then that is how you should work. While Poser has improved in features since version 1,the basic functions remain the same. If you read the advertising for the first release of Poser,you will see the intended use for the program... "Photoshop,Painter,filters,tracing templates,special effects,exporting to other render programs like Ray Dream"....etc. Looks like what they had in mind,was a very openended use for Poser...

SWAMP

There seem to be two parties: - one party of people wants to reach an artistic effect in their pictures, no matter what tools they use - and say its only the result that counts. I have nothing against postwork but its not my challenge. - the other party (like me) talks about a three dimensional Virtual Reality generated in 3DCGs. This has absolutely nothing to do with showing off what one software can do. This is not the goal - the goal is to create a realistic good picture, where a world with its own physics is simulated by a computer. Thats in my view a bigger challenge than using the Photoshop stamp and smear over a picture. This is 2D not 3D, sorry. I like to move around with my camera in 3D and make different shots from different angles, or make the shadows look realistic from any angle and so on. In the past I had discussions with some people here, let me give you oneexamples: The picturee represents a 3d Vicky as pinup- then apparently a pinup from an international collection was cut out, and just the hair and the clothing was used. As most people probably did not know the original, but the picture went up into the top pictures. This has nothing to do with 3D. Another example are the promo renders at every place. Okay advertisement always lies - but its for instance forbidden to use photographs in order to advertise for a TV screen. And I see this custom here used continously - I call this a case of severe treachery to trick people into buying products and then being left with something that does not work at all. Look at all the posting and questions : How do I set up my lights, how I render skin etc. This is the outcome of frustrated buyers. These are probably two completely different aims which demand completely different skills (probably). So why not give us our playground ?

The question is, is poser a standalone program. the answer is NO. Poser renders are dark, overly saturated and blurry. Rendering and displaying raw poser renders just ain't the way to go. At least have the decency to run some adjustment layers and unsharp mask. Thats just meeting the standards of viewability and effective visual communication. So postwork is not just a good idea, its a NECESSITY. Excuse me but this is nonsense. If your poser renders are dark or overly saturated you haven't put the right lights on them. And if they're blurry you're antialiasing them too much or using textures of a wrong resolution. Poser is very much a stand alone program, if you know how to use it properly. Especially Poser 5, since the renderer is better. But what is the point is: Does it produce photo real renders? Well, sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. Depends a lot of the models and even more so of the TEXTURES used. You can't expect photorealism from a painted texture. Sure it can be beautifull, but it won't be PHOTOreal. I don't do much post on my pictures, not JUST from puritan reasons, but also from lack of skill and general laziness. Granted my pictures aren't in the Hot 20 either, and the pic I have made that has the highest number of views HAS some postwork. I agree with whoever said that people post in the Poser gallery coz that's where the hits are. I've posted a few in Mixed Medium and they've hardly had any hits at all. I've also posted more or less the same pic in 2 different galleries with a HUGE difference in views. Go figure. I can't really blame people for posting in the Poser gallery allthough the pic doesn't REALLY belong there. A closeup aof a poser character, rendered in Vue, with a filter from photoshop applied.. where do you post that? It would ideally belong in Mixed Media but I think a lot of people THINK of it as a POSER picture, since that's where the major part of the work took place. And lastly an example of a non-postworked pic that IMO turned out pretty good. And yup, it's even an attempt at photorealism.

"If your poser renders are dark or overly saturated you haven't put the right lights on them. And if they're blurry you're antialiasing them too much or using textures of a wrong resolution" Actually I think thats a bunch of nonsense. Last time I checked, theres two anti-aliasing option; on and off. So I don't know how I could be "antialiasing them too much". As far as lighting goes, even with the best lighting poser renders are dark and overly saturated. Obviously the better the lighting the better the image, but theres no excuse not to at least run levels and sharpen the image a bit. Unless you like sloppy poser renders. :)

I will agree with you up to a point. Poser renders very easily DO get too dark, but they don't NEED to be. It DOES depend on your lightning, and granted, Poser's lights are somewhat special. :o) The antialiasing, sorry I am getting too used to P5 terms where you have different levels of antialiasing. You're right, in Poser 4 there's only on and off. But I've never expirienced "blurry" renders though. Blurry textures, yes but that's because of the resolution of the maps, not poser as such. The edges of things are nice and crisp imo. Some have even complained that they're TOO crisp G So I think it's partly in the eye of the beholder, in other words what are you aiming for? I'm not saying that Poser is the final answer but it IS a stand alone program if you take the time to learn it and learn all it's quirks :o)

Learn how to set up lights correctly and do it yourself not using prefabricated ones - and you will never have to use Photshop to make adjustments. Poser in Firefly is able to make cristall clear renders depending on you setups. but doing this takes time and a lot of patince. for some pictures in my gallery I made more than 100 renders before posting it. Again (and for the last time) its not a question of pro or contra postwork, its a question of the challenge you take. If you like postwork, post your stuff to mixed media - this is where it belongs, nowhere else.

