I just had a look through the Poser Gallery. It seems as though the gallery has become more of a depository for
ad-nauseum nudes and graphicaly violent images. There is a difference between nudity in art and nudity for nudity's sake. I would have no problem letting my children see a work of art containing nude figures, but I'm not so sure I would let any child see this gallery. I see many are posting nudes without the warning. Where are the moderators? I'll probably get flamed for this so I might as well comment on how bored I'm getting with the close up's of faces. I'm baffled as to where the art is in that. Having said that, there are some very skilled people here and I'd like to thank them for sharing their work with us. It has been said that any work that creates emotion is art. I don't think the coiner of that phrase meant to include disgust. Poser is capable of so much why not experiment with original images and thoughts rather than relying on nudity or violence to get people to look at your work. The opinion of those who's minds are in the gutter are not worth much anyway.

Yes, as far as I know, some artists mean to include disgust, anger, hatred and other negative emotions as valid responses to their works. If it disgusted or angered you, then that's more impact than most of the images would have.

I have just two nude pictures in my gallery. Both, I think are artistically done and both are marked in the title for nudity and with the nudity button selected. Neither was done for the sake of nudity but nudity seemed to work better than fully clothed figures would have. I agree that there does seem to be an overwhelming number of large breasted women around here. I generally skip anything with a thumbnail that shows a naked boob. I have found quite a few good images that don't have nudity though. There are some really good artists around here, if you are willing to spend the time looking for them.

I think I will finally speak my mind here. Many times I browse through the gallery and open images that contain no warning of nudity. I find it strange that fairies are taken out of the gallery, yet two women laying on top of each other, one naked are left in. I have no problem with that, but those images should contain warnings in case people dont want to see that kind of thing. A close up of a face and the title are sometimes not warning enough. There are days it takes forever for these pages to load for me, whether it is because there are tons of people on the site or not...and when I open an image that contains nudity that I really dont want to see and it had no warning, I get rather upset. Some times I just dont want to see it. Not that it isnt good art because some of it is but the ones where there is just a plain nude doesnt have meaning..at all. I am fairly new here, and I can see that these issues bring up a lot of flaming around here and argueing...I dont want to anger anybody, just posting MHO.

there used to be a couple of folks that posted links to images in the gallery that were really worth looking at. I'm sure everyone would think their work deserves an audience, but after seeing 10,000 pairs of 40ee boobs, it becomes a bit much. I try to vary my work, but not sure I can call it very good. I do have a couple of nude pics, but I would rather lean towards everyday type of stuff, or a bit of abstract meaning to the image...at least I try fo rthat, but maybe not always quite achieving my vision. I was messing with P6 and Jessi last week...someone commented that instead of default looks and stuff, why not go for something original...what a unique concept in the land of Poser :)

Nudes are abundantly rampant.
A well done nude is rare indeed. I think too many people think slapping up a naked figure is art.
If it has to be naked, it should have some quality of life and substance and style to it, nevermind a pose worth artistic merit.
As for the violence, perhaps it is a form of venting or as suggested, getting attention by being gross. Onlookers are always fascinated by ugly, absurd and grotesque for some reason, that's why we have traffic jams when people slow down to look at victims in accidents.
Is that for real or what?
I will suggest that art doesn't have to be naked to be absurd, there's some pretty disgusting clothed figures being extremely naughty hereabouts too.

Message edited on: 05/03/2005 21:43

LOL! This is just too funny... A suggestion... do what I do... Don't Look!

I think, and this is personal opinion only, my main problem with nudity is not the nudes, but there seems no reason for the nudity except laziness on the part of the people creating the graphic. The human body, if drawn or painted, is complex and a great source of inspiration, and many artists study for years before setting a nude before the public. Plopping a naked Vicky onto a scene takes no artistry or creativity, and shows no complexity of thought. Perhaps because I am a little bit of a writer, and not an artist at all, I'd like to see some story told, some reason for a naked person to be wandering around in what is usually a hostile or very cold environment. But time after time the only conclusion I can draw is that the person creating the graphic simply didn't have the talent to postwork clothes or the funds to buy any appropriate garb. But I know I'm alone in thinking there is more mystery and more allure in a carefully composed clothed figure than most of these "let it all hang out" renderings. I'm baffled by the fascination for plastic looking body parts. Oh well. That's a personal bias. I've been called a prude enough time on these forums to know what is coming next, but truly I have given up on the galleries, not because of TOS, but because so often there is a deficit of originality in approach. I am limited by my lack of talent (and so have spared everyone my lack of ability by removing my gallery), but what is the explanation for those who call themselves artists and yet cannot seem to find an original thought? And yet, once in awhile, a true artist does burst out, which tells me that art is not as common as we pretend it is, but is a diamond among the coals. Which is, afterall, what art should be.

