GabyTrautmann opened this issue on Feb 09, 2007 · 113 posts
GabyTrautmann posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 3:29 AM
" Money does not stink " (Pecunia non olet) - or how can one explain himself this here, otherwise?:
http://market.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/index.php?ViewImage=65744
jonthecelt posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 3:45 AM
Umm.. not sure what your point is here?
jonthecelt
dphoadley posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:18 AM
dphoadley @ GabyTrautmann
Two Points:
*All of this is in keeping with the MP TOS. So tell me, what exactly is your problem? Or are you just trying to 'Out Ceasar, Ceasr' in the bluenose department.
DPH
thefixer posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:24 AM
While I'm no fan of the "new" nudity rules, **i think you're out of line with this!
**
You've directly linked to the "additional" product image, not the main product image which doesn't contain nudity at all which is the first image any viewer of that product would see!
Injustice will be avenged.
Cofiwch Dryweryn.
Madrigal posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:36 AM
Well, there are lots of those little nude Aiko elves and fairies all through the marketplace, but you can't see any of em unless you click on the box for more sample images. You can't expect someone to buy a character/skin texture unless they can see what it looks like.
I suppose it's possible that somebody might go into the marketplace and start clicking all the additional image boxes just to see nude Aiko. This seems a little sad to me... but if they do, where's the harm? It's just a naked body. We've all got one :D
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:41 AM
Going to the front page of the ad for this you don't get any nudity & just for the record there's literally tons of pages in the MP with second or 3rd promo images that have nudity, why pick just this one to complain about?
Madrigal I keep my naked body in the deep freeze in case the police turn up, where's yours?
ps the line about the body in the deep freeze is actually a joke for those that don't understand British humour. :D
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
kawecki posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:47 AM
They forced the nudity switch.
They banned forbiden products.
They banned forbiden words in products.
They banned nudity from the first promo image of the products.
Now they banned nudity from thumbs.
What do you want??, to ban all nudity from product's promo images?, to ban any nudity related product?, to ban any nudity in the galleries and in the end, why not to ban Poser too?
Do you know that Poser is against the sacred teachings written in the Holly Bible?
Stupidity also evolves!
dphoadley posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:49 AM
I think that someone was simply bored, or trying to raise a ruckus as to whether nude Aiko equals instant Pedophilia, or both. Or maybe this is just a troll getting his and/or her jollies.
DPH
dphoadley posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:52 AM
Quote - Do you know that Poser is against the sacred teachings written in the Holly Bible?
To which Bible are you refering to? I wasn't aware of any such ban -at least not in the Jewish Hebrew Bible.
DPH
Casette posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:55 AM
Child nudity?
CASETTE
=======
"Poser isn't a SOFTWARE... it's a RELIGION!"
Dale B posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 5:07 AM
Yaaaaawwwwwwwwnnnnnn............
thefixer posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 5:47 AM
Did they have Poser in Biblical times????
Injustice will be avenged.
Cofiwch Dryweryn.
kawecki posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 5:48 AM
Quote - To which Bible are you refering to? I wasn't aware of any such ban -at least not in the Jewish Hebrew Bible.
I don't know how much different is the Torah from the Old Testament.
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!
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 5:57 AM
But that only applies to Christians Kawecki, the rest of the human race is actually living in the 21st century, here we do things how WE want not how some LONG DEAD fiction writer thinks we should.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
dphoadley posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:04 AM
Quote - > Quote - To which Bible are you refering to? I wasn't aware of any such ban -at least not in the Jewish Hebrew Bible.
I don't know how much different is the Torah from the Old Testament.
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.
All very fine and good, but were does it ban nudity? And believe me I knew the Torah, and in its original tongue, and not by way of a long list of mis-translations.
David P. Hoadley
PS: It is a special mitzva to read in the Synagogue every Sabbath Eve the Song of Songs in its entirity as a reminicence of thespecial love between G-d and his people Israel - and how much more of a graphic discription of physical love can you find.
It is a grave mistake to try to impress Christian prejudices, inherited from the Gnostic Greeks, onto the Semitic faith of Abraham. Judaism believes in modesty, but not in prudery.
SWAMP posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:12 AM
Very cute character....Thanks for the link.
kawecki posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:14 AM
Quote - All very fine and good, but were does it ban nudity?
It's not about nudity, it bans Poser itself!!!
You cannot represent any living organism in pictures or sculptures, it's worst that the Koran than only bans humans leaving the pictures with only birds and animals.
Quote - But that only applies to Christians Kawecki, the rest of the human race is actually living in the 21st century, here we do things how WE want not how some LONG DEAD fiction writer thinks we should.
The problem is that this small group of people is trying that us, who are living in the third millenium, to return back four mileniums in time!!! Even Romans were too much perverted for them!
Stupidity also evolves!
