Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL
Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum
Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom
Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Sep 22 4:30 pm)
Subject: Another funny thread about nudity
Wouldn't it be easier to take thumbnail generation away from the artist and have it the same as other sites where the thumb is auto generated by the system and then have the nudity tag apply to thumbs as well as the image!!
I mean, can't be that difficult 'cos it already generates a thumb if you can't be arsed doing it yourself!!
Other sites use this system, C3D for one, RDNA [I think] for another!!
Injustice will be avenged.
Cofiwch Dryweryn.
^^ That's my thought, from what the initial article says, the reason for this is a few people like to have the whole thumbnail a giant nipple or some stupid crap. Although I guess if your gallery submission is a giant closeup of a nipple ... well, the TOS would be impossible to comply with in that case.
@pjz99 Oh no it doesn't!</pantomimemode off>
At the moment when the system constructs the gallery thumbnail page it selects ALL the thumbnails and if the client prefs are set to "no nudity" replaces the offending thumbnails with a system generated one if the user hasn't uploaded a custom thumbnail.
What I suggested was that the page be constructed using a db query that doesn't display thumbnails for nudity/violence tagged images at all (if the client prefs are set to no nudty/violence).
pjz99 - as a preamble, i'm not disagreeing, but clarifying. yes, precisely. the image you posted is what shows. they're saying that it looks "unprofessional" for the thumb you posted to exist in the galleries at all. or anything like it, that says "censored," has bars or blurring or any other of the simple answers to hiding nudity. at theartdoor, avoiding "censored" thumbs is acheived by simply not showing items in the gallery tagged with nudity if you don't allow it. that is, the database query simply doesn't return any images properly tagged. there is no replacement thumb, and no indication that you're missing anything other than an explicit notice to change your settings if you want to enable nudes. it achieves exactly the same appearance rendo wants in a manner that doesn't involve people having to change potentially hundreds of thumbnails. some people have posted here for years at a rate of about 1 a day or more (from before the limit) and have done nudes pretty exclusively. the potential amount of work is immense; i have no idea what the actual will be.
Thanks for clarifying, cobaltdream. The answer in that case is "yes."
As stated in the article... there are a number of reasons why we have gone down this road. This is not a new or arbitrary decision; it's one that's been in discussion and planning for months.
Let me reiterate the reasons again:
Consistency and a professional look across the site
Feature Art Chart images in the email newsletter
Reduce the "In your face"-ness of some of the thumbnails which can be very off-putting.
Contrary to what some people seem to believe, our reasons DON'T include eeeeeevil plots to eradicate nudity, insaaaane plots to drive away all of our members (what for?) or daaaastardly plans to, oh I dunno, force everyone to post pictures of Barney the purple dinosaur.
"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan
Shire
I don't see how that's at all preferable. As a viewer from work, with "no nudity" flagged, I WANT a big giant "Content Advisory" thumb warning me not to click it unless I know it's safe to do so. The current arrangement is preferable. There is no plan to retroactively apply this policy to old gallery postings, and there does not seem to be any push to completely suppress flagged images (thankfully) - given these two things, the new thumbs policy is just irritating and dumb. Many hundreds must go out of their way to accommodate a few abusers?
*"Many Renderosity members have expressed to us that while they admire artistic nudity, they really don't like it when it's so "In Your Face" in the thumbnail. ... Members that have their profiles set to not view nudity are still going to see the 'Content Advisory' default image if the Nudity or Violence flags are set. This change will only be visible to members that have their profiles set to view nudity. Going forward all thumbnails across the entire Renderosity site will be suitable for all ages. This change does not affect images uploaded prior to January 24th."
It just makes no sense at all!
Cobaltdream,
Point well taken. However, Jim chose the worst possible time to pull off his joke (I thought it was funny also), meaning that this thread is still pretty hot and he called a lot of attention to his thumbnail at the same time. Basically, the moderators probably thought he was "calling them out".
Now if he had waited until much of this died down, or at least until this thread got off the front page, he might even have snuck it through. Even if he didn't, it would have been a private matter between himself and the moderators, and could have been resolved much more gracefully.
