I like the new Mil3 baby, but it renders poorly in Poser6. In the OpenGL preview mode, the texture looks fine. When rendered in Firefly, i get funky seams. Strangely enough, the V3 tex looks "seamy" in the preview, but it renders great. What can I do to fix the baby? -Starkdog P.S. The baby will wear a diaper; I just wanted to illustrate the strange seams.

I wanted to ask you about the new Mil Baby. Other than your current problem does it look like a real baby? The Mil Baby 1 looked like a monster LOL. For your problem try rendering it in the Poser 4 setting. See if that doesn't cure your problem. I wanted to get it now but DAZ3D is handling a security problem and It won't let you log in. Adrian

Try upping the texture resolution to fit the size of whatever texture you're using, in the Render settings. That ought to take care of the seams.

I installed MilBaby 3 just now and tried it in Poser 6 (SR2). I don't get any seam at all. I tried different combinations of texture+bump+tone and still no seam. But in the document window (preview mode - OpenGL) I see a big seam. Just the opposite from what you get. This is weird, isn't it? (Again, sorry for the nudity, but I wanted to show the whole back of the baby)

France, Proud Owner of

KCTC Freebies

Try in the Render settings the myx texture size at 2048 at least, this works for me always when the seams appear.

Ulli

"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience!"

I forgot to check that. Actually, my auto settings in Poser is 2048 for max texture size.

France, Proud Owner of

KCTC Freebies

That's too little if the tex is 2000x3000 for instance :)

crank it up to 3000 and my bet is the seams will go away.

[rant]
What's all this "excuse the nudity" btw? Babies are BORN nude for crying out loud. Can't we even show a nude infan t here without tagging it in a way that will make people expect to see something lurid (yes, I'm thinking of the Nudity tag)

Next thing we know, animal pictures should be tagged with nudity as well..

[/rant]

Message edited on: 12/16/2005 04:58

re-read the NEW TOS these posted pics are in violation
of the child nudity restrictions in place here From the TOS: "Child Image Guidelines Dear Renderosity Members: As Renderosity continues to grow and evolve we find that we have to fine-tune our TOS from time to time. With that being said, we will be making some necessary changes around child nudity on the site. These changes are a result of a combination of several factors: feedback from the community, consistency between the marketplace and the community and the legal liability surrounding child nudity and pornography. The following changes will go into effect today, Monday, March 21, 2005. (There will be a few weeks of education before warnings will be issued for violations): No Child Nudity: Images of children or characters resembling children (including teens, pre adolescent, child like fairies and other imaginary figures) under 18 years of age, depicting nudity are no longer permitted. Child Image Guidelines: # No child nudity of any kind which includes exposed chest on females, buttocks or genitals. # No images in which characters under the age of 18 give the appearance of having no clothes. # No use of: transparent clothes, blurring of nude areas, or the use of blots or Censored wording or props to cover areas that are otherwise not clothed. # No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 displayed in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. # Babies in diapers will be allowed. Toddlers fall under the child nudity section. # Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team. # Gender that is questionable on an image with an exposed chest will be removed from the gallery at the discretion of the Renderosity team. We respectfully request all members please review their galleries and make any necessary updates based on these new guidelines. Going forward, as we are made aware of images that were posted prior to the new TOS change...and are now considered violating the new TOS, we will notify the artist of the new TOS change and remove the image/s. Within the next couple of weeks, we will be communicating and educating those artists that are uploading images that reflect the previous TOS guidelines. This education will take place for a period of several weeks and then warnings will be given at the discretion of the Renderosity team. If you find an image that needs to be reviewed, please send the URL to admin@renderosity.com."

Message edited on: 12/16/2005 05:20

My website

YouTube Channel

Okay, you guys can quit bragging about having the baby already. The rest of us can't access it and it'll be a long while before the Utah people get up and head out for the store to fix it. :-(

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

This happens sometimes when texture filtering is turned on. Try turning it off and see what happens. 8)

Please don't post pictures of naked babies. I've had to delete these. Thanks Karen Poser Mod

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

It's not texture filtering. Texture filtering is off in this image. I suspect DAZ tested this with P4 but not P6.