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:18 AM
You know SWAMP in all the fuss I didn't even notice, you're right she is cute :D I might have to dust off my copy of Aiko & get her, I'm beginning to wonder if Freja paid GabyT to start this thread?
Freja I'm kidding ;) you have some really nice looking characters & other stuff in your store :D
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:20 AM
Kawecki anyone tries to make me go back 4 millennia I'll go naked & that's not something to be taken lightly trust me on that :D
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
-Timberwolf- posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:22 AM
This goes to far....I think of getting a nudity flag for my mirror in my bedroom. :D
kawecki posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:28 AM
You must cover the mirror, it not only allows you to see your perverted nudity, but also attracts lightnings and thunders!
Stupidity also evolves!
Madrigal posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:39 AM
Lucifer, I have the body of a 16 year old!
I keep him in the cellar....
I just bought Thorne's Miette
market.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/index.php
so my cutemeter is at full just now, but she is very nice.
I actually got this character because I accidentally applied the character Stratus McLeod (sp?) for Hiro to Aiko - and it worked pretty well. So my bf and I thought - what if you could do it the other way around? And yes, she makes a very cute he... it's the mouth. We have a lot of trouble morphing Hiro's mouth so it doesn't look Hiro.
GabyTrautmann posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:41 AM
This is a partly pure hypocrisy - I repeat it: "Pecunia non olet"
Madrigal posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:46 AM
:ohmy:
-Timberwolf- posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 6:54 AM
What the hell I am getting wrong here?
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 7:05 AM
Thanks for the work unsafe warning for that link GabyT :(
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
GabyTrautmann posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 7:10 AM
Timberwolf you ask " what is wrong here? ".
Several pictures have been removed me from the Renderosity-Administration from my Gallery because they contained supposedly pornography. Then, however, pictures are shown in the marketplace close to child pornography are. If is no hypocrisy - what then?
jonthecelt posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 7:27 AM
The gallery and the marketplace have two different sets of TOS. In the gallery, nudity of figures that seem to be underage are not allowed, for fear of cries of child porn. However, because people make textures for all figures, including those who look underage, images are needed to show off those textures. Since this involves skin, then the images tend to be (gasp!) nude. however, thse naked images, whether of adults or otherwise, are not allowed to be the front page image of the marketplace item, and are placed as the second or third image, with the clear warning that the images may contain material that some might consider offensive. There's simply no other way to market a skin texture. It's not a case of money greasing the wheel, it's simply the only fair way to let people sell their wares.
Talking of violating TOS, however... you have twice now linked to images or sites which contain nudity, without any flag or warning within either your post or the thread itself. Please, if you're going to use a site, learn ALL of its rules before condemning people's practices.
jonthecelt
dphoadley posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 7:34 AM
Quote - > Quote - All very fine and good, but were does it ban nudity?
It's not about nudity, it bans Poser itself!!!
You cannot represent any living organism in pictures or sculptures, it's worst that the Koran than only bans humans leaving the pictures with only birds and animals.
Interesting interpretation, but wrong as always when someone relies on a translation of the text, rather than on the text itself. The ban her is on idolitry, not art, unless you actually bow down and pray to your poser pictures. Then of curse, the ban would be upon you, but not upon me.
DPH
-Timberwolf- posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 7:36 AM
Ahh,OK.Let's share some aggreements first: Porn -if you like it -Ok.Child-Porn has nothing to do with Sex-It is a disgusting Crime.Concerning that market-place picture I don't see it close to child porn .I see it close to a cartoon Elf or whatsoever.Not my kind but who likes it -ok.Maybe we need a cartoon-flag here.There might be a different problem.In times of plastic surgery pleople especially young people might get some wrong kind of self awareness and how there Bodies should look like.There should be some kind of education about how to deal with media.I am afraid that a lot of people today are not able to differ between Reality and Fiction.
jonthecelt posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 7:57 AM
I'm with you there, Timberwolf. Whilst I did'nt bring it up in my last post, there is a huge difference between nudity and porn - whatefver age the subject is. To say that a nude image of a cartoonesque person who might look underage if you squinted hard enough is child porn is ridiculous - pornogrpahy is in the intent to titillate or cause arousal, and I'm not sure how a simple nude image could do that without an eortic or sexual context.
Whereas judging by the few pictures I looked at at your site, Gaby, are certainly in a sexual or erotic context. I have no way of knowing which images you attempted to show here in the gallery, but based on the few pictures I saw, I believe the admin were right to ask you to remove them from this site.
Note that this is not condemning your imagery, or decrying porn as filth - as Timberwolf said, each to their own. But to claim that your images weren't sexually graphic, and then that a simple standing nude of an Aiko texture is somehow kiddy-porn? That's frankly ludicrous.
jonthecelt
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 8:04 AM
Here we go again!! FFS when are people going to get it into their heads Child porn by it's very nature has to include at least one REAL child. Anything else is down to the warped mind of the individual viewing it.
