I've recently had two of my thumbs pulled due to violation of the TOS. Im not going to get into an argument over whether or not the TOS is fair. Thats open to an (endless) debate. However when you leave it open to interpretation of the TOS - then there is going to be problems.
My newest image was this:
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1466914
Now in order for me to make a sensible thumb that shows more than just her head (which is all the gallery thumbs seem to be now when showing images with nudity) was impossible. To be fair to the image, I wanted to show the horse and the dolphins. In order to comply with the TOS - i painted a white bikini on the thumb. Now at the end of it - why does the thumb get pulled? There is no offensive (lol) nipples showing and I get to represent my illustration with proper representation.
The thumb gets pulled anyway
WTF?
Im trying to find a happy medium that is fair to the artist and still complies with the TOS - but there doesn't seem to be any.
I had another image pulled "hurts so good". My email said that it was the thumb that was pulled. However it appears that both the thumb and the image was pulled and is "under review"
She is wearing a thong in the thumb and no nipple is showing. So I can only assume that the thong shows more than the "standard" bikini.
What the hell is a standard bikini?
It just seems that for someone such as myself who specializes in pinup work - its very hard to be able to show my work here without ruffling some feathers.

I can't interpret their TOS for ya, but this is one of the few places I know about where teen-age boys can view nudie pix without lying about their age.

PerfectN - I've just checked out your Rhapsody work, I have to say it's a beautiful piece of work.
Regarding the thumbnail, I'm bafffled as to why they would pull it. How can something like this be offensive, when the chest area was covered? How would the moderators interpret this as a violation, it'd be interesting to find out.

Just a site that I found........http://www.artistsagainstcensorship.com/

Rhapsody is a stunning piece of work, no doubt, I agree with Stormchaser on that.
Does it not annoy you that work of that quality only has 12 comments from 159 views when some mediocre shite from the "buddy brigade" gets like 3 score and 10 comments!!????
Baffling!!!

Injustice will be avenged.
Cofiwch Dryweryn.

"mediocre shite from the "buddy brigade""
thefixer - Recently I have wanted to make a comment on here about this but I feel that I would be backlashed against it. I'm going to say my piece now anyway. 
I love going through the galleries & picking up those gems that truly are a work of art. I've added some to my favourites recently, I am in awe of some of the talent here.  Some of these great works haven't had the recognition they deserve (not enough views & comments) & half of the most commented & highly rated sections are took up with the friends club just posting canned pictures time after time & maybe alot of people will miss these. I still look at the art charts even though half of that is the "buddy brigade", some work there is superb. I do find though that unless you can look at the galleries everyday you'll find it hard to keep track of the good stuff, so what I do now is check the favourite images of people's work I've commented on. It's amazing what great work is there that was posted weeks & even months ago that you would have missed. I really wish the most commented & rated section would highlight what this section was really designed for.
Sorry for the rant.

I always say it as I see it Stormchaser and night after night I see the same old, same old peddled out with the same old, same old oohh's and aaah's. Same tired posing, same tired lighting, same tired soft photoshop filters etc.
I admit some have lots of comments by merit and that's fair enough, I have commented on those also but let's face it, as you have said there are loads of images out there better than a lot in the Art Charts but they're not "networked" correctly on the site so don't get the votes or however it works now!

If peeps want to flame me for saying what most of us think anyway, let 'em. I won't lose any sleep over it!

Sorry to hijack the thread PerfectN, I'll stop now!!

Injustice will be avenged.
Cofiwch Dryweryn.

Seems to me that your thumbnails were probably pulled because the painted on bikini was considered a "'Censored" image:

Quote - No "Censored" language/images (some examples: "Warning: Nudity Inside" or black bars covering breasts/genitals)

w/ the painted bikini being equated to a 'black bar'.

I'd personally rather see nudity in the thumbs of pictures that contain nudity.
Anything else is misrepresentation of the full image, IMO.

As for quality vs. # of comments/rating: Any relationship between the two is purely coincidental. That's just my opinion too.

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

Dvlenk6 - your comment of quality vs # of comment rating is purely coincidental - surely you are joking. Renderosity is riddled with hug clubs. I've seen some great pieces of work get overlooked because they simply don't comment on others work. Look at the art charts. As the fixer so eloquently put it - "same old tired shite" and he's right. But that is the way it is and I can live with it.
However Rhapsody put me in a dilemma because in order for me to show the full theme of the picture - the winged horse and the dolphins I had to show more of the picture than just her bloody head. In oder to do that I had to cover her breasts. Fine - no problem. But it still gets pulled because I painted on a bikini - so where is the middle ground? The TOS is unfairly skewed.
Stormchaser and thefixer just had the balls to say what everyone else knows. The hug clubs get the most comments because by commenting on one of their picture ensures you get a comment on yours.
...and I thougth I left highschool cliques behind me...

Well, from what I can see, it was probably put into holding because of the ["No Nudity in Thumbnail" policy.](http://www.renderosity.com/news.php?viewStory=13472)

Looking at the actual image and then the thumbnail, it looks like you allowed the Renderosity server to generate your thumbnail for you.

If you have nudity and/or violence in your image, and the image is tagged nudity and/or violence, then you cannot allow Renderosity to generate a thumbnail for you.  Y*ou must use a cropped thumbnail *that doesn't show any nudity or violence in it. Or you can choose to use the Renderosity Content Warning image, found here.

Thumbnail nudity consists of:

• exposed female nipples

• exposed female breast areola

• exposed male/female buttocks (beyond what you would see with a "normal" bikini bottom) IE: a thong panty is considered buttock nudity

• exposed male/female genitals

• exposed pubic hair (even if it's around the edges of the panty)

• shear/wet/see through fabric that shows any of the above

• a nude figure with strategically placed props to hide their nudity IE: Holding up 2 apples in front of the breasts to hide the areola and nipples, or putting a few flower petals over the pubic area.
  **
  What is not considered Thumbnail Nudity:**

• Female Breast tissue other than the nipple and areola area

• The shape of the female nipple through non see through clothing

• pasties that fully cover the breast areaola and nipples

Note: Second skins are apparently decided on a case by case basis. Some second skins are "real clothing" IE: jeans and a top etc, while others are just body parts coloured IE: a lime green martian girl coloured in the material room.

I can tell you that you aren't going to win and reposting a nude and/or violent image with a full reduced size thumbnail is only going to make the staff mad and result in warnings for you.