" Please don't post pictures of naked babies. I've had to delete these." LOL ... it's not a naked baby, it's a naked mesh ;-)

Every organisation rests upon a mountain of secrets ~ Julian Assange

Increasing the max texture size fixes it. I set it to the max for this image. But having to set the max texture size that large for such a small image is a bit odd.

It really frosts my cake, watching all you infantophiles use texturing to excuse this attempt to distribute baby porn.

;)

Seriously, it wasn't until I read the second "excuse the nudity" post that it suddenly hit me that the PTB were taking down the pictures. The Victorians made a vain attempt to diaper animals so women and children would not see the naughty bits. This whole attitude is so utterly stupid it leaves me speechless. What's sick is that the people doing the censoring don't know the difference between naked and pornographic, so they take the "Let God sort them out" approach. This is not assuming responsibility, it's avoiding it. What a surprise.

The TOS is a crock. Mind you, "It's their site, and if they say all your pictures must include humping camels, that's their prerogative." Just as it's mine to do nothing to support them. Why I only stroll around here and never spend a dime.

I think the snuggie on Post 14 is very suggestive, by the way. Better take it down. Also, have you noticed how the Capital B looks like boobs? And what is that coming out of the top of a lowercase sans serif 'i'! Is there any chance that we can be restricted to a less depraved font? Please?

M

Let it go mickmca, it is what it is. It's the TOS and the mod's have to do their jobs.

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

Good grief. I just read the TOS more carefully. Note that we are protected against "the use of 'blots' or 'Censored' wording." In other words, the TOS forbids hiding nudity as well as showing it. Of course, the primary use of "blots" and "Censored" is to call attention to the Victorian obsessions of the site, so it's implicitly forbidding satire of the PTB. Welcome to Totalitaria. Think about this. Michelangelo's nudes defaced with drapes would be banned because they are "really" naked, the drapes are just attempts to prevent us from seeing that. Reminds me of the woman who got nasty with me because I had a Marilyn Monroe calendar above my desk. I chose the calendar for work because it had NO risque pictures. The current picture showed MM in a bed, smiling at the camera, completely covered with a sheet. "You KNOW she's naked under that sheet!" she finally snapped when I asked her what was wrong with the picture. Next month, the picture was MM fully clothed, one of Milton Greene's "gypsy/Santa Fe" outfits, more innocuous than the average '50's Life magazine cover. When the woman came into my office, I took the picture down and put it in my desk. "Oh, that one's OK," she said graciously. "She's naked under the clothes," I said, and left it in my desk. Humans. M

mickmca, If you do not like Renderosity's TOS, feel free to use another community. You don't have to post anything here. If you have problems with the TOS, your best avenue is to contact the Admin of Renderosity. Admin@renderosity.com MorriganShadow Poser Moderator

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

"Like the TOS"? I love the TOS. Golly, without it, I wouldn't know right from wrong. Or left. M

Well I don't like to go against the TOS. I didn't even think about it when I posted my image as I was so intent on showing the whole back of the baby to show there was no seam. Sorry about that. No need to turn this thread into a war. :o(

France, Proud Owner of

KCTC Freebies

Well, the TOS has less to do with R'sity then american society. Seems to me as an american you have to watch where you fart so as to not attract the attention of a lawyer sueing your arse for all it's worth. Funny though, as a R'sity web ring member I had to put up with a previous site to mine showing cocks (ooo, am I aloud to say that here?) and tits Poser renders for a couple of weeks. R'sity seem to be slow enough to exlude those websites when it means advertising for them. I'm not a prude, just making a point that if there is a TOS, then it should be policed equally across the whole spectrum...be it nudity or any other rule that governs this place. Cheers

Website: The 3D Scene - Returning Soon!