Gaby I suggest that if you think the MP here is a haven for Child Pornography then you shouldn't be looking at it, & posting the link to your website on here which has porn included in it is against the TOS so be prepared to get slapped for that when a Mod notices it.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
-Timberwolf- posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 8:45 AM
Still one more funny thing:The old clichee is , that porn pics are made up by young simple minded men who never get to know real women, whereas those nude elves are brought up by well educated women tending to the esoteric scene => Young innocent elves representing the good spirits of mother earth are flying smiling through a farytale forrest.
lemur01 posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 8:46 AM
@Lucifer
*Thanks for the work unsafe warning for that link GabyT :(
*D'ya think the clue might be in the title?
-Timberwolf- posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 8:54 AM
@ Gaby: I somehow understand your point,but I simply think you are wrong this time.
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 9:01 AM
Quote - @Lucifer
*Thanks for the work unsafe warning for that link GabyT :(
*D'ya think the clue might be in the title?
Not really, there's no hint in the Renderosity name is there & this place is just as unsafe for work isn't it?
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
momodot posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 9:13 AM
*You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth.
*That is from the Ten Commandments, myself I always though that kind of precluded getting a photo driver's license or doodling daisies while taking a boring phone call.
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 9:29 AM
ps it's common curtesy (sp) if you know your link is unsafe for the workplace to include somewhere a warning, no matter if the link says fluffy-bunnies-are-cute or filthy-disgusting-acts-of-perversion it's still in the poster's best interest to include a warning, at least round here it is anyway ;)
At least we now know the original poster's real intention wasn't to complain about any "perceived" child porn on this site it was just to advertise their own place.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
lemur01 posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 9:36 AM
*Not really, there's no hint in the Renderosity name is there & this place is just as unsafe for work isn't it?
*Well, that's true... but i think you have to take a certain responsibility if you click on a link with 'erotic' in the title while you are at work. I mean, the word itself is a warning to the likely content.
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 9:45 AM
Quote - *Not really, there's no hint in the Renderosity name is there & this place is just as unsafe for work isn't it?
*Well, that's true... but i think you have to take a certain responsibility if you click on a link with 'erotic' in the title while you are at work. I mean, the word itself is a warning to the likely content.
Point taken :D I didn't actually take any notice of what the link said until after I hit it, never a good idea really.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
Madrigal posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 10:20 AM
I'm sorry, I linked to a nude image as well - I didn't notice the thread wasn't flagged :(
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 10:38 AM
yes you did didn't you, naughty naughty Madrigal!!! brings up a valid point to my mind though, the picture you linked to isn't intended to be porn or to cause shock/disgust, the ones at the site that GabyT links to are designed to do exactly that.
I bet Gaby would have a coronary if they visited FairieWylde if they have the reaction they've had to a single Fae type picture here.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
Mogwa posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 10:46 AM
I agree with kawecki and Gaby. In the last few years it seems my country ( USA ) has descended into a new era of McCarthyism. Free speech, in all its forms, is withering under such a never ending barrage of politically motivated assaults by fanatic special interest groups that it is in danger of disappearing altogether.
People are actually being jailed, harassed or driven into bankruptcy for saying, writng, or graphically representing an idea that somebody somewhere claims to find offensive. In my own home town, an eighteen year old severely mentally retarded boy was arrested and jailed for uttering a racial epithet in the presence of some minority students while they were boarding a bus. This child has the I.Q. of a five year old, and had no idea the word he used was in bad taste. He was just repeating a term he'd picked up from a movie or an overheard conversation. But that didn't stop the local "justice" system from putting him in handcuffs and locking him in a jail cell when a complaint was lodged. Because his parents are poor and could not afford to hire a lawyer or post bond, the boy spent several days held prisoner in an unfamiliar, hostile, frightening world he could not understand. Thanks to public outcry the charges were eventually dropped, but I wonder what would have happened if no one had protested this outrage?
Those who own and control the Renderosity site have every right to regulate the content that appears in the medium they pay for. This is not a publicly owned resource, but an asset of a financial enterprise. But does having the ability and legal right to enforce a policy justify its use? In this instance, I do not believe it does. After all, we are dealing here with graphic artistic representations, not reality itself.
pjz99 posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 10:47 AM
GabyTrautmann:
Quote - Timberwolf you ask " what is wrong here? ".
Your behavior here in the forum is very inappropriate, and your concerns need to be taken to site management, not here.
StevieG1965 posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 11:31 AM
Ok, I'm usually not one to step into an argument of this subject, but, I gotta lay my two cents out...
Finally, the promo pic is showing the texture of the product, it does not look like a child nor is it pornographic. So, until the little elves start posing with their ankles behind their ears with a magnifying glass, this argument has no merit what-so-ever.
kawecki posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 11:34 AM
My eyes were shocked of what they've found after entering the "favela".
How dare you to perturb the prayer chanting in his minareb!