Well, without getting into all the other tangental topics here, I postwork 99% of my images, even if it's only just smoothing a joint or adjusting the levels or something. I do it because it's what I want to do, simple as that. I'm not a "CG purist" or whatever you want to call it, and I generally can't get the end result I want without some postwork. I think it just depends on your orientation and preferences and goals. bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

I think that many who use the most current versions of Poser forget it's original intention was to aid an artist in creating body shapes for their artwork - The artist could then draw the figure gasp outside of a computer!! Poser was never created to produce the final product until P5 which is still buggy to many and not as widely used. So rather than asking if postworking should be allowed in the Poser Gallery - why not ask what the app was bought for? I doubt very many people bought Poser for the out of the box images it creates. The majority of users bought Poser as the starting ground to create "art" with (I say "art" because it is all relative) not to show off what the app could do for them but to use the software to make it easier to finalize their visions. In that scenario (of using it to "aid" in their creative process) then postworked images in the Poser gallery are exactly right and what the product was intended for. Heck even CL uses postworked images in their advertising because it isn't about the postwork, it's about "aiding an artist" (hobbyist or whatever one calls themself).

3-D Arena | Instagram | Facebook

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.
-Galileo

Since Poser is far perfect - the models have odd shoulder, elbows, sometimes tex seams are visible, reflections and lights are not always what you want, hair can be 'off' - there are many reason to postwork. I do it for fixing the mess Poser can't do rigt r the mesh can't handle. Typical example is V3's catastrophic shoulder creases when she has her arms down. M3 is even worse :o( Purism concerning an issue like this is just silly. If you're a modeler or a merchant showing what you can achieve without post, fine. Otherwise - what's the point of avoiding it? Unless of course all your efforts only make things worse lol... :] Fish

While I agree with the general consensus that the end justifies the means and what's important in a still image is the end result not how you got there, there is also a point to be made about NOT postworking: ANIMATION I have infinite respect for those artists, merchants, etc who can put in hours of meaningful PRE-WORK and INNOVATION to achieve results that when rendered are mindblowing because, face it, you can't postwork 400 frames. Now, granted the galleries are only limited to still images but that's only at Renderosity for the most part. Other 3D sites do concentrate more on animation. So, I guess it depends on why someone is using a 3D package. If they're looking to create still images, professionally or as a hobby (in my case) they can postwork to their heart's content. If you work in animation, gaming, etc sorry but you need to know how to use your 3D programs and get the most out of them and in most cases that means spending much more time in preparing everything before a render than postworking it.

I am voting for a new gallery : Poser no Postwork PNP join me

Kalypso, you CAN postwork 400 images. Does it take time? Hell yes. Does it require more expensive software? Usually yes. Do hobbies have both of those? Mostly not. Almost every cartoon you see released today was digitally produced in some way, and ALL use postwork after renders. Many effects can be automated in some way, unless you need to specificallyfix something by hand. This thread just seems like nitpickiness from people who have too much time on their hands. Go make some poser only renders, and post them in the poser galleries! ;)

Way too many people take way too many things way too seriously.

Attached Link: "Pleasing Everyone"

This is starting to remind me of an image here in the galleries. (Link attached)

bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

Artists posting in galleries (in general) are doing so to show off their own skills, not the power of the software. The only places where the power of the software needs to be showed off is on their own marketing pages....a gallery for artists is to show off their skill, wether it is their skill with poser or their skill with painting or their ability to work with both to produce art. my2

Let's see - it's Thursday. Which dead horse should we be flogging today? Oh - it's about time for a Postwork/No Postwork "mass debate". Quick note: animation has been mentioned in the thread (see "Film and TV work" type comments). But the one question that I've never noticed a satisfactory answer to - if it's ALL ABOUT THE ART then why does it matter what gallery it's posted in? Surely "Mixed Media" would be suitable and fine and dandy for "mixed media" work leaving "Poser Purists" to post in the POSER specific gallery/ies without fear that their creations will pale by comparison to images largely not produced in Poser? Or that the amount of effort they've put in to their Poser render won't be seen against images of equal quallity but which are effectively mosaics of Psoer and magazine photos? Of course, I MAY have read the answer if the true and accurate answer is "It's not ALL about the art - it's mostly about the hits". In which case all the arguments about purety and artistry and, well - any arguments either way are completely moot. They won't affect a thing because the artists are not out to produce great art but to be told they produce great art by the maximum number of people possible - maximum gratification. I can't see that anything other than "Actually you'll get more hits by posting to (a specified galelry) could possible sway them in the slightest. And then probably only to adding that gallery to the list of places to post to.... I don't, for the record, produce "great art". I DO sometimes wish there was a Poser animation gallery mind you :) Cheers, Cliff