Twitter: Follow @the3dscene

YouTube Channel

--------------- A life?! Cool!! Where do I download one of those?---------------

Francemi.... you didn't start the war, I think it was going on before you ever posted. :) Glad you figured out the problem and shared it now I know how to fix the porblem should it arise in the future. Kudos

Christina -- "Love me but don't tell me so" Lilly Bart

My Art

Man, this is rich. This discussion has already reached the "if you don't like our rules, maybe you should go somewhere else" stage. It wasn't all that many months ago when the new TOS affecting Gallery images was implemented and the Marketplace thumbnail nudity policy was changed. There was plenty of "open" discussion then...

Like it or not, Renderosity is a place of business. They pretty much owe it to their customers to listen to them. At least if they want to stay in business. One solitary email to "Admin@renderosity.com" isn't going to change anything - sometimes a good communal rant is all that makes sense. Look around - "Forums" are a part of online business life. Companies foster these communities so customers stay logged in to their sites , buy more stuff, and provide each other with customer support so the business doesn't have to bother. For a digital art-based business, "Galleries" are a logical and common extension of this to give people more reason to visit.

I got burned the other day for posting an images with blots - no defense here, the new TOS spells it out clearly, had I read it with this image in mind. The thing is, the image was SO inoffensive to me (apart from obvious rendering aritifacts) that I never though twice about hitting the "Upload" button. I didn't give it a second thought. But the day before I posted an image of a nude woman with enormous breasts drifting underwater. Her skin had a gray cast to it, and there was no evidence of motion, save for the fish swimming about. One might logically conclude that the person depicted in this render could be lifeless - I wanted this to be ambiguous. I pained over posting this render, but in the end I was struck by the strength of the image, and hoped it wouldn't get pulled (who knows, maybe it will get pulled now).

Maybe what is needed here is a review process for images before they appear in the galleries or forums. Given the schizophrenic nature of the TOS, it seems that we should really be protected from ourselves until we are fully assimilated. Of course, the current system DOES seem as though it is a pretty effective selection system, weeding out those whose works may occasionally (or frequently) stray too far from the Top 20 B**b-fest.

" mickmca, If you do not like Renderosity's TOS, feel free to use another community. You don't have to post anything here. If you have problems with the TOS, your best avenue is to contact the Admin of Renderosity. Admin@renderosity.com MorriganShadow Poser Moderator" whoohooo! from calm to Snippy in 3.4 seconds..

Maybe what is needed here is a review process for images before they appear in the galleries or forums. All members are welcome to contact a staff member for an image review prior to posting if you're not sure if it will be okay. We're always happy to work with you on a way to bring the image within TOS if at all possible. Karen Poser Moderator

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

I think the TOS is a messed up. Its a 3d model .. not a living thing. Who cares if its naked? A little over the top on taking things too literally, huh?

Just enjoying the Vue. :0)

"All members are welcome to contact a staff member for an image review prior to posting if you're not sure if it will be okay. We're always happy to work with you on a way to bring the image within TOS if at all possible."

Yeah, but...

That's the point, isn't it? The TOS are so bizarre, IMO, that people aren't always aware that they could be stepping over the line. Francemi had no intention of posting a violating image, but ...

Now that I think of it, a review process should be mandatory sitewide. Who knows what sort of perversity those Terragen and Fractal people might be poisoning us with. Better safe than sorry...

First of all, let me apologize for being short with Mickma earlier. I shouldn't have been so short with you, and shouldn't have pointed frustrations in your direction.