Stupidity also evolves!
zollster posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 11:37 AM
christianity dont like poser cos poser is a different religion and it has only 3 commandments---- "though shalt only render nekkid vickis with big boobies"
"though shalt put vicki in a temple"
"though shalt give an oversized sword that noone in reallife could lift"
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 11:57 AM
Quote - My eyes were shocked of what they've found after entering the "favela".
How dare you to perturb the prayer chanting in his minareb!
Pray & chant all you want just don't expect me not to laugh about it or to join in.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
Miss Nancy posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 12:29 PM
wheatpenny posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 12:53 PM Site Admin
a while back I worked as a marketplace tester for a few months, so I have pretty good familiaroty with the Marketplace TOS. Marketplace guidelines specifically say no nudity on the ***first ***image only. It is allowed on any additional images.
So unless the MP has changed its policy, that image is not a violation.
Jeff
Renderosity Senior Moderator
Hablo español
Ich spreche Deutsch
Je parle français
Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?
dlfurman posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 1:06 PM
Quote - > Quote - To which Bible are you refering to? I wasn't aware of any such ban -at least not in the Jewish Hebrew Bible.
I don't know how much different is the Torah from the Old Testament.
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.
K,
This was in reference to making an IDOL and then saying this is GOD to WORSHIP.
"Few are agreeable in conversation, because each thinks more of what he intends to say than that of what others are saying, and listens no more when he himself has a chance to speak." - Francois de la Rochefoucauld
Intel Core i7 920, 24GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1050 4GB video, 6TB HDD
space
Poser 12: Inches (Poser(PC) user since 1 and the floppies/manual to prove it!)
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 1:11 PM
But surely you knew that we poser users worship the renders we make as gods?
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
Unicornst posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 1:44 PM
Quote - a while back I worked as a marketplace tester for a few months, so I have pretty good familiaroty with the Marketplace TOS. Marketplace guidelines specifically say no nudity on the ***first ***image only. It is allowed on any additional images.
So unless the MP has changed its policy, that image is not a violation.
**In actuality, if the character is deemed "too young looking", then nudity is not allowed on any of the store pages. Apparently, the tester and MP Managers didn't think this particular character looked "too young" to be shown nude.
Gaby,
If you think she is too young to be shown nude, you have the right to send a message to either ClintH or DebbieM stating your concerns.**
rickymaveety posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 2:05 PM
Looked at the ad .... doesn't appear to be a child to me. Looks like an elf. And, an adult elf at that. And you have to go looking for the nude shot.
Went over to look at Gaby's site, and all I can say is "blech!" That's my personal opinion, but I'm sticking with it. That's the stuff that I would prefer not to run across while viewing the galleries. To me, it's not "erotic" ... it's just plain old garden variety porn.
Since I am not a follower of either the Christian or Jewish religions, I'll leave the rest of the debate to people who care about that sort of thing.
Could be worse, could be raining.
jjroland posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 2:20 PM
I really don't get this thread.
As a side note Lucifer, from one non-monotheistic person to another - Its a little naive to call the bible fiction.
I am: aka Velocity3d
kawecki posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 2:23 PM
Quote - This was in reference to making an IDOL and then saying this is GOD to WORSHIP.
In this part there is no reference to any idol, idolatry, gods or any kind of worship. The Bible is very clear and explicit about idolatry in many parts.
Even Egyptians had gods represented by bulls, aligators, dogs or cats, as I know nobody has ever worshiped or made an idol for a squid, a lobster or the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth.
Even you consider it a worship you must remember that Poser is used to represent our female or male idols, godess, nude Vickies in a temple, Saints, Virgin Mary and Jesus himself!!
Stupidity also evolves!
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 2:39 PM
I'll believe in any god whose existence can be proven by logical debate.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
svdl posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 3:06 PM
Ah Lucifer, that's a good one! A very nice paradox.
If the existence (or non-existence) of a god ever can be proven, there's no need for belief anymore. The existence (or non-existence) becomes a fact, which stands on its own, independent from belief.
No one has ever been able to prove that God/Allah/Brahma/Jupiter/etcetera exist.
No one has ever been able to prove that God/Allah/Brahma/Jupiter/etcetera don't exist
So where does that leave me? I just don't know, and I'm content with the fact that I can not know.
The pen is mightier than the sword. But if you literally want to have some impact, use a typewriter
rickymaveety posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 3:14 PM
That's one of the reasons I became a Budhist. No bothersome "gods" to worship (and, no ... we do not worship Budha as a god).
So, I don't need to get into the logical conundrum ... yippee ... more time to render.
One of these days I'll tell you all about the old Budhist parable on faith ....
Could be worse, could be raining.
KarenJ posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 3:18 PM
Links to porn site removed.
Thread flagged for nudity.
Gaby - could you please refrain from telling lies in the forum. You have never had a gallery image removed. Although we have asked you, twice, not to post the link to your porn site.