I feel it is the final image that counts and ANY tool that helps achieve the desired results is ok. Of course if one want's to use "pure" poser that is ok so long as they are only using what is supplied with the original program only and no other downloaded or purchased additions! I am smiling.

Maybe there should be a no-postwork Poser gallery. It would be interesting to see if it gets as many hits as the current one. I'll usually do color corrections and sharpening and minor touchups on every image, but haven't had the time to really go wild with postwork. I'm worried about seeing too many people getting caught up on a pure Poser render the same way so many higher-end application purists get over the process of doing something wholly in their program of choice. To me, postwork or no postwork is a question of which is the fastest way of achieving what I want. If it's easier to fix a bad looking elbow in Photoshop instead of playing with joints in Poser, I'm going to fix it in Photoshop. If I can get a good looking wind-blown hair with a dial in Poser versus painting it, I'll use the Poser hair. I'm using Poser because it gets me to a final product faster than doing a painting. I'm trading time and putting more work in laying out the image in Poser, but the rendering process is quicker to a final product. I'm not using Poser to create the best Poser only drawing. Poser remains a means to an end, not the sole means of getting there. There seems some interest in a no-postwork gallery, but I suspect it will be a small niche gallery with compartively few views.

it's all about your style. Poser is a program..it does some things well, it does other things not as well..it's a tool. If you just want a hammer in your toolbox, that's your right, but unscrewing things is gonna be a challenge..;)
the real issue is 'does it make a good picture'? we go over and over this argument, but the end result should be what counts. I'd agree that if you just use the one program, you're going to learn a lot more about it, but if you're a pro (which I ain't..;) you get paid on output..so why reinvent the wheel? 'nuff said..;)

I wish I'd said that.. The Staircase Wit

anahl nathrak uth vas betude doth yel dyenvey..;)

"Maybe there should be a no-postwork Poser gallery. It would be interesting to see if it gets as many hits as the current one." Does it not strike one as odd that in order to have a place to put Poser renders as opposed to mixed-media artwork, we need more than a mixed-media gallery and a Poser gallery?

This is beating a dead horse because most of you dont get the point. It is absolutely not about showing off the capabilities of a software or Poser or whatever - its about the creation of virtual reality in a 3d environment. The fact that you fix an elbow later possibly is because you are not able to deal with the 3d anatomy and its limits. I am here for a long time - and there was a time when postwork was not tolerated, it came up slowly and suddenly the effect was put over the 3d work. This community has mutated from a 3d community to a photoshop or whatever community. This is my opinion and now I give really up.

I saw about 8 posts using the phrase "(postwork does not)...show the capabilities of the software package." Are we in the business of advertising the software? I thought Poser had good sales figures already. You want to see what it does out of the box, go to the company's website. (But don't look at the box art. Most of the 3d programs I've bought had cover images modelled in other applications, rendered with plug-ins not included in the base package, and were composited and color-corrected after!)

I couldn't run a marathon, but I could do the trip faster and more efficiently than most if I took a taxi :) I suspect that photos of me at start and finish as proof that I did the course would be seen somehow as "cheating" by those who ran (or walked, or crawled) the entire race themselves.

Well, if the purists insist, why not propose a "no postwork" genre in the Poser category to the admins. That way everybody can have their cakes and live happily ever after. :o)

Software: Daz Studio 4.15, Photoshop CC, Zbrush 2022, Blender 3.3, Silo 2.3, Filter Forge 4. Marvelous Designer 7

Hardware: self built Intel Core i7 8086K, 64GB RAM, RTX 3090 .

"If you spend too much time arguing about software, you're spending too little time creating art!" ~ SomeSmartAss

"A critic is a legless man who teaches running." ~ Channing Pollock

My Gallery My Other Gallery

Or we could propose a "mixed media" gallery for those who want to use Poser output as a good solid base for their artwork?

I believe that the US Congress should pass a law which forbids postworking of any kind.

And the US Supreme Court should find postworking to be un-Constitutional.

As for all those international postworking criminals out there, those that are outside of the jurisdiction of US law (and you know who you are) -- they should all be tracked down by Interpol. And brought to face justice at the Hague.