We know that francemi and Starkdog didn't intend to violate the Child Image Guidelines, and they didn't receive a warning for it. However, we have to do our best to make sure we carry out removal of TOS violating material wherever we can. We're human. Once in a while, we miss something, especially in the Poser gallery. In a one day period, 10 or more pages of Poser galler images alone are uploaded.
Also, having a review process prior to image upload would not only be counter-productive, but, honestly, aren't most of us adults? As such, we expect you to actually read and follow the TOS and Child Image Guidelines. Every time you upload an image, there is a red link on your upload page that is a little reminder of where to find the Child Image Guidelines. In my opinion, as a member here, reviewing images prior to allowing upload would be akin to treating everyone like children.
We've got site rules. From time to time, we have to change them in accordance to laws, regulations, and rulings from the merchant banks that allow this site to also broker products and keep the forums and galleries online.
I've stated in a post in the past few days that we don't like removing images. We really don't. In my time on staff here, I've removed a lot of absolutely remarkable images because they violated the TOS in one way or another. It's heartbreaking. The amount of work and skill that goes into any image in the gallery is enough for me to not want to remove it, however, if it's in violation of the TOS, I wouldn't be doing my job to skip over it.

As Karen stated, if you ever have a question as to whether or not an image you want to upload might violate the TOS, first read through the TOS, and, if you have questions, feel free to email any one of us. That's what we're here for.

In closing, I'm sorry for snipping. I shouldn't have done it, and I'm sorry.

MorriganShadow
(speaking on her own, and without the Mod hat on)

Message edited on: 12/16/2005 10:04

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

It really strikes me as funny to see the "we're all adults here" logic used in a thread where people are complaining about TOS that treat us all like children... We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.

So.. let me get this straight.. and honestly, I wasn't trying to start a war here, I thought I was being funny because I didn't in my wildest imagination think that renders of the backside of a nude 3D infant could be in any way offensive - but... Is it correct then that we can't render a pic of the new baby being bathed? Since I've never bathed my kids while they were still in their diapers, I'm used to doing this to gasp NUDE kids...

"Is it correct then that we can't render a pic of the new baby being bathed?" you can... so long as you only see the baby from the waist up. you can't show them from any other angle. I mean god forbid. it's NAKED!!!

As per the guidelines in place since last March, pictures of babies cannot have the genitals or buttocks exposed. Karen

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

This baby doesn't have any genitals, so you don't have to worry about that.

The old MilBaby did, but not this one. Just like the old MilGirls had nipples, but the news ones don't.

Interesting. That would indicate Daz have given this some thought, too... Anyway. As Wolf kindly pasted the guidelines above, you can all see that it says "No images in which characters under the age of 18 give the appearance of having no clothes." That means babies need to be wearing nappies/diapers at the least, if the body is included in the image. (By which I mean, if you're doing a portrait shot, you don't need to worry!)

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

It is correct that this seam isue is the result of not testing the seams in Poser6.

It has been seem before by others with various projects. Some seetings require a more liberal margin around the seam than in Poser 4

The textures can be easily fixed to solve the problem, if Daz decides to. they just need to add more of a border around the edge.

regards,
Anton

Ot: I frustrating to see how common lack of respect to other members has become, even by moderators sometimes.

Message edited on: 12/16/2005 14:31

-Anton, creator of Apollo Maximus
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

Over 100,000 Downloads....

"Is it correct then that we can't render a pic of the new baby being bathed?"

"you can... so long as you only see the baby from the waist up. you can't show them from any other angle. I mean god forbid. it's NAKED!!!"

Not so - see TOS:

No images in which characters under the age of 18 give

the APPEARANCE of having no clothes.

The textures can be easily fixed to solve the problem, if Daz decides to. they just need to add more of a border around the edge.

That's why I assumed they didn't test it in P6. It would be SO easy to fix this, but they didn't. I get the feeling they rushed this one out.

Good grief, I came reading to try and find out if I should even BUY the baby....and found a long thing on the TOS again? sigh... and has anyone see the GORGEOUS 1.99 PC club texture for the mil baby 3 at DAZ? Yes the MESH SHAPE in the Thorne/Sarsa product images looks a little older than a BABY...but that is the mesh, not the texture... I am considering buying the baby because of their texture for one thing...and I am also waiting to see WHO may do MORPHS to shape the baby right...hate those thin lips and chin shoved up...skinny body.... At any rate...I am pretty sure there is a way here at this forum site to get off a post notification list...and if this goes on about the TOS I shall find and learn that feature.... just hoping for some INFORMATION on the product.