It is possible to be creative when you make your thumbnails and still be able to attract the hormonal :)

I took the liberty of creating a thumbnail using your image to show you what I mean. Feel free to use it in your gallery if you want to.

I tried to just use the image in it's actual rendered state, but when I positioned the image into the window of my 200x200  thumbnail template, the full torso including the hips and "groin" area was visible. Even with the horse's mane covering the groin it is clear that she is not wearing a piece of clothing in her hip area, so because of that, the figure is considered "nude"

I resized the image by 125%  and  magnified the thumbnail template with the enlarged image in it. I was able to position the enlarged image into the thumbnail so that there are no areola or nipples showing, and the image is cropped high enough above the hip so that it can be "assumed" that she is wearing a bikini bottom.

So keep in mind that if you tag an image nudity and/or violence, you have to use a cropped thumbnail.

"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

Acadia - a few things. One - how does the thumbnail you created (thanks for that) even remotely show the scene in which I created.  No sense of the flying horse or the sky or the ocean or the dolphins. Two - and most importantly - **I created a thumbnail with a bikini painted on to cover the breasts** in order to appease the nipple police. There is no showing of nipple anywhere and that is why Im pissed. And the fact they consider a thong "buttock nudity" is laughable. I mean how fucking uptight are we getting here?! Lastly - your thumb was creative (giving credit where its due) and your statement of "If you don't talk to your cat about catnip..." - love it!!

Quote - Dvlenk6 - your comment of quality vs # of comment rating is purely coincidental - surely you are joking.

No, I'm not joking.
From your comments, it looks we are saying the same thing:
Quality of images has nothing to do with the number of comments or ratings, IMO.
I've seen too many cheap images get into the most commented/highest rated slots and really good images get overlooked too many times to have my mind changed about that.

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

Sorry Dvlenk6 - we WERE saying the same thing. I agree with you 100%

Quote - Acadia - a few things.
One - how does the thumbnail you created (thanks for that) even remotely show the scene in which I created.  No sense of the flying horse or the sky or the ocean or the dolphins.
Two - and most importantly - I created a thumbnail with a bikini painted on to cover the breasts in order to appease the nipple police. There is no showing of nipple anywhere and that is why Im pissed.
And the fact they consider a thong "buttock nudity" is laughable. I mean how fucking uptight are we getting here?!
Lastly - your thumb was creative (giving credit where its due) and your statement of "If you don't talk to your cat about catnip..." - love it!!

If you have a nude and/or violent image, and the nudity and/or violence tags are on, you must use a cropped thumbnail. If you have a white bikini on that thumbnail you have in the gallery, I can't see it.  Personally I can still see what looks like nipples and when I look at the thumbnail you have posted, and the actual image itself, they look the same, only different sizes.

You cannot have a nude/violent image and have a reduced scale image for a thumbnail because if your image is "nude", then it stands to reason that the resized image in the thumbnail is also nude.

As far as painting a bikini on a thumbnail that is not in the actual image itself, that can be considered "censor-like thumbnail" and is not permitted.

**The hard and fast rule is that if you have a nude and/or violent image, and the nudity and/or violence tags are on, you must use a cropped thumbnail.

**If you want to have a fully resized thumbnail of the actual image, then you will have to redo your image and add a bikini top and bottom to the figure. Then there will be no need to have a nudity flag and you can then use a resized image as your thumbnail.

"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

And that is why the TOS is full of shit! In saying that I can't represent the picture in its purest sense because I can't have the picture nude and have it faithfully represented with a thumb. The fairest and reasonable way to serve both parties is to allow my to edit the thumb. How is that hurting anyone?
By painting on a bikini top - no one is offended by the nipples - and for the record THERE ARE NO NIPPLES IN MY THUMB. And I get to show the picture in a grand scale.
Asking me to paint the picture I envisioned with a top and bottom on merely to allow me to show it fully in a thumbnail is crazy - I'd rather delete my gallery and go elsewhere.  And rendo can satisfy themselves with their hug clubs and endless pictures of cutsy pie fairys.

I can take the TOS with a grain of salt and abide by the no nudity or violence in the thumb. But now this is just getting anal and needless censorship.

Sorry, I didn't have a hand in making the rules and thankfully I no longer have to see that they are enforced.

All I know from reading the Thumbnail Policy and my brief stint as a co-ordinator, that if you want to have a full depiction of your image in your thumbnail, the image itself cannot have nudity or violence in it.

Why is editing the thumbnail wrong?  I can't give you a valid reason because I personally don't see anything wrong with doing that, however, it's Renderosity's site and they make the rules. And their policy is that they don't want the thumbnail edited to be something else because they consider it "misleading", and have stated that  if you have nudity in the image you have to use a cropped thumbnail.

What I'm failing to understand here though, is having looked at your gallery thumbnails, I see that you have been "creative" and have been following the Thumbnail Policy properly and have some very attractive thumbnails.  Why all of a sudden this protest thread?

"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

You see what is happening here? Great art is being trodden on because of silly censorship rules. PerfectN has created a brilliant image & we are overlooking it because of a damn thumbnail rule. This has happened before. Good art should not be treated this way. How the hell can the nude woman in this image be offensive, Jesus Christ I've had enough!

Quote - You see what is happening here? Great art is being trodden on because of silly censorship rules. PerfectN has created a brilliant image & we are overlooking it because of a damn thumbnail rule. This has happened before. Good art should not be treated this way. How the hell can the nude woman in this image be offensive, Jesus Christ I've had enough!

The image is not offensive.

However it does contain nudity and because it contains nudity has to have a cropped thumbnail.  The image itself is absolutely fine...beautiful in fact.

So far as the thumbnail policy goes and censorship, you can thank the hormone ridden ones who felt that they had to blow up a boob or buttock or crotch so that it filled 200 x 200 pixels worth of space in order to attract views.

Over the years it's gotten worse and worse to the point that almost every second thumbnail being uploaded was a giant boob, a giant nipple, a close up of a butt crack or a crotch.  IMHO the gallery arrival pages were looking like the back of pornographic magazines, and extremely tacky, even to those such as myself who am a nudist and enjoy viewing the naked form and don't use the "No Nudity" filter.

It's not hard to locate the nudes....just look for the strategically cropped thumbs that show lots and lots of breast tissue and is tagged "nudity".

Unfortunately because people showed no self control and it kept getting worse and worse, Renderosity felt a need to put a rule in place to force people to stop.  You know that moderation vs indulgence thing?  Had everyone not jumped on the bandwagon and turned the gallery into the likes of a porn magazine, I doubt that the rule would have ever been made.