Rat, kind of hard to avoid if people doing such things are not posting the warnings.......

When/if I do nudes, I always try to make them artistic ... I think a picture that is more subtle in its nudity is more "erotic" than something that has content that is in there just for the attention factor. 8-) I won't link to it directly, but I recently did a scene with Victoria 3, using the Anne Marie Goddard texture from DAZ3D, and with face_off's Real Skin Shader. I was experimenting with the lighting features of Poser 6, and after a 3 hour render I came up with an image that I was thrilled with. It wasn't because it was a nude rendering that I put it in my gallery, but because I was fascinated with the way the light affected the skin texture (thanks to face_off). The backlighting and light placement did EXACTLY what I wanted it to. The image is called Curves ... and yeah, it is the one with the most viewings in my gallery. ROFL I think artistic nudity can be really beautiful!

blaineak and All, Please remember, If you find an image in the gallery that you feel violates the TOS just drop us a line. (Poser Moderators/Coordinators) We to are human and do make a boo boo once in awhile and miss an image. So, just drop us a line if you see an image that you feel may violate the TOS and we'll be glad to look into it. *BTW: Lets keep this nice :) Popcorn anyone? * Ryuslilangel Poser Moderator

Personally, I do not care what is or is not in the galleries, because of the fact I do not look in on the galleries often (I try to hit them all once a week looking for examples of lighting or texturing). I find it funnier that as soon as some of the other posts about the last TOS change dealing with galleries died down, here is a new (old) complaint... I am just thinking out loud about what the next round of TOS changes will be like.

New TOS ... no 40EE

ROFLMAO

I agree very much that there is a lot of nudity for nudity sake. I once turn on the nudity and violent filter. Then returned to the gallery....there was only two picture left! Sigh! :^/

blaineak, I have to admit that after I read your original post and wrote my own response, that I checked out your gallery. I LOVE your eagle's nest image. It's gorgeous.

Thanks Kristta, I've gotten the response I wanted. Thanks for everyones input:) To those of you who are doing tastefull nudes and art that happens to contain nudity. Keep it up! I was not including you in what I said. I suspect some of the bad stuff is coming from adolescents:) It matters not how good of an artist a person is, only that you enjoy the endeavor. Looks like I'd better get back to work:(

Sweet Mother Of Merlin Bisected, here we bloody well go again.... Why don't we just get it all over with and ban everything in the gallery save the Poser Woody? That should prevent offending the tender sensibilities of: Children Adults PETA members (can't have those animals shown against their wills you know...and all that fur and leather, Nooooooooo!) Sword lovers. Sword haters. Temples have to go...(well, except the right =kind= of temple. The Holy War starts Friday to see who's version will receive official sanction). Ban -all- edged weaponry as it might offend the NRA. Ban -all- firearms as it might offend the SCA. Religious iconography of any type; Whatever You Want to Name knows it would offend someone somewhere somehow, and we can't have that, can we? Oh, and no scenery or stuctures. The Sierra Club, Audobon Society, and National Association of Architects have feelings too, you know... Of course the Carpenter's Union might have something to say about it, as one of their member's didn't have a hand in Woody's construction. I suppose that leaves the gr-- No, no, can't do that. The Flat Earth Society would pitch a fit about ground plane renders. Bitstream displays as renders...? No, those formats are most likely covered by the DMCA, and improper formatting would offend coders and math geeks alike, so that's out.... Guess that takes care of the galleries. Doesn't everyone feel better now? (Note: this would be considered sarcasm, nay parody of the lowest order, save for the sad fact that it is all too likely, given past patterns observed)

Besides, PETA wouldn't be happy about it either. ;-)

Some artists know how to make a great nude, some are still working on mastering that. I'm patient. ;)

Well obviously if the TOS bans any nudes of women with small breast because they could be mistaken for a child all you are going to see are women with enormous breast because these are the only ones that someone can't claim is a child.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?Sectionid=0&filter_genre_id=0&MostWanted=Yes