Life Requires Assembly and we all know how THAT goes!

Just don't come back when you get the ebot, and you'll never get another one.

Buy the baby. Hey, for $5, how can you go wrong?

" "Is it correct then that we can't render a pic of the new baby being bathed?" "you can... so long as you only see the baby from the waist up. you can't show them from any other angle. I mean god forbid. it's NAKED!!!" Not so - see TOS: # No images in which characters under the age of 18 give the APPEARANCE of having no clothes." not so again. this has been explained. do a search for when the rules were brought in. the kind of image I stated was allowed ;)

Khai is correct. Showing the baby from the waist up is just fine :-)

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

Rendering in draft settings will likely produce seams on anything. move the slider up a notch or two (i did 1280)

I don't think I've ever had a problem with seams (except when texture filtering is on), even rendering in draft mode.

Lowering the max texture size is a good way of conserving memory, and can also be used to fix "noisy" textures (as often found on hair). You set the max. texture size to approximately the size of your render.

It would have been so easy to fix this.

Randy, what are you rendering at? Size and Settings.. (Curious)

Randy, my experience with Poser 6 has been that rendering at anything less than Final produced texture anomalies otherwise not there when rendered at Final. For very large textures such as those on the baby, I even need to go to max. Even when I am rendering for my promos (500x650), I have encountered problems if I am not at Final. Just my experience. Your mileage seems to vary more than mine. Cris

Draft slider is just universally moving all the settings. Many tweak individual ones oppose to the universal slider. Texture size, min shade rate, etc contribute. All they have to do in the future is make the boundaries wider, whick is a 5 second fix.

-Anton, creator of Apollo Maximus
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

Over 100,000 Downloads....

okay mabey a minute.

-Anton, creator of Apollo Maximus
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

Over 100,000 Downloads....

To the Mods, I was not in any way, trying to post a scandalous picture. I was actually trying to illustrate a problem with a product. I feel that if there is a problem with a paid product, people should be made aware of it, before they spend their precious money on it. I can understand your theory based on the TOS, but the "Child Image Guidelines" is for the GALLERIES. I feel that this was a ridiculous thing to do in this forum. If I could have accessed the DAZ Technical forum, I would have posted it there, as it is permitted in their TOS, but DAZ was/is still down. For future references, please send the "offender" an IM before taking a picture down. I would have been able to explain things out to you before these posts turn into another warzone. -Starkdog

True, I never use the automatic settings. I prefer to set everything by hand. Here are the settings I used for the baby render. Image was rendered at 600x600, though I typically render larger. I did that size because I knew I was going to post it here.

Setting things by hand, I never have a problem with seams (because I never use texture filtering - too much of a memory hog).

Setting the max texture size is a good way of eliminating "noisy" hair textures, like you get with a lot of DAZ's hair, and Koz's, in Firefly. True, you can lower the minimum shading rate instead, but that means the render takes much longer. I don't mind for stills, but for animation, max. texture size is a much better way.

And as Anton says, it's not like this is a huge fix. If they'd tested it in P6, I bet they'd have fixed it.

And who's to say it wasn't tested in P6? "You set the max. texture size to approximately the size of your render." Actually no The firefly renderer has the capability to load texture maps at any given size, regarless of the actual map size. Reducing this value will result in samller versions of the texture being used, which will consume less memory and deliver faster renders." Snip: "as there may be some reduction in detail as a result of the reduced size*, you can raise the Max Texture Size for just the final render" -page 335 of the p6 manual

See this is the problem that is ahead, people testing things with too little experience with Poser6. Or just ignoring Poser6. Was it even tested in Poser6 at all? How many people tested it in Poser6? Did they test different render settings? Obviously not. You do not need to use the highest settings. That is just silly. And I am sorry but a bit irresponsible.