EDIT: To fix spelling

"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

Just a thought here. I thought PerfectN did the right thing by Rendo & tried to cover the woman up. Now this bit gets me, this is supposed to mislead people because it doesn't represent the image because she's nude? Just a minute, aren't Rendo misleading us as we are to presume this is a site for artists to express themselves!

Acadia -  the reason why im pissed is because in order to show Rhapsody to its full effect - i.e - on a grand scale with the clouds, ocean, winged horse and dolphins. I can't crop the image to represent it that way. The woman is secondary. The woman for a change (as per my usual images) is not important. With my other pinup work if I can crop it without altering the image. Ill do it. But in this case I simply couldn't do it.
Im further pissed because this is a bullshit rule. It is needless and restrictive. They don't want nudity in the thumb - fine - I can live with that. However allow the artist some room to move.
How the hell is it misleading? If I tag the image with nudity - there is going to be nudity! You don't want to see nudity - to click on my bloody image.
This altering of the thumbnail rule needs to change. It blows.
And Stormchaser, thanks for the compliment.

Quote - we are to presume this is a site for artists to express themselves!

You can still upload your nudes and violent images :)  You just can't have nudity or violence in the thumbnail.  I don't see a problem with that.

Now on the other hand had Renderosity said "ok, no more nudity or violence in the galleries", then yes, I can see that as being censorship.

However, cleaning up the gallery arrival pages so that there are no nudity or violence in them, I do not see as censorship because the thumbnail still leads to the actual "non censored" image.

"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

So the gallery has been changed from cropped images of boobs and crotches to thumbs of fairys and fractals....
Ill take the crotches in my face anyday.
Pun intended.

"So far as the thumbnail policy goes and censorship, you can thank the hormone ridden ones who felt that they had to blow up a boob or buttock or crotch so that it filled 200 x 200 pixels worth of space in order to attract views."
Acadia - That's a good point & I understand how the galleries were looking. I just get annoyed when tasteful nudes are deemed inappropriate. Yes, I know the full image can contain nudity, I just don't see how a tasteful nude thumbnail is not allowed. Well, I can see only one reason to not show nudity here, & that's because of the minors. Any other reason is downright silly. Yes, as you say it can look a little tacky with every thumbnail showing nudes, but I still don't see enough reason in this to stop it. We choose to look or we choose to move on. At the end of the day we are talking about art here, not pornography. They are two very different subjects.

You seem to have your mind pretty firmly made up and nothing I say is going to appease you. So I won't bother to try anymore.

Renderosity is not going to change it back. All we can do is live with it, or not.  Trying to buck the policy by posting the thumbnails regardless, is only going to lead to warnings and eventually bannings.

"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 - ** I just don't see how a tasteful nude thumbnail is not allowed.**

Please try and define the word "tasteful" so that it encompasses each person's individual level of tolerance and opinion.

It's not possible because what is tasteful to you may  not be to me and vice versa.

I'm sure there are many that would consider a close up shot of a giant nipple on a size 99XXX boob  "tasteful", and then there are those that don't.

You cannot have a rule in place that is loosely open to interpretation so Renderosity went with an  "all or nothing" one.  In fact they took the word "Tasteful" out of the thumbnail policy guidelines because after great discussion it was determined that  there is no clear cut definition for it and it's too subjective a term to use because of that.

"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

Everyone please try not to notice the merchant banners that have areolae showing and other fine distinctions.  Thanks in advance.

My Freebies

Acadia - The thing is, & this is me personally. I just don't see how the human form can be distasteful. It beggers belief when I hear that someone is offended by nudity. You say you're a nudist, you surely understand this?

pjz99 - Now you're just being naughty, you'll have me up all night now just waiting for a dirty banner to show up. Now where's that refresh button again?!

Like I said, I don't make the rules here and I no longer have to enforce them. However, I do respect the right of the site owner to determine the rules they want to have in place. I have my own site and I have my own rules for it too.

"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

Acadia - Fair enough. My gripe isn't with you. I'm not really angry with Rendo, as you say it's their site & their rules. I'm just tired of so many rules in life which just don't make any real sense to me. So much expression is lost.

I look at a community forum the same way I do someone's home.

For example let's say that I am a smoker and I go to someone's house and they are nonsmokers and don't want people smoking in their house. Do I disregard their rules and light up regardless of what they want in their own home, or do I respect their right and go outside to have a cigarette? 

I could easily argue that by refusing to allow me to smoke in their home that they are trodding on my rights to smoke, just like they could argue that it's their house and they have a right to put in a no smoking rule.

However, they haven't barred me from smoking on their property, just from smoking inside their home.

I use that smoking example because I am a nonsmoker and I actually had someone do that to me. She knew my home was nonsmoking and she did ask if she could smoke and I told her no and said that she could go downstairs to have one. She said that she didn't want to go downstairs and she opened my livingroom window and lit up a cigarette and said "I'll stand here and the smoke will go outside."  Needless to say she was never invited over again.

Renderosity hasn't barred you from posting nudity and violence....they just ask that you limit it to the actual image and not the thumbnail image.

"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

**Acadia - That actually is a very good example of abiding by the house rules & I agree in principle. I too would have responded like you. **

Yeah, what acadia said!

The thing is that this site is trying to cater to a rather wide audience.
I for one are glad that nudity on thumbnails is limited, because it allows me to cruise the site while at the office, during lunch, withot getting fired for material inappropriate in a workplace (nudity), and also, I can look through things at home without worring about one of the younger teenagers in the house wondering what I'm looking at. There's warning when going from PG to to nudity.
So, with too much nudity, I would not be able to see a lot of good art without nudity (without getting myself fired or in hot water over it).
Also, there's so much friggin' nudity around this site as it is, I'm more intrigued by clothed then nude figures any more.

If boys want to look and nude chicks, doesn't mean they have to be in my face the minute I peek into a gallery. And one has to admit that geat many nudes on this site aren't exactly 'art nudes' and artistic body studies. They are images with rather heavy sexual connotations. Dare I call them sexual fantasy material.
Bottom line is, sexual fantasy material isn't exactly appropriate in a relatively PG environment.

It doesn't have much to do with having a personal distaste for nudes, and everything to do with a lot of people having their own 'house rules' in the environments they are in when viewing the galleries and images.

Pjz99 brought up a good point about vendors too. I almost never look at the marketplace when at work, because of nudity. I can't check out a lot of characters without being bombarded with pubic hairs etc... so, as a result of that, my marketplace browsing time is rather limited. If it weren't, I would have purchased a lot more stuff then I have.