We now return you to your regular scheduling. Coming up next it's "Renderdale" followed by "Renderation Street"...
"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan
Shire
zollster posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 3:37 PM
yannow...all these religions ya'll keep spoutin bout is just silly...theres only 1 god and its ME!! so get down on your knees and worship ME!!!! :)
rickymaveety posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:16 PM
A: Budhism is not a religion and
B: I'll pass on worshiping you, but thanks for the offer all the same.
Could be worse, could be raining.
kawecki posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:35 PM
Quote - I'll believe in any god whose existence can be proven by logical debate.
Damn!!!, there's no more God or G-d?, no more idolatry???
Hurrah!!!!, we can continue using Poser and making more nude Vickies!......
Stupidity also evolves!
rickymaveety posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 4:36 PM
Quote - Links to porn site removed.
Thread flagged for nudity.Gaby - could you please refrain from telling lies in the forum. You have never had a gallery image removed. Although we have asked you, twice, not to post the link to your porn site.
We now return you to your regular scheduling. Coming up next it's "Renderdale" followed by "Renderation Street"...
Karen,
I don't know if you noticed, but there is still a link from Gaby's gallery to her porn site. It's not super noticable, but it is in fact there. For myself ... not an issue, because I promise you I will never go over to that site again. I'm still scrubbing off my eyes with Clorox just to get the taint off. :) But, it's there (the link I mean) all the same.
I'm not really certain why anyone would call a site like that "erotic." It's got nothing to do with being erotic .... it's just plain gross. It makes some of the worst Poser porn look like great art.
Could be worse, could be raining.
Jumpstartme2 posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 8:14 PM
I think I got the other two references here, and the gallery..thanks Ricky
~Jani
Renderosity Community Admin
---------------------------------------
Whatthe posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 8:58 PM
If I might throw in $.02 about child nudity. Child nudity for the sake of art by itself is not illegal, controversial, yes, but not illegal. Until 2003, virtual pornography in the United States depicting minors was not illegal until George Bush signed the PROTECT act (which even makes some of your favorite ANIME -not hentai- illegal by definition). So I don't think it's out of line for a Renderosity that is open to WIDE community that has tastes outside of the constant pinups to enforce strict rules and interpertations regarding this matter.
rickymaveety posted Fri, 09 February 2007 at 9:27 PM
Well, and the nude child has been a staple of great art since time began. Little naked cheubs in religious art ... even baby Jesus, naked as a J bird in several great artworks.
It's a little sad, really. I was over at a friend's house and his kids were running through the sprinkler. They were having a blast. The youngest, his little son, who was about 2 at the time was quite naked. We all took photos because it was just too cute. Now, I worry that someone will see those photos and think I'm a child porn collector.
Could be worse, could be raining.
kawecki posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 12:24 AM
If I post a nude photograph of me when I was two years old, am I a paedophile????
Stupidity also evolves!
zollster posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 12:56 AM
shg0816 posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 12:56 AM
Okay, I saw the picture...
I agree with Jonthecelt, because I want to see the whole skin texture...sorry folks, but I may want to change some pubic hair color (I checked the appropriate language box for "pubic hair", so I won't get tos'd)
When I saw the picture, I saw a young elf (Aiko)...Isn't Aiko supposed to be anime-ish? If so, aren't MOST anime girls high-school age?? If that is the case...the staff better start TOSing the lot....
What's my point??? Hey Ollie, what IS my point.....
Oh yeah, my point is this...If Renderosity tos'd this, because they thought she was young, then they DO need to start tosing more. If it's because it was the first picture, then what would suggest they do is this:
Send an e-mail, asking the artist to move the picture to the 2nd or 3rd picture, and explain why.
If this isn't done withing a reasonable time (a week or so - due to someone MAY be on vacation), then the staff move it, send an e-mail explaining why is was moved.
Yes, as Timberwolf said, she appears to look like a childish elf. YES, the staff needs to be monitoring what goes up...but they need to do it logically, not willy-nilly and arbitrarily. If I remember this site, it is for ARTISTIC RESOURCES....which....
GASP...will have nudity
Sorry, it seems they are trying to please EVERYONE - and this simple isn;t possible...lets start exercising common sense, and the artists need to be cognizant of this too...no visable boobage on the first picture
Bea posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 1:42 AM
I did understand from various comments that there have been in various long threads before that Aiko naked as an elf or fairy was not actually acceptable if she looked young even if you were portraying her as someone hundreds of years old - and we were told also in that thread - finally that the same rules were in place in the Market Place - if Aiko looked young in the images she should not be naked.
jonthecelt posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 2:23 AM
That only applies to the first image in a marketplace item, Bea. Second or third images can contain nudity, provided it is corrrect to do so in the context (ie: it's a texture you're selling), and the link to that image clearly states that there is content which may be considered offensive to some.
jonthecelt
Bea posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 3:53 AM
No - I have a feeling that it was said that for the other images as well if Aiko looked you she should not be naked. I don't know because I haven't looked but I think its the same ruling for Laura and Maddie? I mean, being quite honest why does it need nudity to sell a texture?