"Get forced" was a poor choice of wording on my part.
Quote - Hi infinity,
Yes, male chests are fine :-)
Am I the only person who finds this an absurd double standard? 
Nude female chest=Unacceptable.
Nude male chest=Acceptable.
There is technically nothing a female chest has that a male chest does not, you can even have a male with "breasts" if he's overweight enough. So why, why, why, is a man's chest acceptable when a woman's isn't?
Not that I have any real issues looking at a man's chest (I see mine without clothing on it every single day), but this double standard is ridiculous.
Both should either be acceptable, or neither.
Forgive my rant, but this attitude of "this one thing is a no-no, but this other thing, which is almost the same, is perfectly fine" really irks me. :cursing:
________________________________________________________________
If you're joking that's just cruel, but if you're being sarcastic, that's even worse.
Quote - Well, if I have have the money I will make an all pagan, nude-worshipping site where clothed figures will be banned, LOL!
Will it allow Jews?
DPH
STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS
Content Advisory! This message contains profanity
Having followed this thread over the last few days I feel I need to say:
Renderosity 'Allow' you to put your artwork on this site, they do not charge you for the privilege.
Therefore you should simply do as they ask, at the end of the day you have no right to do otherwise, bitching/whinging and moaning about it won't make any difference - if you don't like the new rules - go elswhere - it IS that simple.
I'm not exactly 100% keen on the new thumbnail guidelines myself, but at the end of the day it's easy enough to make a thumbnail that follows the new guidelines, and I'm not willing to let a little thing like that spoil my appreciation of the wonderful community that is Renderosity.
Sure - Tits get hits - and lots of art involves nudity, but is there really any need for such a thing? It isnt a competition about who gets the most hits - it's all about ART and sharing that work with the rest of the community. I know some of my pictures have nudity in them and I haven't changed the thumbnails as yet, and I'm not going to apologise for that - it will be done.
**
Apologies if what i've said offends anyone but its the simple facts of the situation.**
@ ianliddle (with tongue implanted firmly in cheek)
The last thing this thread needs is someone coming in here and being completely Rational! :rolleyes:
(By the way...from what I understand...the new thumbnail rule does not apply to thumbs posted before said rule took effect. Your older images should be perfectly fine...)
...You may now resume your regularly scheduled mass debation....
<-insert words of wisdom here->
Quote - @ ianliddle (with tongue implanted firmly in cheek)
The last thing this thread needs is someone coming in here and being completely Rational! :rolleyes:
(By the way...from what I understand...the new thumbnail rule does not apply to thumbs posted before said rule took effect. Your older images should be perfectly fine...)
...You may now resume your regularly scheduled mass debation....
:lol:
Quote - > Quote - Hi infinity,
Yes, male chests are fine :-)
Am I the only person who finds this an absurd double standard?
Nude female chest=Unacceptable.
Nude male chest=Acceptable.
There is technically nothing a female chest has that a male chest does not, you can even have a male with "breasts" if he's overweight enough. So why, why, why, is a man's chest acceptable when a woman's isn't?
Not that I have any real issues looking at a man's chest (I see mine without clothing on it every single day), but this double standard is ridiculous.
Both should either be acceptable, or neither.
Forgive my rant, but this attitude of "this one thing is a no-no, but this other thing, which is almost the same, is perfectly fine" really irks me. :cursing:
And what about gay men? Shouldn't pictures of gay men's chests be banned, because
this could arouse other gay men? I know on one TV show there were some men in a
swimming pool, and they pixilated out the gay man's nipples, but didn't pixilate out
the nipples of the straight men. So I think this should apply at Renderosity too.
No gay man nipples.
Quote - Having followed this thread over the last few days I feel I need to say:
Renderosity 'Allow' you to put your artwork on this site, they do not charge you for the privilege.
Therefore you should simply do as they ask, at the end of the day you have no right to do otherwise, bitching/whinging and moaning about it won't make any difference - if you don't like the new rules - go elswhere - it IS that simple.I'm not exactly 100% keen on the new thumbnail guidelines myself, but at the end of the day it's easy enough to make a thumbnail that follows the new guidelines, and I'm not willing to let a little thing like that spoil my appreciation of the wonderful community that is Renderosity.