Well obviously if the TOS bans any nudes of women with small breast because they could be mistaken for a child all you are going to see are women with enormous breast because these are the only ones that someone can't claim is a child. Not true ... the image I did doesn't show a woman with appendages on her chest that are bigger than her head. 8-)

Message edited on: 05/03/2005 23:13

I agree. I think the human body no matter what it's shape is a beautiful thing; a work of art. However, there is something to say about erotic versus porn. I much prefer erotic art where there is somethings left to the imagination vs blatant out there nudity bordering on pornography. Some people have no clue about the difference and just slap up a naked figure and call it art, when IMHO it's not.

As I have said before elsewhere in response to an attack on one of my works, don't assume that the artist isn't clicking the nudity thing. I always click the nudity warning on mine (when they're nudes) and it never seems to show up. Talk to the site folks about that.

Personally, I believe that only landscapes should be allowed in the galleries.

Add people into a scene, and you've got problems.

At least -- when there's more than one person in a given scene. Then you've got trouble brewing.

BTW -- my cat always agrees with me. No matter what I say, she always says "meow!". Or sometimes "purrrr-r-r-r-r-r".

So animals should usually be OK to include in an image. At least the cute, fuzzy kind of animals.

Of course, there's yet another angle to this.......

.......my cute, fuzzy cat wants to kill things.

If they are banned, I am out of here.....:o/ JV

First they make a new TOS that prohibits renders of nekkid young Faries.

Then Wyrmmaster becomes "Merchant of the Month"

Anyone else thinks that Rendo has been infiltrated by a bunch of Voluptuous Mature Farie Lovers ?

;-)

This daily dose of free Poser Smut was generously brought to you by:

stahlratte

LOL She's definitely over 350 years old. ;-)

That faery doesn't stand a chance of lift off! LOL

Shouldn't they be laying on the ground by now?
lol

Message edited on: 05/04/2005 00:31

"I browse through the gallery and open images that contain no warning of nudity" If the image contains no nudity flag, you must report it to the moderators; if it contains the flag, it's perfectly within the TOS: sorry, no "nudity warning" in the title ever existed as a prerequisite to post a nude.

blaineak, The nudity flag is not visible to you. If you set nudity not to show from within your profile, and you still see nude images, then you're correct that they haven't been flagged. In this case, please alert a member of staff who will flip the tag in a matter of moments. Or of course you could always IM the member (nicely!) and remind them that they didn't set it. Fazzel, Well obviously if the TOS bans any nudes of women with small breast because they could be mistaken for a child all you are going to see are women with enormous breast because these are the only ones that someone can't claim is a child. Not sure where you're getting that from. The TOS does not mention breast size. We would not assume a small-breasted woman was a child. Otherwise a good proportion of my friends would be getting asked for ID every time we went out drinking ;-) Karen Poser Moderator

would any of your friends be willing to share their number? i prefer small breasted women. seriously, the whole nudity thing about poser and the hot 20 is this: it keeps coming up, nothing ever changes, and all it does is perpetuate the myth that poser is for posers who just want to make porn. either we should learn to deal with the stigma (water off a duck's back) or create a non-nudity poser site. renderosity will never change anything with nudity in the hot 20. And it's their choice, cause it's their site.

either we should learn to deal with the stigma (water off a duck's back) or create a non-nudity poser site

Ah .. and that brings up a real dilemma. On one hand, we have the admins and mods who want this to be a "family friendly" site; on the other hand there are people who have been in trouble at work or school for viewing Renderosity as "a porn site." In that case, it doesn't matter what stigma members of this community attach ... those who aren't members of this community see it in a different light. So there is a bit more than stigma from the community standpoint.

The dilemma is that it can't be both. If the site were truly "family friendly" it wouldn't be perceived as a "porn site" in other circles. So clearly there are some gray areas here.

Thing is, which side of the fence should it fall on? That's up to the admins to decide.

Message edited on: 05/04/2005 01:42

Personally, I find nudes rather difficult to get right. I've been using Pro Pack and always found that it was very difficult to get skin to look good - and that much of it was a real chanllenge that always required postwork. Then there are the body morphs, I find them much harder than face morphs to do. Breasts are another problem, there are a couple of morphs packs to help with the breast/gravity problem but they only seem to work well with larger sizes. Sadly, it is rare for someone to post practical advise regarding your pictures. Not satisfied with the results I haven't tried one for a while now.