Just one man's opinion.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=649049&Start=1&Artist=Latexluv&ByArtist=Yes

I am a minimalist. I like to see what I can push Poser to do and reserve Postworking for smoothing out a bad joint like knees or elbows, and occassionally a special effect (though recently I've been collecting some Poser props that are special effects, fog, fire, lens flares, ect). I am entrhalled by those who can hand paint hair on their figures after rendering. But at the moment, I'm learning the usage of spotlights. I have astonished a few people in the gallery with a couple of my images that came right out of Poser, required no post work, and all I needed to do was place my logo on the image and convert from tiff to jpg (I always save in tiff format out of Poser). Stealth1701, if you'd like to see what can be done and posted as a Pure Poser render, please follow the link. Though I love some images that I know are heavily postworked, the Poser program itself can produce some cool work without a bunch of bells and whistles. Liz Pope Latexluv

"A lonely climber walks a tightrope to where dreams are born and never die!" - Billy Thorpe, song: Edge of Madness, album: East of Eden's Gate

Weapons of choice:

Poser Pro 2012, SR2, Paintshop Pro 8

You know it really amazes me how many people read an original post and COMPLETELY miss the point!!! All I was saying is, it would be great if we could separate out pure 3d renders from postworked ones. Its plainly obvious that in the production of art you are totally free to use what ever combinations of packages you want to produce your final image. However, there are some of us who are facinated by the computer generation of realism and some of us that want to learn how to use the package better and want to see producers of these packages continue to develop them. I for one would love good 3d artists to explain how they made hair look so real, or how they achieved that certain lighting effect within the package - at least I could then have half a chance at reproducing it. PLEASE can we stick to the original question and stop defending your right to produce art by whatever means you desire - that fact is taken as read! In conclusion, (and this is a question for the moderators), could we have a separate gallery that allows us 'purists' to display their work. Instead of the genre, we could maybe select the package we used. Just one measly new gallery, PLEASE....?????

"All I was saying is, it would be great if we could separate out pure 3d renders from postworked ones." That's a damn good idea, actually. Of course, to make it work there would have to be double the amount of Poser gallery categories; everything we have now, plus a non-post version of every category. Even so, I'd be willing to upload to the correct ones as necessary.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

There's a lot to be said for poser purism. Not so much in creating the final image, but seeing what the program is capable of. I've spent countless hours myself tweaking around in poser and have discovered quite a bit. And if you can do something inside poser, why postwork it? Thats generally my approach. So all you tweakers, geekers, twiddlers and fiddlers, go get some! Get your own genre in the poser gallery and show us what you got. :)

If it was important to you, couldn't you just mention that your image contains no post work in the comments? Wouldn't that basically accomplish what people want to accomplish by having a separate gallery - an indication that no postwork was involved? Just a thought. Unzipped

Right on unzipped....

Software: Daz Studio 4.15, Photoshop CC, Zbrush 2022, Blender 3.3, Silo 2.3, Filter Forge 4. Marvelous Designer 7

Hardware: self built Intel Core i7 8086K, 64GB RAM, RTX 3090 .

"If you spend too much time arguing about software, you're spending too little time creating art!" ~ SomeSmartAss

"A critic is a legless man who teaches running." ~ Channing Pollock

My Gallery My Other Gallery

Here's my 2 cents - If I render an image in Poser, I post in the Poser Gallery. If I render an image in Vue, I post it in the Vue Gallery. Do I post work? Yes, but not a lot, because I don't know photoshop that well and I don't know my tablet that well. HOWEVER, if I were to render an image in either Vue or Poser and then the BULK of it was Photoshopped, then I would post it in Mixed media or 2d. IMHO, as soon as you save your render to an image file, it's now a 2d image that reflects a 3D world.

Oh and let's not be dissing Manilow! ;-)

Manilow what?

Something To Do At 3:00AM

I wonder if it's possible to post-work music.......?

Something To Do At 3:00AM

MungoPark,
Have you ever looked in the Mixed Media gallery? It is mostly the home of some excellent artists that do photography/traditional/digital work combos. There are those that do combinations of 2D and 3D, but their program range is usually quite larger than "postwork in photoshop." I post in Mixed Media quite a bit, but only for the ones that really do not have an overwhelming percentage of usage by any particular program.

Putting 90% of the poser images in Mixed Media, and from the other genres is going to leave little in their original galleries and flood the poor MM gallery, shoving out the people that are already there. While I'm sure this will certainly help the 10% who do no-postwork, it's very impractical. I can just imagine the upheaval that would come if Rosity suddently decided that images are no longer welcome in Poser from some of Poser's most elite artists because they do postwork?