Sure - Tits get hits - and lots of art involves nudity, but is there really any need for such a thing? It isnt a competition about who gets the most hits - it's all about ART and sharing that work with the rest of the community. I know some of my pictures have nudity in them and I haven't changed the thumbnails as yet, and I'm not going to apologise for that - it will be done.
**
Apologies if what i've said offends anyone but its the simple facts of the situation.**
The old love it or leave it argument. Let's all Sieg Heil der Furher or off to the gas chambers for you.
My Homepage - Free stuff and Galleries
Quote -
- No Sexually Suggestive Language or "Censored" language/images
Define "sexually suggestive".
I have pictures of dykes disrupting bedding.
And odds are that many people have their minds in the gutter when I say that, not being aware that I'm a geologist, said dykes are igneous intrusive structures and the bedding is Proterozoic sedimentary rock. So is what I said sexually suggestive just because people who aren't geologists aren't familiar with those terms?
Quote - I know on one TV show there were some men in a
swimming pool, and they pixilated out the gay man's nipples, but didn't pixilate out
the nipples of the straight men. So I think this should apply at Renderosity too.
No gay man nipples.
As Poser doesn't render skin hair unless you try with dynamic hair, you are not able to say if the rendered nipple belongs to a man, gay or shemale, so male nipples must not be allowed.
Even you don't need to go so far with the gay "sinners", some men are hairy as gorilla and other haven't a single bit of hair and no beard at all!!!!
Stupidity also evolves!
Quote - Jim you didn't get a site mail? I will send again, but basically we aren't allowing thumbnails which are effectively "censor" thumbs. Not very professional looking... which is one of the reasons for this change.
Since when did this become a community of professional artists? I find this whole thing amazing and befuddling. I would like to point out that if this has to do with anyone complaining about nudity in thumbnails, if you think about it you will find that complaints is all you ever get. I mean no one ever says, "Gee, I really LIKE that there is nudity on the thumbnails here!" now do they? Considering the need to turn on violence and nudity viewing in your own options, this policy is obviously either about (1) a few complainers who can't figure out how to filter it themselves, (2) a few administrators who just need to feel in control of other people's morals, (3) or Renderosity is getting pressure from the government (the FCC? Is there a new Department of Homeland Insecurity???) about "all that open nudity the kids might accidently see... (quick ma, cover up! The baby's staring at your nipples again)" If Renderosity wants to look professional, maybe they should adopt the policies of say, a museum...? What do you think? Would that be good enough for Renderosity? Or is that too radical?
Quote - > Quote - If Renderosity wants to look professional, maybe they should adopt the policies of say, a museum...? What do you think? Would that be good enough for Renderosity? Or is that too radical?
Here here, thats why a rarely post any pics, Its ok to take your money and sell you stuff to make you an artist (allegedly in some cases) but far be it if you actually do a nude, which is a staple in beginning figure painting classes.
It's their right to do it, it is also my right not to buy their products... I vote with my wallet on policies I like or dont like. If this is a community apparently it is not speaking for at the very least a portion of it.
Content Advisory! This message contains nudity
Attached Link: Picasso in violation of TOS
Last thoughts before I move on, A stern word of warning to those who do not like nudes... the following link will lead to nudes done by the great Picasso in a true artistic endeavor...How can any place the refers to itself as an artistic community blandly apply such restraints? Is this a common meeting place for artists to speak, or is it simply a market place to broker wares and make money?
In either case even art stores have the occasional nude up, I fully understand that this is the internet and you must appeal to the basic moral fiber. But if there are filters and they do work (I hope) why must we punish the artists because someone views something that makes them unhappy?
Maplethorpe, a slew of other artists and odd work (anyone ever see the freeze dried cow cut in half, yea my museum paid to have that) all had their say. Why does this forum if it is an artists community have anything less than the right to speak ones mind, share images.. Much like the frozen cow, if I dont want to see it..I dont..