-Anton, creator of Apollo Maximus
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

Over 100,000 Downloads....

"my experience with Poser 6 has been that rendering at anything less than Final produced texture anomalies otherwise not there when rendered at Final." coughcoughcough erm... no? I've been using 6 since it came out.. and not found anything like that.... can you show a comparison?

"You do not need to use the highest settings. That is just silly. And I am sorry but a bit irresponsible." Hmmm? 1280 isn't huge with poser 6 it's not quite midway. no one is saying YOU HAVE to do it in final but draft isn't always going to give you great images either.

Stop focusing on "draft". This has nothing to do with "draft". :) look this isn't rocket science. Just the pixels need to overlap more. It is just that simple. I am sure it is a fine product. I am sure the texture look awesome at full settings. But I think this illustrates the inexperience, misinformation, and lack of serious concern for the current version of Poser. Should have been caught in beta testing. Period.

-Anton, creator of Apollo Maximus
"Conviction without truth is denial; Denial in the face of truth is concealment."

Over 100,000 Downloads....

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=2356407

*And who's to say it wasn't tested in P6?*

I'm just assuming that's what happened, because why release it with this flaw, when it's so easy to fix? As Anton said, it would take only a minute or two to fix.

*"You set the max. texture size to approximately the size of your render."

Actually no*

You don't have to, but it works well to eliminate noisy textures and speeds up the render. There is a slight decrease in quality, but for animation, you won't even notice. And for animators, it could make the difference between rendering in a few minutes and a render that takes hours.

You might find the discussion in the link interesting. It explains why large textures are often noisy in Firefly, and why reducing the Max. texture size fixes it.

I don't render with the max. texture size set to the minimum all the time, but I like to have the option.

Quote - The Mil Baby 1 looked like a monster LOL

The new one is really homely looking.

"It is good to see ourselves as others see us. Try as we may, we are never
able to know ourselves fully as we are, especially the evil side of us.
This we can do only if we are not angry with our critics but will take in good
heart whatever they might have to say." - Ghandi

actually, i find this new mill baby interesting. i mean, for $5 i'll get it. but it doesn't look substantially better than the original mill baby to me. in fact, i'm really surprised at how unreal it looks. the cubed baby looks much more realistic and has been out now for what, more than a year? i've been waiting to see if daz would trump it, and well, they very much didn't. i've always felt that indie models didn't fail because of the "everyone loves supermodels" stuff people drag out each time indie figures come up, especially since just about all the (female) indie figures have been more stylized than v3 default. i think it's four things: realism, versatility, support and pricing. the indie figures that have beaten daz on any one of those points while maintaining a decent average on the other 3 seem to do fairly well (miki, apollo, ej, etc.). before this, i would have said that daz would always win on realism given the opportunity (because they have the resources). now i'm not sure. all i can say is that if i actually come to need a baby model, i'm still going to go cubed... that said, i think thorne's and sarsa's texture is nice (though the face morph made he/she/it look much older and perfect for fey-ing the baby). and i'm eagerly awaiting gareee's morph set.

Yeah, I agree. This baby isn't ugly, but it doesn't look much like a baby, really.

But the mesh is much higher-res than the old MilBaby, so I assume it could be morphed into a more realistic shape. Since the baby was $5, I don't mind paying for extra morph packs.

The Cubed babies are great. And anatomically correct. A little more than I want to spend, given that I rarely have use for babies, but very cute.

Well, I've played with Baby all evening, making some new morphs for it, and I think it's cute. AND baby-like. I like the Cubed babies too, but they're simply too expensive for such a niche product that a baby is.

trekkiegrrl - i noticed about the morphs! wow, you're fast! and incredibly generous. they are very cute. i think it's default face is ok, though strangely not as cute as aiko can be. just not very realistic. as for the price of the cubed babies... if i ever had to do anything professional that called for a baby, i wouldn't hesitate. basically, so far none of the daz kids seem to be able to acheive the realism their adult counterparts can. speaking of aiko, has anyone tried Shapeshifter (freebie script for changing heads between meshes at http://www.philc.net) on the baby? i bet one could do a chibi figure with it.