The way I've always understood it, the gallery separations are more guidelines than hard and fast rules. They keep the galleries fairly organized, but still allow for some play, which in my eyes is the perfect system. It allows choice for the artists, does not overburden the moderators with having to move images that may be postworked a bit, and allows people to stay where they are known and often experts in the software, postwork or not.

I think the best solution would be either to put "No Postwork" in the image notes as was suggested, or to put a flag (like nudity/violence) for no postwork. If you create a genre, than you rob the artist of the chance to put his image in it's proper conceptual genre (for instance, if one puts Non-Postwork, they can't put Romance). A new gallery would not be anywhere near as popular and would wind up being a disappointment to those that post there, until they were back posting in Poser anyway. Not only that, but if you give Poser a pure gallery, you have to do so with every other gallery.

My 2c
ShadowWind

well I consider the 3d program or the 2d program as tools, just like a brush or pallete knife, they are to be mastered for what they add to the creation process. Each artist controls the "technique" they use, if one uses a fine brush to paint to look like the larger wash type brushes then they have applied one tool differently from the way others apply the same tool...the end result well that is what you are creating after all...so if one is wanting to use only one brush or one color to create their work it is a style, a technique they employ not any better or worse than any other technique or style available...in other words if I can achieve the "impressionistic" style with brushes, and oil paints or the same with 2d or 3d computer art programs ...I am still intending to create in that style. I am not sure we are able to call 3d a "style" or 3d with or without post work a style or technique... rendering is itself a variable in many programs...Poser has a sketch render choice of output...does that make a poser render using the sketch output 2d or 3d?.... This argument seems to make a lot of assumptions about "programs in general", without defining or separating the ability to model, to pose, to render ... what 3d computer programs and 2d computer programs require in my view are a series of artistic results...modeling like sculpturing within the 3d environment...texturing is a new thingy within a 3d environment using 2d techniques and some intermediate programs...texturing is almost an artform in its own right...projecting images onto shapes...atmosphere...all of these things are thought out differently in 3d/2d environments... all of these "tools" expand our ability to create...if it is not the end result it is the exploration of the technique...the bottom line is it should be what each individual expresses that is the end result, the steps, the tools, the techniques well those are extensions of the creative process....DaVinci had the right idea...

AFAICS this thread was started fairly innocntly (I CULD be wrong!) by someone who sees a set of categorised galleries and wonders, at leats in part, why the categories as stated are not the categories that we actaully USE them as. AFAICS he has no beef with people doing postwork, or people doing prework for that matter - but has some conceptual difficulty in working out why the galleries are split by application (or "tool") in name but not in use. If we REALLY object to splitting our art up by the tool (or the major tool) in use then why don't we regularly see threads demanding that the walls are broken down and that Bryce, Vue, Lightwave and Cinema users etc. etc. all post to combined "Landscape","SF","Romance" ec. galleries among the posr aristis doing the same? Are the other 3D programs not equally "just tools" to be used one way or another? Cliff

Hi Cliff! I was thinking the same thing while I was reading Lorraine's post (and I agree with a few things stated). Maybe the if the galleries were set up by genre? SF, Fantasy, Romance, Adult, action, nature?

What a pointless argument. Why would you limit yourself to just one tool when you have a bag full at your disposal? Purists spend all their time arguing about the "correctness" of this or the minutiae of that. Everyone else just gets on and creates stuff, using all the tools available to them. Purism in CG is a furphy anyway, as the whole thing is one big fake reality.

postwork was not tolerated That's what we need. More intolerence, dammit! ;-P bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

What about the other way round though? If someone rendered a Poser figure in Cinema 4D and posted it to a Cinema 4D gallery, do you think that visitors might feel 'cheated' if they subsequently realised that it was a Poser figure, as they might origianlly assume it was a mesh created in Cinema? What are we displaying in the gallery anyway, art created MAINLY using a particular program or showcasing the abilities of a particular render engine? Should Poser 5 renders be split between P4 renderer and Firefly? Oh yes, and I create my textures in Photoshop before applying them to my Poser people, does that affect the 'Poserness' of the image?