Anyway, I wrote this to offer some perspective for those whom insist on freedom of their expression. Just because they are pushing to express themselves a certain way, it doesn't mean that it will get their expression noticed, heard or appreciated, or that their form of expression is appropriate for the place where they are wanting to express it.

I mean, heck, I could inist on walking around the world naked, everywhere I go, regardless of whether it's socially acceptable or not, and insist that it's a form of an artistic expression, and get mad and cry censorship at everyone that yells at me to put some clothes on. If I did that, most people would think I'm a nutcase.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Conniekat8 - I hear what you & Acadia have said, & in general you are right. We have to abide by the rules, but it doesn't mean we can't have a say.
I know it can be awkward for people when viewing images at work or in front of youngsters, I just don't want some of the great artists on here to go because they feel they can't express themselves without having their images or thumbnails removed.
Oh, & Connie, when you do decide to walk around naked, don't upload any pics here without a cropped thumbnail, you'll have the mods after you, LOL!

have to agree with Conniekat8, have the same (0% tolerance) on nudity, violent images, etc. at work. Also, some spouses might have a bit of a problem with 'idealized' human figures, which having the nudity filter on, keeps marital harmony in accord here (though I have other ways of @#ing up..;)

That being said, I don't have a problem with others doing nudes...I often amuse myself with running a mouse over the 'blocked' box (which shows the number of comments and hits...think about it....208 views and 3 comments...what is that saying?...;)

good art is good art, whatever the model is wearing. Just thought I'd get mine in in case this gets locked..;)

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

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

Quote - I for one are glad that nudity on thumbnails is limited, because it allows me to cruise the site while at the office, during lunch, withot getting fired for material inappropriate in a workplace (nudity), and also, I can look through things at home without worring about one of the younger teenagers in the house wondering what I'm looking at. There's warning when going from PG to to nudity.
So, with too much nudity, I would not be able to see a lot of good art without nudity (without getting myself fired or in hot water over it).

This has always been nonsense, and remains nonsense.  There were nudity and violence filters in place long before the thumbnail change.  This change is about making many people cater to the desires of a few people who are actually going out of their way to see nudity (filtering is on by default).

My Freebies

Quote - That being said, I don't have a problem with others doing nudes...I often amuse myself with running a mouse over the 'blocked' box (which shows the number of comments and hits...think about it....208 views and 3 comments...what is that saying?...;)

 

I've always understood that once the blood drains out of ta guy's head, a girl should not expect much in a way of conversation....  [ducking and running]

Couple of weeks ago I caught a comment on one of the nudes (I do look at them sometimes), a guy saying something to the effect: 
'I'm going to have to run home at lunch after seeing this :P;) if ya know what I mean'

I mean how transparent is that, and I eally don't think rendo is an appropriate place for it (deviant art, perhaps)??? 
LOL, The next thing we'll see is a few guys claiming that the reason for publishing playboy is for the 'Artistic nudes'. I don't have a problem with guys using yank your noodle material, but I do have a bit of an issue calling that 'artistic expression', I just like calling spade a spade, and not pretend it's something else.

Now, penis puppetry, that's borderline artistic expression ;) , and something I may be more interested then in female boobs... but not here on rendo.  There's a time and a place for everything.  

I mean, if I want to make a male morph of a weenie twisted into a knot, then insist on showing a thumbnail of it, if it was taken off, I'd say, yeah, I was pushing the envelope, and someone thought I went overboard. I've pushed enough envelopes to know that occasionally you end up getting a nasty sore little papercut. You suck it up and move on. It goes with the envelope pushing territory.

Well, okay, I'm off the soapbox here before I get thrown off....

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote - This has always been nonsense, and remains nonsense.  There were nudity and violence filters in place long before the thumbnail change.  This change is about making many people cater to the desires of a few people who are actually going out of their way to see nudity (filtering is on by default).

 

I actually like that policy change, because now I don't have to turn the thumbnails off... and I don't have to look over my shoulder to see if anone is snooping behind my back in the office and seeing a boob... or a large NUDITY ADVISORY label.  LOL, that label was more alarming and serious looking then seeing a boob lurking in a thumbnail.

I'd have an easier time explaining a boob flashing thumbnail by saying, oooh, how'd that get in there, then a repeating series of  'NUDITY ADVISORY' series of tumbnails.

Plus, images containing nudity are still required to be labeled as nudity, so whomever is going out of their way to see nudity still has a little hook they can follow.

Anyway, I don't mean to be combative, I just have a different outlook and opinions on those things.

[I'm off the soapbox, for real this time... I think...]

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote - LOL, that label was more alarming and serious looking then seeing a boob lurking in a thumbnail.

As you say, your problem may have been with the Content Advisory thumbnail (which Rendo provides).  So it makes all kinds of sense to force thousands of users to conform to an obtrusive, irritating policy rather than change the Rendo default thumbnail.

My Freebies

Two things.

First, how many more times do I have to bring up the idea of a separate nudity gallery before someone will finally say "Well holy dawgshit! Tha's a good idear!". Y'kno, one gallery for nonoffensive material and one for nudity/violence. I mean c'mon, how hard can this be to do?
And with the nudity gallery you post an opening page with all the disclaimers intact. Stuff like:  "HEY STOOPID!!! You're about to enter an area overrun with tits and buttcheeks! So you is on yer own once you hit that enter button! DO NOT blame us(Rendo) for losing an eye(or your job/wife) when you view the xtra-special-cheese-sauced-nipples-of-death. We warned you!"
Now this would seem like a good rational idea but, since this site doesn't belong to me then I suppose Rendo can run it however they want.

Second, this comes in the form of a rant that I hope to god will piss off at least one person!
I now must inquire as to just what the fuck is so important on the internet that some people just HAVE to browse at work?  What? Are these people so impatient that they just can't wait to get home to view their latest dose of jackoff material? Come on!! Unless your boss is paying you to actually browse at your leisure... well then, maybe you shouldn't! As for me, I have an occasional side job that is quite simply called "internet research". This involves the use of a company computer and guess what sites I visit? You betcha, NOT Renderosity, NOT myspace, NOT daz3D, and NOT even porn! Hell, I don't even check my personal email. Why? Maybe it's because that not what I'm being paid to do! Novel concept, eh? 
And as for those lunch break addicts, try this: actually get your lazy ass up and away from your desk. Do something constructive. Eat your lunch elsewhere, tidy up your work area, take a walk or ...heh-heh...go to the john and beat off(at least some part of you will be getting things done)! 
Now some of you out there are indeed, unfortunate enough to be living with an insecure spouse who quite dependably shits a gold brick every time they catch you looking at V3's boobies or M3's package. Well, bad news, this is NOT renderosity's problem. So complaining to them about gallery/MP thumbs and banners is at best...RETARDED!!
Take some responsibility into your life for once and quit-yer-bitchin' about how un-visually-friendly this site is to view at work! Or... as pjz99 pointed out... try using the goddamn filters for once!!!