BAHH!! ill stick with Apollo's baby cole DEATH TO UNIMESH!!

My website

YouTube Channel

The baby is not really unimesh. And it doesn't have those injectable morphs you so hate. In fact, none of the kids do.

Of course, that's because they have a lot fewer morphs than V3 and M3 have. >:-(

The baby is not really unimesh. And it doesn't have those injectable morphs you so hate. In fact, none of the kids do. Injectable morphs don't mean it is or is not based on the Unimesh. Lo-Res V3 and Lo-Res M3 don't have additional injectable morphs, and they're certainly Unimesh-based. "Unimesh" is the single mesh/topology base, and the figure is sculpted and scaled from that base. Luke and Laura (Millenium Young Teens) DO have additional morph packages with injection, as do Matt and Maddie (Millenium Preschoolers). bonni

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

Happy to see the thread get back to the baby....and I DID buy it...price will never be that good again...plus I got the gorgeous Thorne/Sarsa texture at the same time (oh alright, and the bassenette and it's textures, I admit it)... BECAUSE I am counting on one of the human morph masters to really do the little thing justice in the future....plus it helps get that Charity a push too! ....and yes...any texture artist should always put a little OVER the texture template edges for goodness sakes! :)

Life Requires Assembly and we all know how THAT goes!

One thing I noticed thoug, regarding textures and seams, is that when I made my latest character, I fixed the seams by painting them in Blacksmith, and it causes seams when not rendered at the proper resolution in Poser 6 (not in P5 or earlier), but if I put a border around the texture, I got SEAMS in all programs. I even tried to manuallu brush the texture bits outwards to make sure it was the right colour (as a texture isn't uniformly coloured all around) but no go. SEAMS. So I eventually just let Blacksmith handle it. And now it's seamless, as long as it's rendered in the right resolution. So it MAY be a no-win situation with the baby too. I noticed a seam showing on the Elderlies texture I used for an elf pic, eventhough that pic was rendered at P6's FULL setting, with max texture size. And I've never had that seam showin on the Elderlies before. So it MAY be that the baby is slightly differently mapped, so that it will take unimesh textures, but not quite 100% (kinda like the navel problem if you use a M3 testure on V2)

Injectable morphs don't mean it is or is not based on the Unimesh.

I know that, but they're Wolf's pet peeve. :)

Ernyoka - the baby is differently mapped. Try a unimesh texture on it, and you'll see it doesn't cover the shoulders and the sides of the neck. Some M3 textures work, but most of the textures you'd want to use on a baby - female and child textures - don't work.

Hmm. I guess we will need a UTC plugin to cover baby then? ... That makes me wonder if you could simply remap a Mill Kid texture to M3 and have it work?

That's an interesting idea. That might work. IME, not all M3 textures work, but they are a lot more likely to work than V3 or Laura or Maddie textures. It's definitely worth trying.

Not so - see TOS: >>>> # No images in which characters under the age of 18 >>>> give the APPEARANCE of having no clothes." >> not so again. this has been explained. do a search >> for when the rules were brought in. the kind of >> image I stated was allowed ;) This is beginning to sound like Alice trying to reason with Humpty Dumpty. If I were about to post a picture of bathing a baby and I read the TOS (not the learned explication of the TOS), I would not post. SO WTF difference does it make if the TOS doesn't mean babies in bathtubs? It says babies in bathtubs. I was planning to post a picture of a naked child foot passing a doorway with the caption, "I'm hiding because I'm naked." Wait for the TOS storm to fall on me.... Like I said, I love the TOS. It's like going to the zoo. M

That was actually the reason for my question. A baby being bathed IS nude, even if you can't see the "bits" (the bits it doesn't even have btw) And obscuring the (nonexistant) biits with suds.. wouldn't that be to blot it out? That is also against the TOS. I'm not trying to stir up shite here (not much at least) but the TOS contradicts itself, if it is legal to make a nude baby in a bath tub, but not the same baby on a white fur (like the baby pics most of us have of ourselves...)

the TOS contradicts itself I'm not sure where you're getting that from? I don't see any contradiction.