Well, let me answer one question here. Several people above have said something along the lines of, "If purism isn't important, why are the galleries arranged by application, then?" The answer is, because the gallery arrangement is moronic. It makes as much sense as sorting short stories according to those written using Word, those written with Star Office and those typed on a traditional typewriter. I'm sorry to speak bluntly, but this business of "showing the capabilities of the software package" appeals to a sort of anally retentive class of people who like things like collecting matchbox labels. It is nothing about art. MungoPark wrote: "This is beating a dead horse because most of you dont get the point. It is absolutely not about showing off the capabilities of a software or Poser or whatever - its about the creation of virtual reality in a 3d environment. The fact that you fix an elbow later possibly is because you are not able to deal with the 3d anatomy and its limits." Virtual reality? Really? With the fancy goggles and all? Hardly. In so much as a 3D app allows you to create an imaginary environment, you can only communicate this via images until someone makes an affordable 3D printer, and if you want to show off your images in public you make them as good as you can if you have any pride in your work. Having to fix an elbow is nothing to do with the limits of 3D anatomy, unless you mean the limits Poser applies. Having to "deal with" those limits would mean never showing a character drinking a glass of water, even though that is easily accomplished by a real human. Imposing that sort of limitation on yourself I would find deeply repelling - no kneeling poses because Poser can't do knees, and so on. I don't actually do a lot of postwork - only as much as I need - but the idea of sorting images by postworked and not-postworked is deeply silly. In many cases I couldn't tell if you a picture of mine was postworked or not.

This image was postworked. What did it look like BEFORE it was in photoshop? It was two different images and you couldn't see her body for the most part. Before someone tells me this is MY fault... It's not. This was a commissioned work for which I got 45$. What's postwork? Everything from the tips of the wings to the floating head in the background to the waves under her feet. I airbrush my images with dodge and burn because that's what I enjoy doing. Did I /significantly/ alter this image from what it looked like, before? No. Except for the tattoos and the background, everything in this image was there before, it was just in two seperate pieces. Postwork isn't bad, postwork isn't GOOD. People like Trekkie/Ern amaze me. They can push Poser to its limits and then push it further. Me? I'm an artist for commission. That means I want to get it as done as quickly and as good as I possibly can. Which often means postwork when I can't do something in Poser.

Kreations By Khrys

"this business of showing the capabilities of the software package appeals to a sort of anally retentive class of people who like things like collecting matchbox labels. It is nothing about art." Phantast, I can appreciate your concern, but I think you're going a little far. I like CG photorealism, that is my main interest in poser. Surfing the galleries here has become quite a chore, having to sift through thousands of fantasy airbrush fluff pics to find the occasional gem by an artist like Dash or TwiztidKidd. But maybe thats just me and my taste. Everyone else seems to enjoy looking a paintings of fairies sitting on giant mushrooms with a rainbow in the background. So I do postwork myself, but I tend to prefer viewing pics without a lot of postwork, or at least post-painting. I'm feeling both sides of this argument, but I'd hate to see it taken to far.

Maybe just a button you can click? 'Did you postwork this image?' and it gets a unique indicator that there's postwork, or you can turn non postworked OR postworked off..?

Kreations By Khrys

Oh cr*p.. I just wrote a long reply and the server ate it :o( Anyway, first: Thanks for the kind words, Khrys. Even if they aren't true ;o) The main reason why I don't do a lot of postwork is laziness. But also that I'm not THAT good with PS. I know the basics, but that's about it. I guess I'm a Poser Purist at heart, but sometimes )I like to play with my pics in Photoshop and see what comes out, like the "babee" pic here. Besides most Poser pictures are at least somewhat postworked. I know a few who render their sig too, but in general at least the sig is postworked. so should THEY click the "postwork" button too? theoretically they should becourse where do you set the line otherwise? Is smoothing an elbow ok? Smooting an elbow and a knee? brightening the picture? I don't know. I usually write below my pics if there's no postwork, but of course that's not searchable :-)

Oh cr*p.. I just wrote a long reply and the server ate it :o( Anyway, first: Thanks for the kind words, Khrys. Even if they aren't true ;o) The main reason why I don't do a lot of postwork is laziness. But also that I'm not THAT good with PS. I know the basics, but that's about it. I guess I'm a Poser Purist at heart, but sometimes )I like to play with my pics in Photoshop and see what comes out, like the "babee" pic here. Besides most Poser pictures are at least somewhat postworked. I know a few who render their sig too, but in general at least the sig is postworked. so should THEY click the "postwork" button too? theoretically they should becourse where do you set the line otherwise? Is smoothing an elbow ok? Smooting an elbow and a knee? brightening the picture? I don't know. I usually write below my pics if there's no postwork, but of course that's not searchable :-)

Ern, you know I love your work. Especially your BSNVIATWAS.