@PerfectN : Sorry to hijack your thread, man! That render is an excellent piece of work! Too bad the thumb you posted caused the death of 10,000 nuns and orphans in Zimbabwe! Tsk-tsk, shame on you!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

AMD FX-9590 4.7ghz 8-core, 32gb of RAM, Win7 64bit, nVidia GeForce GTX 760

PoserPro2012, Photoshop CS4 and Magix Music Maker

--------------------------------------------------------------

...and when the day is dawning...I have to say goodbye...a last look back into...your broken eyes.

Quote - As you say, your problem may have been with the Content Advisory thumbnail (which Rendo provides).  So it makes all kinds of sense to force thousands of users to conform to an obtrusive, irritating policy rather than change the Rendo default thumbnail.

 

Now, wait, you udidn't tell me we're looking for rules to make sense :tt2:
The more I look for things to make sense, the more I drive myself crazy!

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote - First, how many more times do I have to bring up the idea of a separate nudity gallery before someone will finally say "Well holy dawgshit! Tha's a good idear!".

 

Well, holy fresly cleaned litterbox, I go to renderotica for thaaaat!
There's also raunchyminds
But I don't go there when at work or when someone is looking.

As for browsing while at work... I actually do 3D at work too, and often come to rendo (and few other 3D related places)  to learn a thing or two, and sometimes to purchase content we use in some of the visualizations. And no, nudes aren't the kind of 3D I do at work.

Now, speaking of responsibility, take some for yourself and do your homework about what why and whom and how you fit into it before being presumptious running yer yapper and telling people what to do. Pay very close attention to the first three letters in a word ASSumption.
Just because one clod is a Poser hobbyist, doesn't mean everyone is.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

"Well, holy fresly cleaned litterbox, I go to renderotica for thaaaat!
There's also raunchyminds.com
But I don't go there when at work or when someone is looking."
Soo... what your saying, I'm ASSuming, is that you don't look at nudity here...right? By suggesting a separate nudity gallery, I'm talking about what's allowed here, NOT what renderotica allows. In fact, renderotica has NOTHING to do with my suggestion. Period.

"As for browsing while at work... I actually do 3D at work too, and often come to rendo (and few other 3D related places)  to learn a thing or two, and sometimes to purchase content we use in some of the visualizations. And no, nudes aren't the kind of 3D I do at work."
Wow! You actually get paid to occasionally browse Renderosity and use their MP? Do you have ANY idea how many people ENVY you! I do! That is too freakin' cool!!  This totally excuses you from the "Browsing at work rant" that I posted above.

As for the last bit that you wrote, I'm still trying to uncross my eyes after reading that severely run-on sentence. Don't ASSume I'm poking fun at your grammar because... actually... I AM!!!
Seriously, you missed the whole point of that rant, which is... it was a RANT. Better yet, it was an opinion based NOT on ASSumptions but, on all of the complaints that I constantly see from other users in this forum. Remember, it was an opinion and opinions are never right nor wrong. They are just opinions.

Now, as for telling other people what to do, I never do that unless I plan to tell them to do just the opposite of what they really should do. Why? Well, have you ever given someone some good, sane advice...only to have them ignore your suggestions and go right on with what they originally planned? Maddening, isn't it?

"Just because one clod is a Poser hobbyist, doesn't mean everyone is."
How did you know that I'm a clod?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

AMD FX-9590 4.7ghz 8-core, 32gb of RAM, Win7 64bit, nVidia GeForce GTX 760

PoserPro2012, Photoshop CS4 and Magix Music Maker

--------------------------------------------------------------

...and when the day is dawning...I have to say goodbye...a last look back into...your broken eyes.

"the idea of a separate nudity gallery"
 
I think that we would then see the same complaints about a TOS that relegates nudes to the nude gallery, as in, "Why was my image moved to the nude gallery?"

tn other words, right now we have a TOS that says "no nude thumbnails," and there are complaints from people that the TOS is enforced incorrectly, arbitrarily, or unfairly.

If the TOS said "nudes have to be in the nude gallery," we would inevitably see the same kind of complaints.  "Is that a nipple?"  "No, I don't see a nipple." Et al.

Please understand I am not criticizing people who posts nudes (like myself), or people that complain about the TOS in principle or practice. I just don't think a nude gallery would solve anything.

Gallery

How they spot some thumbnails a surprise while in a heavy ebay bidding session last night i posted a picture, musta been up 10 hours.
This morning i realised i put a nude thumb up by mistake and took picture down to repost with correct thumbnail, so they must check every so often posted pic's.

The idea of a separate gallery sounds good in theory....

Some people post nudes in the tradition of classic art, some in the tradition of pinup art, and some just pose nekkid women. Regardless, some viewers/commenters just see nekkid women (men) and can't make the distinction. So, you may post a "classic art" type render and have to tolerate one idiot that doesn't get the inappropriateness of his response, amidst others who are looking at artistic merit. In a separate nude only gallery, all restraint would, I think, vanish.

The separate gallery idea is a complete surrender to the notion that a nude render may be art, it tucks it away in it's own little shameful corner.

kalonart.com

The question was asked why an altered thumbnail would be removed.  The likely reason is because an altered thumbnail  is considered a misrepresentation of the work.  Someone views the the thumbnail and thinks they're going to see a girl in a white bikini riding a white pegasi.  They click on it and they get something different.  Rendo then gets a complaint.  Which then sets up the damned-if-you-do-and-damned-if-you-don't.  Create a thumbnail that is a true and accurate representaion of the work and you're in violation of the TOS, create an altered thumbnail to meet the TOS and you're still in violation.  Which is one of the reasons I don't post to the gallereies.  Too many conflicts in their TOS.

Quote - The separate gallery idea is a complete surrender to the notion that a nude render may be art, it tucks it away in it's own little shameful corner.