Gaby_t posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:39 AM
I am suspending your account for 7 days. On your
return to the site, please follow the TOS - which you agreed to do when
you joined - or you will be permanently banned.
Karen
Renderosity Staff
This is unfathomable - here a frustrated housewife censors as Renderosity would be her private arena.
An untalented worker from a dirty town on an island shows off here as if that was her private playing field.
nruddock posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:49 AM
spedler posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:56 AM
Quote - We now return you to your regular scheduling. Coming up next it's "Renderdale" followed by "Renderation Street"...
And after that, it'll be time for "Render Enders" (sorry - couldn't resist; and apologies to non-Brits who are probably mystified by these soap opera references).
Steve
Madrigal posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:59 AM
Not Render Enders! All those fake East Rend accents! :D
O my, Gaby, what big bad manners you have!
pjz99 posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 5:10 AM
Quote - This is unfathomable - here a frustrated housewife censors as Renderosity would be her private arena.
An untalented worker from a dirty town on an island shows off here as if that was her private playing field.
You are way out of line. This kind of behavior is never tolerated in any moderated forum.
KarenJ posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 5:39 AM
Silly Gaby. Everyone knows that I'm divorced and have a full time job and two part time jobs. :laugh:
"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan
Shire
KarenJ posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 5:45 AM
PS:
Sheffield - beautiful, not dirty.
"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan
Shire
Dale B posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 5:46 AM
Nice overhand volley, Karen....!
zollster posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 7:07 AM
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 7:52 AM
Wasn't Sheffield where the film The Full Monty was set? Am I the only person round here who's seen it? the film you dirty lot nothing else ;)
Kawecki you want to be careful who you tell about your picture collection, you could probably be arrested for it in certain countries.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
rickymaveety posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 9:52 AM
Quote - This is unfathomable - here a frustrated housewife censors as Renderosity would be her private arena.
An untalented worker from a dirty town on an island shows off here as if that was her private playing field.
Sorry, Gaby, but I've seen your "art" ... so, if I were you, I would be very careful as to how I threw around the word "untalented."
Also, considering your general attitude about .... pretty much everything .... I don't think you would be all that much missed if you were banned. Clearly, you do not know how to behave yourself in polite company. Heck, you don't even seem to know how to behave yourself in the company of the complete whackos who hang out here.
And I've been to Sheffield ... have you?? It's really very pretty in that part of the British Isles.
Could be worse, could be raining.
KarenJ posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 11:28 AM
Yep, Sheffield was the setting for the Full Monty.
Although I only came here relatively recently (2001) so I didn't see it being filmed. But it's funny to be watching it and think, hey, I know that street, that's where Bob from the canteen lives!
I Y my adopted city and would never want to leave :-)
"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan
Shire
dphoadley posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 11:33 AM
The Full Monty was broadcast on Israel Television a couple years back, definitely a nice piece of cinema.
DPH
Mogwa posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 11:37 AM
Well, all this badinage is quite amusing, but what I want to know is how it's ever going to help me achieve my ambition of seeing the comedienne Kathy Griffin nekkid? I mean legally.
rickymaveety posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 11:56 AM
Well, Mogwa ... why don't you call her and ask her? You never know, she might oblige.
Could be worse, could be raining.
Mogwa posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 12:16 PM
Well, I would, dear Ricky, but her phone number is unlisted. And then there's that annoying matter of the restraining order and the confiscation of my binoculars.
jjroland posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 12:35 PM
Do young elves typically shave and groom thier nether-regions? Seems odd to me, I know for a fact my 13 yr old daughter would balk at the idea.
So I find that kinda interesting...
Anyway -
The "art" on that site - is whoa, I really don't know how anyone that makes that can label it as art or be offended that the world at large doesn't want to see it. As a matter of fact, even if I was looking for porn, I wouldn't look at that.
I am: aka Velocity3d
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 12:45 PM
Depends how young the elf in the picture actually is, don't forget they age at a different rate to humans & could quite easily be 70-80 & still only just be past puberty, anyway that's all by the by as this isn't a real person or elf it's a flat texture that's wrapped round a digital model that actually has no physical age.
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
dphoadley posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 2:36 PM
Quote - Anyway -
The "art" on that site - is whoa, I really don't know how anyone that makes that can label it as art or be offended that the world at large doesn't want to see it. As a matter of fact, even if I was looking for porn, I wouldn't look at that.
Actually, I found it kinda interesting, a REAL eye opener in fact -and yeah, I bookmarked it too, naughty me.
The most odd part of it all is, that I'm sure that I recognize some of those faces.