Kreations By Khrys

"Purists spend all their time arguing about the "correctness" of this or the minutiae of that. Everyone else just gets on and creates stuff"... Errr... who are these foolish purists aruing WITH, then? "Phantast on 4/23/04 02:31 Several people above have said something along the lines of, "If purism isn't important, why are the galleries arranged by application, then?" The answer is, because the gallery arrangement is moronic. It makes as much sense as sorting short stories according to those written using Word, those written with Star Office and those typed on a traditional typewriter." I'm glad that more people seem to be picking up this half of the point (it seems to me that a lot of people have instantly assumed that any query on the topic is a personal affront to their religeon). "In many cases I couldn't tell if you a picture of mine was postworked or not." I'm not ENTIRELY sure that this is an argument for or against post-work, to be hoenst :) Cheers, Cliff

I think you should remove the word "foolish" in your post. Nobody is arguing that postwork is bad, so why defend yourself ? The only argument was that some people like it plain, others dont. It is also not about showcasing an app. Its about how close you can come to what you have imagined in a 3D environment alone, thats all. I work in 3ds, Maya and also Poser. I like Poser because its simpler to use, although the renderer is not so good and it took me almost a year to get something decent out of Firefly. Just recently when I was going through my notes, I realized that I was closer to what I wanted at the beginning - the way I was exploring was the wrong one. I think its an art by itself understanding and using a lightset and its simulated physics. If you want to do this with Photoshop you can do it for me this is no challenge.Period. PS: My stuff is printed because I dont make post.

I LOVE this thread!

So, tell me....have we reached a conclusion yet?

Just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Seven. If you add an 8th endless argumants ensue (so a pinhead is not so very different from the internet). IMHO I shouldn't remove the word "foolish" because I was quoting a self-contradicting statement. Is implication was that purists MUST be foolish because they were the only ones arguing - everyone else was off elsewhere creating art. Therefore everyone in this thread MUST be a purist who is anti-postwork by definition...erm... were that accurate I know that I would find it pretty foolish! I'm also not defending myself as I'm not a purist. The problem as I see it is that each "side" (for want of a better term) is definisng the contents of the thread in entirely different terms. One is saying "when the rules say apples, why do so many of us eat oranges?" while the opposing side say (I will darn well drink cola if I like and don't ANYONE dare to tell me to drink milk!". Which kinda leaves the discussion at something of a stalemate, I feel :( Cheers, Cliff PS there is the occasional misguided member in the middle who tries to see both sides, but that can easily drive you insane!

"I'm sorry to speak bluntly, but this business of "showing the capabilities of the software package" appeals to a sort of anally retentive class of people who like things like collecting matchbox labels. It is nothing about art." I agree somewhat, however I for one do like to know what is possible with Poser, and some people really do some innovative stuff with it sometimes. In those cases it's nice to have a notification that what was done was done just with Poser (for the sake of this example). It's nice not to have to guess in the cases where you're wondering if the artist achieved something with or without postwork in consideration of how to reproduce a certain effect yourself. It's not so much an artistic appreciation angle as it is a technique/skill angle. But as I said before, you only really need to say something in your comments for the image in that case - I still don't see the need for categorization by technology (subject matter would be a better categorization I think). I hope that made some sense. Unzipped

I suppose one reason to categorize the galleries by the program is to cater to the people who sell, buy or use a particular program. When I first bought Poser (yikes Poser 2) I immediately looked for others who were using the same program to learn how they were getting results...mine at the time were ...well...sad...I was stuck for a week at least with the head and arms twisting up and the feet stuck to the floor...there are many levels of learning a particular program...and I have yet to wrap my poor brain around the modeling aspects.... It took a while to learn that I could move the poser stuff into Bryce to improve the "render" and to get more interesting backgrounds...or to make backgrounds that I could use as backgrounds in poser. The community has grown, there now are many more programs, but I suppose the community may have grown beyond the "wow look what this program can do" approach, we see more and more combinations of different programs. Including strictly 2d and photography. I like the idea of re-vamping the galleries to just allow us to browse through the results...but change is hard especially when there still are many who are finding the galleries a place to learn what they can accomplish with one program or the other or combinations of different programs. I see the entire experience in Renderosity evolve and grow in response to the community wants and needs. perhaps it is time to look at the gallery as a gallery of art and to use the forums as a means of finding those people who use the same program by artist search... But I still sometimes look at something and think wow, I wonder if I can re-create that in Poser...rendering is still variable to my view, some programs recreate reflections better than others...so we ship our figures into that program to take advantage of that improvement... I can see the point in terms of using a program without post work, it is sometimes a short cut or a crutch, but it also is a legitimate tool. There is a comment section where the artist can explain and often does explain that they did a lot of post or not so much... For me it may be a moronic way to organize the galleries but it is how it has evolved...from a group of enthusiasts who started with one program and shared techniques on how they expanded the one program to include other techniques... maybe it is time to change the organization...but we are thankful that the databases are set up at all allowing us to narrow down our "perusing" ...or not...