 

I'm with you on that.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

MISSION STATEMENTThe mission of Renderosity is to create a thriving, productive environment that encourages an atmosphere of community, respect, collaboration, and growth for graphic artists, digital artists, animators, photographers and writers of all backgrounds and levels. We are a community created by artists, for artists ... Because The Art Matters!

Rendo's own "mission statement"

I like that last bit, pity they don't stand by it!!

Injustice will be avenged.
Cofiwch Dryweryn.

Quote - Now, as for telling other people what to do, I never do that unless I plan to tell them to do just the opposite of what they really should do. Why? Well, have you ever given someone some good, sane advice...only to have them ignore your suggestions and go right on with what they originally planned? Maddening, isn't it?

 

Poke all you want at my english, it's not my native language. Actually I never had a single lesson in it. :tt2: So the joke is on you-again. When you lear my native language, I'll be lurking to poke fun at you.  (Actually, I won't, I'm not that mean, but it was fun saying it.)

As for giving advice and it not being litsened to being maddening. Not at all. I don't give advice with the expectation that the person at whom the advice is directed is going to be receptive to it and stroke my ego by taking it or being grateful for it etc.... Most people aren't receptive to good advice when they could use it the most. It's a pretty normal thing. It again comes back to the realm of personal responsibility. This time having responsibility for one's own feelings.

As for looking at Nudity here, I do look at it, when the time and the place is appropriate.  However, I don't particularly care to see so much nudity on renderosity that the only time I can safely log on when the time and place for nudity is appropriate.
As for a separate gallery for nudity, I don't  think that's a good solution. However imperfect, I'm actually fine with the way things are right now. I don't have such a huge need to create and exhibit nudes to feel stifled by rendo's rules on nudity. Also, I think there's a lot of artistic human body studies and renderings that can be made without showing nipples or pubic hair and such. Many times it's more appealing to leave a few things to the immagination.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Well give me a scantily clad lady over a nude one anyday!!

Injustice will be avenged.
Cofiwch Dryweryn.

Quote - "The separate gallery idea is a complete surrender to the notion that a nude render may be art, it tucks it away in it's own little shameful corner."

Oh man, I never even thought of it in that light. Good point! I guess a separate gallery for nudes would kinda be a censorship, which would ultimayely suck! Not to mention all of the new TOS crap that it would probably invoke :P

@Conniekat8: Easy, fluffy! Easy! I'm just kidding with you!  As for poking fun at you, that's all I'm doing! No harm intended. 
What's interseting is that the only person who really seems upset by my rant is the kind of  person who it doesn't apply to. Go figure!

"Well give me a scantily clad lady over a nude one anyday!!"
Absolutely!! Leaves more to the imagination, doesn't it? That's why I never post nudes, not even in forum examples! Now on my computer, there ARE a lot of 3D nudes but, I don't feel secure in posting them simply because of all this TOS crap! I just don't have time for that!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

AMD FX-9590 4.7ghz 8-core, 32gb of RAM, Win7 64bit, nVidia GeForce GTX 760

PoserPro2012, Photoshop CS4 and Magix Music Maker

--------------------------------------------------------------

...and when the day is dawning...I have to say goodbye...a last look back into...your broken eyes.

Quote - Well give me a scantily clad lady over a nude one anyday!!

 

I like men in speedo's
my euro roots are showing ;P

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

PerfectN, it really is a great image. You’re a talented artist, no question; and it’s a absolute crime that more people won’t see your image due to an over-cropped thumb-nail. Ultimately though, I do agree with the TOS.

 

It may not be perfectly suited to every single instance (your image is a prime example) but it’s as close to reasonable and acceptable middle-ground, and coverall solution that’s possible.

 

Sure, there’s still DeviantArt and Renderotica as viable alternatives. But I for one enjoy the (some would argue ‘artificial’) sense of community here at R’osity; and the somewhat rare acceptance of Poser as an Artistic medium.

 

What I’ve come to realise is at its core Renderosity isn’t in actuality an artist’s community; it’s a commercial site designed to sell products; with the gallery essentially being a means to display and endorse said products (wittingly or otherwise). As such, it must be consumer friendly to the largest possible contingent.

 

Still, this debate will always re-surface. You just can’t please everyone, and unfortunately for PerfectN, it’s sometimes the good ones that suffer for the greater good.

 

If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards...checkmate!

Quote - at its core Renderosity isn’t in actuality an artist’s community; it’s a commercial site designed to sell products; with the gallery essentially being a means to display and endorse said products (wittingly or otherwise). As such, it must be consumer friendly to the largest possible contingent.

Bingo!!!! That is so very true because I have seen numerous responses by the admins to people saying that Renderosity is a business. The forums and gallery are here as a "draw card"  to attract people here and get them to shop here.

Look what they tried to do with the new free stuff forum? It was only going to be for items here in the free stuff, no "outsiders".

I'm surprised that they allow other sites to advertise their products in the merchants forum. I suspect that will be coming to an end at some point because it takes away from Renderosity's Market Place and ultimately their bottom line.

"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

I'*ve always understood that once the blood drains out of ta guy's head, a girl should not expect much in a way of conversation....  [ducking and running]

*There's blood rushing now, believe me, and it's not going downstairs. We men are such pigs. It's good that people are brave enough to expose us on a daily bases. Keeps us honest at least and gives us a healthy dose of feeling of guilt. It's my firm belief that this will make things better for all of us.
  inster chauvinistic remark here

I've often thought about using the nude filter here, since there aren't many artistic nudes, but my blood allways drains out of my head while making big decisions, so I just keep staring at the monitor, paralyzed. It's a vicious circle but I manage. Barely.

-Morbo will now introduce the candidates - Puny Human Number One, Puny Human Number Two, and Morbo's good friend Richard Nixon.
-Life can be hilariously cruel

Someone stated that the problem with PerfectN painting a bikini on his thumbnail (only) is because it "misrepresents" the actual image. In fact, a thumbnail that crops out the nudity part of the full image is just as much a "misrepresentation" of the nudity as is a thumbnail with a painted on bikini. In both cases, a viewer wouldn't know there was nudity until he either saw it flagged as "contains nudity", or clicked upon the actual image. For example, if I saw Acadia's version of the thumbnail, I'd have no idea that the full image contained nudity, any moreso than if it was a thumbnail with a painted on bikini. Indeed, because Rendo allows thumbnails that are a partial clip of the full image, THERE IS NO WAY TO PREDETERMINE THE CONTENT OF THE ACTUAL IMAGE WITHOUT VIEWING IT. And that includes predetermining  nude content via the thumbnail.