DPH
rickymaveety posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 2:56 PM
Well, to each their own, dphoadley. I didn't think that most of it had much artistic merit, and even the porn was amaturish at best.
I suppose part of the problem (for me) is when someone calls their work "erotic", I expect something more than just snapshots of women in crotch shot poses.
Could be worse, could be raining.
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 3:00 PM
I agree with Ricky, erotic isn't women lying on their backs with their ankles behind their ears, erotic to me is like the stuff Playboy Magazine has ( or used to, haven't actually seen a copy in years)
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
dphoadley posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 3:25 PM
Well, if you’re looking for decorous nudity, you might browse through my gallery. And if you’re looking for something exotic, then you might check out my Yakuza Women. I can’t say how erotic they are, but I did put some time into them, especially in creating their tattoos.
While my renders may not always be the best, and my figures tend not to be the latest and greatest, at least one commenter did say that my work was much more strongly themed than what she usually saw in the galleries.
On the other hand, you won’t see a nude Vicky (well there is one, but she’s a fat dwarf, sitting under an oak tree, smoking a pipe); nor a temple, nor a sword.
An interesting aspect of my gallery is that my most commented render is not a nude, but a religious scene: ‘If I forget…’ which would seem to prove that more important than inflated breast to make a render popular, is an element of drama.
Yours truly,
David P. Hoadley
nysalor posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:02 PM
Quote - This is a partly pure hypocrisy - I repeat it: "Pecunia non olet"
Wow Gaby, great insight.
To avoid the taint of hypocrisy you should deactivate your membership here at Rendo and visit websites that only reflect your pure, untainted view of the world. Its the only principled thing to do.
As Horace reminds us, Est modus in rebus.
nysalor posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:05 PM
Quote - If I post a nude photograph of me when I was two years old, am I a paedophile????
That would make it what, ten years old?
Does your mom know you're posting this stuff? She'll ground you for a week.
pjz99 posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:07 PM
jjroland:
Quote - Do young elves typically shave and groom thier nether-regions?
There are actually good technical reasons why many people prefer skins to not have pubic hair or eyebrows painted into the texture. If there's no painted hair there, then you have a lot more freedom to apply a variety of props or transparency maps to get whatever general shape or color you want. It's not so much the bareness fetish as how that particular couple of regions are very individual, and a lot of buyers ask for that.
Dimension3D posted a very clear and coherent tutorial that explained exactly how to use trans mapped hair with Blender node, but unfortunately it has aged off the forum - I still have a copy of the tutorial if you are interested.
kawecki posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:34 PM
Quote - Does your mom know you're posting this stuff? She'll ground you for a week.
She must be jailed too?, she was that took mine picture, or was my father?......
I don't know, I don't remember, I was so innocent then...., I suppose....
Stupidity also evolves!
rickymaveety posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 4:40 PM
Quote - This is a partly pure hypocrisy - I repeat it: "Pecunia non olet"
If it's a "partly pure" hypocrisy, then is it also partly impure?? And if partly impure, does that mean it is partly not hypocrisy at all?? Orrrrrrr, is it possible that Ms. T partly doesn't know what the heck she is talking about??
Then again, do any of us??
Yes, I'm feeling philosophical this afternoon. Poser keeps crashing on me, so I'm haunting the forum.
Could be worse, could be raining.
Sivana posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 5:18 PM
Well Gaby, I always have enjoyed you images and I was sorry to hear about your nudity-problemes in the gallery.
BUT, when I want to buy a texture on marketplace, I want to see the full quality of the product. Therefor I need to see the full nude figure that I can decide if I want to buy it or not. I don´t think that a product offer is the same a ready image for a gallery.
Dale B posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 5:28 PM
Quote - Do young elves typically shave and groom thier nether-regions? Seems odd to me, I know for a fact my 13 yr old daughter would balk at the idea.
This assumes that elves even have body hair. Depending on whose interpretations, they may not have a follicle below the scalpline. Wendy Pini's elves do not, for example; no shaving or waxing there, even among the wolfbloods... Anyone know about Arwen or Galadriel....? :D
pakled posted Sat, 10 February 2007 at 6:20 PM
de non gustabus disputatem...as long as we're on a Latin bent..;) (Pakled took no latin in school, and it shows..;)
I wish I'd said that.. The Staircase Wit
anahl nathrak uth vas betude doth yel dyenvey..;)
Lucifer_The_Dark posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 5:47 AM
Carpe Jugulum is about all the Latin I know ;)
Windows 7 64Bit
Poser Pro 2010 SR1
zollster posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 6:51 AM
dphoadley posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 7:03 AM
Attached Link: Carpe Jugulum
***Carpe Jugulum*** is a [comic fantasy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_fantasy "Comic fantasy") novel by [Terry Pratchett](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Pratchett "Terry Pratchett"), the twenty third in the *[Discworld](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discworld "Discworld")* series. It was first published in [1998](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998 "1998").'In Carpe Jugulum, Terry Pratchett pastiches the traditions of vampire literature, playing with the mythic archetypes and featuring a tongue-in-cheek reversal of 'vampyre' subculture with young vampires who wear bright clothes, drink wine, and stay up until noon. The title is a play on the Latin phrase carpe diem ('seize [literally, "pluck"] the day') and the author considers it to mean 'Go for the throat'.' (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Gini posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 8:01 AM
LOL @
Quote - We now return you to your regular scheduling. Coming up next it's "Renderdale" followed by "Renderation Street"...