The are societies where a woman showing almost any part of her body at all is a crime. So no matter what you do, you're going to offend someone. But if you're going to try to please everybody, you end up with pablum.

I just checked out your stuff, philebus, and I don't think you need any advice. I wouldn't mind getting some advice from you on how you do your postwork, though. :) As for the breasts, I find that for the smaller sizes, it's best to do your own morphing with magnets.

"If the site were truly "family friendly" it wouldn't be perceived as a "porn site" in other circles." "Family friendly" means one thing and "church friendly" means other thing, don't confuse both terms.

I respectfully disagree. "Family friendly" means something that is suitable for people of all ages, and which doesn't require parental supervision. In the movie industry, that would mean something that has a "G" rating. A lot of the content here is PG and beyond.

A museum, an art gallery is "Family friendly", any member of the family can visit those places without any problem, but these places are not "church friendly" and members of some churches never visit such places! The "G" rating is fabulous, blood, killings, war against the evil ones, violence, etc is very instructive and educative for kids.

Living in greece and having seen many nude men and women in our history books since the first class of school I find all this so demure (as found in the dictionary,hope it suits) A nude body is something natural and innocent as soon as it is not used for sexoual action, which is natural too but not to be seen in public :^) been terrified by a naked body is not a natural reaction to me... Violence is terrifing,nude not, killing is not natural ... The fact that I grow with stroumfs and now kids grow with Xena that kills an army in every episode that terrifies me... pitklad

Hi folks, Saying that nudity is not art is a bit of a harsh statement, but I can see its validity in this case. It is true that many renders do not make use of naked figures in a very creative way - in fact, many of them are purely gratuitous. The deplorable downside of this is that I usually discover only one artistic nude on average per day, as I browse the galleries. Still, many of us strive to make nudity look artistic and beautiful. There are specific techniques, light effects, points of view and poses that allow people to render superb pictures, not to mention postwork tweaking. In short, there are some eggs that we should keep out of the basket. ;) Cheers, Antonio (a.k.a. Amalthea)

NT

:-)

Folks, you are booooored. Four days of vacations and when I return another NUDE-CHILD-TOS thread... and the hamster is rolling rolling rolling again his wheel

blaineak, thanks to open another stupid thread. Only I say the same that in pst threads:

• TOS ALLOWS CHILD NUDITY? NO. So case closed
• TOS ALLOWS ADULT NUDITY? YES. So case closed

And sorry, but people that think that nudity is bad need a good brain examination

And last one. Here in Spain, Madrids Museo del Prado is full of nude pictures and sculptures. Its visited daily by hundred of school kids. As far as I know, no kid flees in middle of mouth foams and noisy howlings seeing such human naked bodies

"I would have no problem letting my children see a work of art containing nude figures, but I'm not so sure I would let any child see this gallery"

Sorry. I'm not so sure I would let my children stay with you

;)

Message edited on: 05/04/2005 04:54

If you let your underage kids surf in here you need to think about what you're doing. If you let your underage kids surf ANYWHERE on the web witout parental supervision, you need to think what you're doing. If you let your kids watch TV you need to think what you're doing. If people are in here and look in galleries here, they must expect nudity and if it appalls them I have no patience with that. It's ridiculous. Ever noticed how Poser figures load (gasp) with no clothes on??!!?? Ooh, it's shocking. :] Fish

Why don't we just get it all over with and ban everything in the gallery save the Poser Woody? I thought "woodys" weren't allowed either. >:)

First, a big tits up to stahlratte and that old hung fairie posted above!! I think I saw her buzzing around at the mall yesterday, she was looking for a new bra like I was, lol! I never can understand this fascination with big boobs, I'm sick of mine and they're only medium size, anyone here is very welcome to carry them around for a while and see how it feels to have a pair yourself! Gets to be a real pain in the neck and back sometimes, and I'd feel sorry for some of these Vickie's and such with big gongs because they'd all be so hunched over or be having to throw them over their shoulder by the time they got past middle age! Anyways, at least I feel better. I finally got a new bra that fits and holds and now I can laugh all I want without pop outs, lol!!

Deecey; Awww, Cute! (Now, where's that chainsaw....? >8D ) yp6; Damn, it took -that many- posts before someone twigged to that one? This place is definitely getting burned out...