Rendo's thumbnail policy is totally illogical. Note: I'm not discussing the issue of "fairness" or anything else. I'm discussing logic only. It's illogical.

Who thinks these things up?

The policy should be changed to "A thumbnail may not contain nudity, and an image with nudity must be specifically tagged as so. In the thumbnail image, either cover up the nudity, or clip it  out of the thumbnail". Anything beyond that (like saying "covering up the nudity in the thumbnail is not acceptable, whereas clipping it out is") has no logical basis in helping the viewer to predetermine nude content.

Man, I wish I could get a job where I can surf all day long on the Internet and get paid for it. Thanks to the working crowd that has to come here during work hours all the nudes have to be hidden so your boss doesn't see way to go chaps so dont bitch if you get an image pulled because of nudity. Got to keep the working force happy so their boss doesnt see they are slacking instead of actually doing what they are supposed to do, work.

Just flag every image whether it's nude or not and rate the site Rated R, then you wont have to worry about thumb nails.

*eyeroll.

Quote - For example let's say that I am a smoker and I go to someone's house and they are nonsmokers and don't want people smoking in their house. Do I disregard their rules and light up regardless of what they want in their own home, or do I respect their right and go outside to have a cigarette?

That's the problem, I have to go out and in of their house all the time!
And if gets to much anoying, I'll never visit their home again.

Stupidity also evolves!

Whatever Renderosity does, it does in the best interest of their market majority. And certainly, I imagine those that browse the galleries while at work make up a portion of that. It may not please you specifically, but it's good business.

Honestly though, what would you have them do? Kowtow to those that complain the loudest and most frequently?

To ensure no crossed wires, that last statement was meant universally. It was not an attack on PerfectN, who I deeply admire as an artist.

If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards...checkmate!

Quote - Honestly though, what would you have them do? Kowtow to those that complain the loudest and most frequently?

That' seems to be pretty near what they did, although "loudest" was likely given greater weight than "most frequently".  Someone intentionally browsing nudity at work or in front of their eight-year-old kid?  You have to turn the filter off before you see anything naughty.  Come on.

My Freebies

That could very well be true pjz99.

I'd love to know the proportions of for and against for this brand of gallery 'filtering'. It'd be interesting to see just how many people would prefer the gallery returned to its pre-non-nude iteration. Although the likelihood of such a poll eventuating is miniscule at best.

Having said all that, I can honestly say that not allowing black-bars or similar 'masks' to hide nudity in thumb-nails is a little puzzling. I've read the reasons behind this decision, and see their point of view. I just don't agree.

If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards...checkmate!

Quote - It'd be interesting to see just how many people would prefer the gallery returned to its pre-non-nude iteration. Although the likelihood of such a poll eventuating is miniscule at best.

These things never happens, for what a poll, they know much better want the members want than the members themself.
Imagine a poll's result of 80% of members wanting the nudes again, this poll will never happen!

Stupidity also evolves!

I think the intent was mainly to make the gallery "appear classy" even with the titty filter turned off.  Biting my tongue on further comment on that ;)

Not a comment on nudity in principle, after all more than half of my own artwork contains nudity, I just hate the idiotic "must use cropped thumbnails" bullshit and the illogic of the policy and inconsistency of how it's applied (don't look too hard at those merchant banners!  buy stuff!)

My Freebies

Quote - I can honestly say that not allowing black-bars or similar 'masks' to hide nudity in thumb-nails is a little puzzling. I've read the reasons behind this decision, and see their point of view. I just don't agree.

I believe the reason behind that is purely  esthetics and that it would make the gallery arrival pages look ugly with all of those "CENSORED" bars stamped across images, or blurring of certain areas or happy faces strategially placed etc.  Since everyone would have their own idea of how to do it, the gallery arrival pages would start to look childish and ugly. So they did the all or nothing rule....absolutely no censor-like thumnails.

Renderosity wants the arrival pages to be visually attractive and at first they weren't even going to allow people to use Censor thumbnails at all, but then they relented and  have been allowing people to use the standard Renderosity one because some people either don't know how, refuse to learn or are to lazy to learn  to make their own thumbnails.

"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 - I think the intent was mainly to make the gallery "appear classy" even with the titty filter turned off. 

Yeppers :)

"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

Beautifying, or otherwise making the arrival pages more socially acceptable...sounds almost as though they're catering more to first time visitors than long-term members.

Discuss...

:P

If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards...checkmate!

Or investors, or paypal, or people considering buying the bondware storefront software, yeah.  Not about the community at all.

My Freebies

It looks to me like a rule intended to stop blatant gaming of the system -- the censorship-bars stuff -- has caught one of the edge cases. But you either have a rule that applies to everything that fits the nudity definition, or you get forums filled with screaming complaints. And I agree that in this case the rule doesn't have a good result. In the past, I've done thumbnails which try to catch the viewer's eye, modifying the colour and tonal dynamics of part of the image, picking out a detail, things like that. I can see how such tricks could fall foul of the current rule, if somebody wanted to act stupid, artist or admin. And I'd rather have Renderosity playing safe. There are images that would be quite legal in the USA which, where I live, could lead to huge trouble for me. There have been laws proposed in the UK which would make accessing Renderotica foolhardy, because they don't distinguish between photographs, however much faked, and other sorts of image. No, they're a long way from being on the books. But this isn't a US-only community. We're not all protected by your Freedom of Speech. Some of us, I'm sure, live in the countries to which you outsource torture. Renderosity has to live in a wider world than just the USA.

Again this just comes back to what I consider IMHO to be the simplest, easiest to implement, least contentious way of handling the situation.

Have a nudity flag and set it off by default. If somebody wants to view images containing nudity then they must conciously check the nudity flag and save their profile. Purely by the nature of this choice people cannot complain that they are not getting what they asked for. When someone who has not enabled the nudity flag browses the gallery, quite simply do not show any images or thumbnails that contain nudity!

This argument of 'I want to view nudity, but only if it's tasteful' isn't very strong IMHO. If someone willfully and knowingly chooses to view images containing nudity then they must be prepared to get what they asked for! They have effectively chosen to be their own censors, so why should they be given the opportunity to complain bitterly that they wanted nudity but 'not that kind of nudity'.

If someone is browsing the Renderosity galleries from work but is concerned that they may see 'inappropriate' content then they can simply switch off the nudity flag and never have to worry again! How much simpler than this can it be?

To sum up, as has been mentioned in this thread and elsewhere, rules should be simple, effective, easy to implement, and not rely on subjectivity to be enforced. What I have proposed here has been voiced by many many others and it fits the bill quite nicely don't you think?