Let the chips fall where they may, let our votes count for what little it seems to mean, if giant breasted neandertal Victoria 3's dominate.. So be it, after all where did we buy the kits to make much of this "pronography"? Most likely from your stores...
If it's good enough to sell, isnt it good enough to show?
(Hopefully thats not bannable, but these days..)
Quote - if giant breasted neandertal Victoria 3's dominate.. So be it, after all where did we buy the kits to make much of this "pronography"? Most likely from your stores...
If it's good enough to sell, isnt it good enough to show?
(Hopefully thats not bannable, but these days..)
I just want to point out that you can show them all you want in your actual image. All Renderosity is saying is don't show them in your thumbnail leading into the image.
This change does not affect the actual image. It only affects the thumbnails in the gallery.
"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
Quote - > Quote -
This change does not affect the actual image. It only affects the thumbnails in the gallery.
yes I know, but have you seen how disjointed these new thumbnails are?? I for one dont go surfing for porn here that seems silly to me. But I used to be able to skip images I didnt like based on a thumbnail, now its a pot luck whats inside some of these where you only get to see like her elbow or something in the thumbnail, I would say I have viewed more badly dont porn because of this new policy than avoided...
It does seem this gets alittle worse each year, the nudity thing.. and there is always a fight, and a post just like this. Is there an end misson statement on what should be allowed? Can't we just jump to thr endgame of what is and is not kosher and be done with it instead of these micro battles each year or so?
Not my fight perhaps, because i don't do nudes myself but it just seems tiring this happens so often?
I was in favor initially because I didn't understand exactly what it entails. If I understand this correctly and all the "content advisory" thumbnails are now gone and it's just a guessing game, well then it is less safe now than it was before to allow my child to peruse the gallery.
I am: aka Velocity3d
It's still lopsided, like their avatar policy.
If I wanted to Acadia, I could have my avatar as my nude male chest. You, OTOH, cannot, because it violates the TOS.
Same with thumbnails, the male upper torso is fine but the female upper torso isn't.
________________________________________________________________
If you're joking that's just cruel, but if you're being sarcastic, that's even worse.
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/news.php?viewStory=13472
> Quote - I was in favor initially because I didn't understand exactly what it entails. If I understand this correctly and all the "content advisory" thumbnails are now gone and it's just a guessing game, well then it is less safe now than it was before to allow my child to peruse the gallery.If you have the nudity filter on, you won't notice any change to the way you were viewing things in the gallery. The only ones who will notice a change in how the gallery looks are those who do not have the nudity or violence filter engaged. For them the gallery will be more "tasteful" in appearance and won't have the "T & A" onslaught that there was in the past.
"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
if Acadia wants to have a nude male chest as her avatar, that's her business..;)
It doesn't bother me. I have the nudity filter on, so I can look at things on my lunch hour, and so's the missus doesn't do amateur phrenology on me with a frying pan..;)
I wish I'd said that.. The Staircase Wit
anahl nathrak uth vas betude doth yel dyenvey..;)
Quote -
Renderosity 'Allow' you to put your artwork on this site, they do not charge you for the privilege.
Therefore you should simply do as they ask, at the end of the day you have no right to do otherwise, bitching/whinging and moaning about it won't make any difference - if you don't like the new rules - go elswhere - it IS that simple.
I always find it a bit funny when people state things like this. I was here before there was a store. Renderosity is as big as it is because of us. Without us they would have disappeared from the net long ago.
But Renderosity is going the way this whole country is and in 20 years we won't recognize either. And it doesn't do any good to stand up and say anything because those in power couldn't give a flying bleep what we think. Those that stand up against the mass brainwashing that's going on are fighting a battle we can't win.
Quote - if Acadia wants to have a nude male chest as her avatar, that's her business..;)
haha. I told Stacey the other day that I just got a new digital camera and that once I figure out how to use it I'll be posting naked pics of my butt in my gallery! ;)
Trust me, if I ever did that you would be glad of the no "T & A" in your face thumbnail rule, because being hit in the face with my bare butt would give you a concussion and make you blind!!! LMAO
"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
Quote - If you have the nudity filter on, you won't notice any change to the way you were viewing things in the gallery. The only ones who will notice a change in how the gallery looks are those who do not have the nudity or violence filter engaged. For them the gallery will be more "tasteful" in appearance and won't have the "T & A" onslaught that there was in the past.