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

"I'm not trying to stir up shite here (not much at least) but the TOS contradicts itself, if it is legal to make a nude baby in a bath tub, but not the same baby on a white fur (like the baby pics most of us have of ourselves...) " No offense but why pursue this TEDIOUS unwinnable argument ?? the rosity servers are private property we are INVITED GUESTS. that fact that they run a Store here and our purchases suport the site BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH not with standing. their TOS is what it is and it seems pretty clear to me at least

My website

YouTube Channel

the TOS contradicts itself I'm not sure where you're getting that from? I don't see any contradiction. It's contradicting if you can't show "images in which characters under the age of 18 [that] give the APPEARANCE of having no clothes." because, usually you're naked when you're in a bath. Yet someone here said that it was ok to make pictures of babies being bathed. --- Wolf: Spare me. I want this clarified, because if I can't (for instance) show a pic of the baby in a bath, I'd like to know it BEFORE I get a "warning"

"Giving the appearance of having no clothes" This clause was introduced in an effort to prevent people from posting pics of children that look naked, then saying "Ah ha, but REALLY she is wearing a flesh coloured bodysuit!" or posting an image of a naked child standing behind a gate which "just happens" to cross the child at groin and breast level and then saying "Ah ha, but REALLY she is wearing a very small bikini behind there!" Truthfully, babies in bathtubs is a tricky subject because it can be depending on the camera angle, etc. Images are judged on a case-by-case basis by the staff. For example, this photo was allowed to remain as it is a head-and-shoulders portrait shot. The staff could not see a reasonable grounds for removal. However, bathtub shots where the camera is above the child and the lower torso/legs etc can be seen (even if covered by bubbles) have been removed. Hope this helps. Karen

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

BTW looking at that photo that was allowed i am struck by how much this new "mill baby" does NOT even look like an infant but more like a scaled down teenager Hmmmm.....NOT impressed :-/

My website

YouTube Channel

It helps, Karen. In other words, portraits of a baby being bathed is ok :o) And shots taken so that the bath tub covers it all (not just the suds, but the actual tub) are ok, right? :o) Honestly, I wasn't trying to make trouble here, but I'm not interested in being labeled as a paedophile just because I make a picture of a baby in a bath either. With that said: Baby can be so much more than a baby ;o) Yep, I've been playing with Blacksmith again. In Denmark, it's customary to set a bowl of rice porridge up at the attic (if you have one...) for the "nisse" - a mix of elves and goblins, more or less. Not intirely good creatures... But they ARE the ones that bring the christmas presents... so it's a good idea to keep them friendly. And you do that by serving porridge for them at christmas eve.

Cute. That's a good use for him ^_^ Yes, a shot with the bathtub in the way of the camera should be fine.

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire

I have bought the baby and once I got into it, and played with the dials on the head that come WITH IT, I was pleased...I also created a cr2 that would seek the textures of Aiko, which look great on the baby (if some post to make the eyebrows lighter or gone is needed, which I do not mind)... I have the oringal baby, the mil baby and now this one...got pulled in...but it's neat what all CAN be done with it...did you see the LITTLE PEOPLE (almost scary!) by putting an M3 texture on it?!?!? It was obviously made FROM M3 to take his textures so well...as the V3 ones look very strange (like kid got onto mommy's lipstick!!)...LOL!! TOS aside...I am glad and hopefully helps the charity! :)

Life Requires Assembly and we all know how THAT goes!

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: Problems with the new Mil3 Baby

No images in which characters under the age of 18 give