If you hit upon a clever trick for doing some effect in the app that you are using, it's fair enough in such a case to make a special mention of what you did and how you did it. But this should be the exception, not the rule.

"IMHO I shouldn't remove the word "foolish" because I was quoting a self-contradicting statement. Is implication was that purists MUST be foolish because they were the only ones arguing - everyone else was off elsewhere creating art. Therefore everyone in this thread MUST be a purist who is anti-postwork by definition..." Bollocks...........that's your interpretation, but not what I was implying at all. I never called anyone foolish. Anyway, the whole thread's just turned into a bunch of semantic arguments which, as I stated in my first point, is pointless.

This point has been pointless from the beginning.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Exactly...........heh. Enough said.

:)

Why is it that whenever anyone wants to discuss their ideas about something that other people have discussed previously, there's always someone leaps in and cries "beating a dead horse!" usually with a stupid picture or even stupider animation? If you were restricted in your communication only to ideas that had never been discussed by anyone before, how quiet the world would be. Philosophy? Beating a dead horse! Art? Beating a dead horse! Politics? Beating a dead horse! Have you not realised yet that beating a dead horse is beating a dead horse?

"as I stated in my first point, is pointless." "This point has been pointless from the beginning." "there's always someone leaps in and cries "beating a dead horse!" usually with a stupid picture or even stupider animation?" I was just trying to inject a little comedy into a discussion that has grown stale. I think you're this is being taken WAYYYYYYYY too seriously. Try not to be so humorless.

You'll need to think of a new joke if you want to inject any comedy, that one is REALLY stale. Oh, oh, a picture of people beating a dead horse. Like as in the saying "beating a dead horse" - geddit? Oh how funny. Oh how I'm laughing.

::laffs at people who take themselves too seriously.

Me: "IMHO I shouldn't remove the word "foolish" because I was quoting a self-contradicting statement. Is implication was that purists MUST be foolish because they were the only ones arguing - everyone else was off elsewhere creating art. Therefore everyone in this thread MUST be a purist who is anti-postwork by definition..." RubiconDigital: "Bollocks...........that's your interpretation," My apologies, I can only give my interpretation. RubiconDigital: "but not what I was implying at all. I never called anyone foolish." Nor, in fact, did I say you'd typed that word. I was however trying to point out, somewhat light-heartedly (too many thread sof late seem to be full of far too little humour) that your statement appears to be somewhat nonsensical. Please feel free to correct me. If the purists are arguing while everyone else is out making good art, who ARE the purists arguing with if not themselves? Feel free to assume that I typed that with a slightly wry grin, and that I'm a fairly easy-going chap who likes to puzzle things out and even discuss the oddities of the English Language - as opposed to the current norm of assuming that every second post is some form of personal attack (dunno whether to put a sad or a smiley here, so I'll play it safe and leave it blank). Cheers, Cliff

OK time out guys! Posts about the semantics of English phrases surely belong in their own thread, but maybe its a good lesson in how things can be misinterpreted. With that in mind, let me just restate my views about the original post just so that there is no mis-understanding or offense taken. 1/ I don't care What tool or combination of tools, you use to produce your art - if it looks good then I'll admire it for the great piece of art it is 2/ I would like to be able to give (and hopefully receive) credit for work that did not just rely on the artists 2D Postworking ability so I'd love an area where theres a Hot 20 for non-postworked images 3/ I think its important that potential buyers of a 3D package know exactly what the strengths AND LIMITATIONS of a package are. And don't tell me to go look on the manufacturers web-site! Go to the Curious Labs website and tell me hand on your heart that NONE of the images there are postworked (eg. Reflections by Drazenka Kimpel - great image but I couldn't do that with just my copy of Poser!) 4/ There's a certain challenge in producing a piece of work using only one specific tool to achieve the desired effect. Its not being a fanatical purist - just a facination in getting a 3D package to model the real world. Remember if an image is produced using only a set of repeatable algorithms then given enough computing power its a short leap to an animation, realistic movies rendered entirely with a computer, realistic virtual environments for games etc etc etc. I (and I'm sure a few others) would like to distinguish between these potential pictures and ones that included postworking. Thats it from me - I'm off to think of another Controversial thread ;-) Stealth1701

Thats it from me - I'm off to think of another Controversial thread ;-)

That's easy.

Start one about Poser models looking too young.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Thats it from me - I'm off to think of another Controversial thread ;-) How about, "But is it REALLY art?" ;-P bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: The Case for NOT Postworking Images