Yes, as I and many others have said in a few different ways, effectively if you choose not to view nudity nothing changes, however if you do choose to view nudity you are now restricted in what nudity you can see in the thumbnails because 'some members of the community' who have chosen to enable the nudity flags don't really like the thumbnails they see.
To use the pornography analogies suggested earlier and elsewhere, that's like saying yes as an adult of course you can view adult movies, but you aren't allowed to know anything about them before you watch them. Oh, and I hope you aren't just into soft porn because hidden in all the movies on the shelf are a whole lot of hard-core and heavy pornography movies too! :blink:
I swore I was going to try and stay out of this. I am torn on the issue. But, urbanarmitage brings up a very good point. As much as I choose what to look at by the thumbnails, I also choose what not to look at.
I like tasteful nudity. I like humour of all types. But I don't really care for the art style that looks like it was done by a teenage boy who just got his hands on a hacked version of Poser. I can often tell by the thumbnail whether the pic in question would bore me or not. My time in the galleries (and forums) here is precious, and I do a disservice to myself and other artists by wasting it on things that I might not be interested in.
I don't know. I'm not hostile in one direction or the other. I understand the reasoning behind this decision, but I really do think it is 'too little too late' and that there might have been more constructive ways to achieve the same goal.
On the other hand, any change is going to cause a debate. That's the nature of change. This is almost as heated as the posts when V4 came out! :lol:
Poser gallery shalt be closed!!!
Exodus 20:4, Derteronomy 5:8
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven
above, or that is in the earth beneath.
Deuteronomy 4:16-18
Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the simultude of any figure,
the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness
of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground,
the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth.
Deuteronomy 4:23
Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget ... and mke you a graven image, or the likeness of
any thing, which the Lord thy God hath forbidden thee.
Deuteronomy 27:15
Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image, an abomination unto the LORD,
the work of the hands of the craftsman.
Stupidity also evolves!
Out of curiosity, roughly how many complaints from different people really caused this policy change? Fifty? A hundred? I find it pretty unlikely it was more than a hundred different people complaining, but maybe more?
Was that more than the number of gallery submitters who will be inconvenienced by this (imo) stupid and unjustified policy change?
Since there is obviously no room to push back on this - the change was just dropped in with only closed-door discussion - I guess I will make a generic black thumbnail and forget about it. Might as well turn in the nudity filter for my own use because at least I'll get a predictable "Content Advisory" icon instead of a random non-representative thumb for all flagged images.
Perhaps simply one single complaint. For example (invented story): PayPal's manager, a 60 years old man, takes his laptop and surfs the web taking a view of some sites where he have his bank online. Suddenly, while he's visiting Rosity he finds a thumbnail with a huge boob in the middle. Inmediately, he takes his cell and says: 'Pete, please, send to Renderosity administration the usual nudity email, second version'
And a Rosity administrator glups his coffee reading an email like: 'Dear Renderosity Administration: we're sad to tell you we comprobed your site and we're still founding nudity without warnings, so a software like CyberNanny couldn't detect it and OUR CLIENTS' KIDS would watch forbidden content. This is the second warning we send you requesting you need to extreme cautions because PayPal only offer its services to 'family friendly' sites. We warn you if we find again another example of carelessness we'll inmediately paralize our account with you. We hope next time blahblahblahblah...'
Fiction. Only a fiction... or not?
CASETTE
=======
"Poser isn't a SOFTWARE... it's a RELIGION!"
Privacy Notice
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
um, no, i don't think it already does that. though i could be incorrect, i believe what it already does is show a default NUDITY/CENSORED thumb. hence making everyone change their thumbnails so that these people could see the galleries without seeing "unprofessional" censored thumbs and without actually changing the code. at theartdoor, you just don't see nude thumbs until you enable them. even if the thumbs don't have nudity. so its' a seamless experience- you just see more pictures one way. but you don't miss them if you're leave it on default.