Have to add my favorite telly shows: "Celebrity Big Render" "Ugly Vicky" "Desperate Renderwives" "Extreme Makeover"( Poserstyle) and the early movie today is "The Sword In The Temple"
" Try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good
book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live
together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and
nations."
-Monty Python
zollster posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 8:34 AM
Quote - Carpe Jugulum is a comic fantasy novel by Terry Pratchett, the twenty third in the Discworld series. It was first published in 1998.
'In Carpe Jugulum, Terry Pratchett pastiches the traditions of vampire literature, playing with the mythic archetypes and featuring a tongue-in-cheek reversal of 'vampyre' subculture with young vampires who wear bright clothes, drink wine, and stay up until noon. The title is a play on the Latin phrase carpe diem ('seize [literally, "pluck"] the day') and the author considers it to mean 'Go for the throat'.' (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
granny weatherwax rooooolllls!!!! :D
dphoadley posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 8:39 AM
Don't forget:
"Render Girls," staring 30 Something Judy and her teenage daughter Penny.
"Seventh Poser"
"MidRender Murders"
Plus an oldie re-run: "Render She Wrote."
DPH
Tiari posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 4:14 PM
Now lookit what we got here!
I go away for three days to the pocinos to cesar's resorts for a much needed respite with the hubby in a private room with a pool and jacuzzi............. and lookit the topic of the day.
The Irony is freakin killin me guys LOL.
Sadly, I missed out on the smut page by being away and now its currently taken down, so I have no frame of reference, of which I could have relinquished hours of my time decoding the nuances of is it erotic art, or smut pretzel women clothing non grada. Bah, I'll have to wait for a sequel.
I'll avoid the whole God topic or I'll have to start bustin out my Atheist card again. Actually, technically, I don't even believe in that....... but there's no title for someone who thinks two tiny ameoba began this all.
Okay Gaby, here's the 411 for your pleasure. No kevlar today, I'm feelin like tough stuff. Lets be realistic. Again, lets go back to Kirin's class of basics 101:
Art created for sexual arousal: Porn
Art created to beautify and glorify the nude form with respect: Art.
Woman with legs splayed and ankles behind her ears for maximum genetalia exposure with "boo boo pouty face" = Porn.
Woman displayed in standing pose WITH warning, showing all angles and fully described in content: Texture for Purchase.
Now, I gota hand it to you, you have some nerve waltzing in after displaying a link to a contortionist genetalia delight on your page, and somehow comparing that to a vendor, who's clearly marked what the item is. To me it seems like you are more angry that you got called out, than that someone followed the actual rules, made an appropriate addition to the marketplace and is, well, marketing it.
Granted I havent seen your art, but I'll take it from the masses here. And, i do like porn, its great actually........ when done by people who actually ACKNOWLEDGE their genre....... and embrace it without trying to pass it off as "nude art"........... dude, its some righteous stuff. Thats why I come here for art, and oh......... waltz over to some other brilliant sites who proudly display and wave their erotica banner.
Putting erotical here, is slightly like trying to sell a Pacer at a Ferrarri dealership.
jjroland posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 4:59 PM
""Quote - "Do young elves typically shave and groom thier nether-regions? Seems odd to me, I know for a fact my 13 yr old daughter would balk at the idea.""
I gotta go back to this and quote myself for my own correction - because I've been thinking about this since I posted it and every time I read this thread. When I posted it, I was imagining for some reason a real life elf. Why was I? Now thinking about it, and honestly not knowing how to word myself correctly - but it does actually make sense that a fae/elf would be asthetically pleasing in all respects. In the 70s she would have probably been quite a furry nymph - in todays world no.
I am: aka Velocity3d
pjz99 posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 5:08 PM
Plus it's something customers ask for just for technical reasons (scroll up).
svdl posted Sun, 11 February 2007 at 5:14 PM
I prefer bald in the nether regions - that way I can use a pubic hair prop and give the character any color and shape of pubic hair I happen to like, or leave her bald.
Same goes for eyebrows. I wish more texture makers would make use of the eyebrow transmap, instead of painting eyebrows on the head texture. Most of my characters have dark hair, since most eyebrows are painted dark. The fantasy world my characters live in does NOT know peroxide, so a blonde should be a natural blonde - everywhere.
Unless she's a mage, of course, then other rules apply...
The pen is mightier than the sword. But if you literally want to have some impact, use a typewriter