As per usual, my 5c-worth. I'm now wearing my asbestos suit so let the flaming begin! :)

 

Quote - Have a nudity flag and set it off by default. If somebody wants to view images containing nudity then they must conciously check the nudity flag and save their profile.

Assuming you mean that nudity would be filtered by default - that's how it works now, and has been so at least since I joined.

My Freebies

Quote - > Quote - I can honestly say that not allowing black-bars or similar 'masks' to hide nudity in thumb-nails is a little puzzling. I've read the reasons behind this decision, and see their point of view. I just don't agree.

I believe the reason behind that is purely  esthetics and that it would make the gallery arrival pages look ugly with all of those "CENSORED" bars

Aesthetics is irrelevant. You are ignoring the compulsion that Puritans have for being perceived as open-minded and fair and, well, liked. Black bars would suggest that this was "censorship" rather than the simple requirement that everyone be reasonable. Even oppressors need love, you know. Not that kind, gutterbrain.

Seriously, the censor bar ban is utterly ludicrous. If the problem is burnt eyeballs, then blurred , barred , and added features to cover up the scorchers (like a painted-on bikini) all  work just fine. But they also put the prudish hypocrisy right there on view, crowding out the discipline appliances and Las Vegas goddess outfits.

M

That's exactly what I mean pjz99, sorry. :)

What I am suggesting is that when you have elected to view nudity, you will see thumbs and images containing nudity, and if you have elected to see no nudity then the images and their thumbnails will never appear when you browse the galleries.

 

I see what you mean.  That was suggested once or twice when this policy change was being implemented as well, and rejected by PTB - far too easy a solution I guess, like changing the ebil scawwy Content Advisory icon.

My Freebies

As I have already stated, I like the new thumbnail policy.

However, much grief could be avoided if Renerosity disabled "auto thumbnail" generator completely  and went back to where we all had to create our own. Either disable or  make some changes to it..

If you don't manually enter a thumbnail, the system generates one for you by resizing the full image.  think the feature was created to prevent people from uploading images without a thumbnail, thus making the gallery esthetically unappealing.

The auto thumbnail generator was fine prior to the change in thumbnail policy. But it's caused problems since the change.

You can pretty much code anything into a website if you know what you are doing, so I think they should change the code so that if the nudity and/or violence flags are ticked:

1. The auto thumbnailer is disabled and the image will not upload until a thumbnail is manually entered or

2.  Have the system generate the Renderosity content advisory thumbnail automatically if the nudity and/or violence tags are checked and no thumbnail is entered manually.

Another  separate suggestion would be for the system to generate a prompt error if you do not place a check mark next to:  violence, nudity, both or none.

Or they could do the extreme and go with a fully moderated gallery where all images are in holding after upload until they are manually approved by the site staff and released to the gallery.  This way there won't be any "pulled images", just ones that aren't approved for upload for whatever reason.  If the image is rejected, a note could be sent to the person indicating why.  However, I don't think anyone wants this option :)   However, having it so the images need pre-approval before being allowed into the gallery would go along way in easing up on the warnings and bannings IMHO because you can't violate rules if your image isn't allowed to be shown.

PS: urbanarmitage if that is you in your avatar, I think I'm going to move to South Africa! 

"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

How's this for an idea. 

Someone sets there profile to censor nude images. They click on the gallery -- any gallery -- and all images with the nudity flag set are filtered out. No thumbnail drama. You just get a smaller subset of a gallery. This would work the same on censoring out violence images as well.

Well great minds must think alike... and be ignored.  What Urbanarmitage said...

kalonart.com

Quote - How's this for an idea. 

Someone sets there profile to censor nude images. They click on the gallery -- any gallery -- and all images with the nudity flag set are filtered out. No thumbnail drama. You just get a smaller subset of a gallery. This would work the same on censoring out violence images as well.

That's not the point.

The problem wasn't and isn't about being able to filter out nude images.

The thumbnail policy was implemented to clean up the gallery thumbnails on the arrival pages for those who don't use the nudity filter because they want to view nudes.  I for one like to view truely artistic nude images, so tell me how my using the "no nudity filter" to block nude images is going to allow me to do that? 

The complaints were that the gallery arrival pages were looking like the backs of porn magazines with all of the close up shots of T & A. 

The thumbnail policy still allows for people to upload their nude and violent images, and it still allows those who want to browse the gallery without the nudity filter on, without being hit in the face with dozens of extremely tacky blown up body parts.

"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 - That's not the point.

The complaints were that the gallery arrival pages were looking like the backs of porn magazines with all of the close up shots of T & A. 

The thumbnail policy still allows for people to upload their nude and violent images, and it still allows those who want to browse the gallery without the nudity filter on, without being hit in the face with dozens of extremely tacky blown up body parts.  

 

And that makes the most sense to me! A simple 'nudity flag' as it it right now works quite well for me to let me know whether I should attempt to view the particular image (depending on the environment that I'm in at any given moment).
Lot of times a thumbnail will let me know whether the nudity is understated and 'soft' and artistic (like many pjz99's images), or if it's something I really don't want to see.

There's a difference in nudity that celebrates a nude human form vs. gratuitous nudity like crotch shots or boobs of the size they would cause major neck deformity.
It's really not so much about the nudity as it is about 'tasteful' nudity. (And for those whom like crotch shots, I don't mean 'tastes like...')
Now unfortunately due to a number of rather distasteful in your face type nudes, overall nudity is limited. Sort of like the case of few bad apples ruining it for everyone.

Ideally, one would classify the types of nudity, but I don't think that would be practical, and personally I have no Idea how I would define (in a form of a gallery or a thumbnail rule), what is tasteful and what isn't.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

*""The complaints were that the gallery arrival pages were looking like the backs of porn magazines with all of the close up shots of T & A. ""
*I agree it did.  I got into this debate before and went and looked at some of the pro-nude artists and found some fabulous work.  Its a shame that they have to be grouped with those who do the tits = hits thing.  But I still have to agree with the thumbnail rule.  The default censor nudity flag worked just fine for me - but on the other hand I can see how someone who leaves the flag off because they like to view "artisitic" nudity still doesn't want to see the back of a penthouse every time they come to rendo.

If you give an inch they take a MILE and that is something that I have found to be a hard cold fact in my life.  As you can see now it's still true.  The rules seem to be very clear and precise to me but people will still do whatever they can to figure out how to get a boob or a pubic hair into the thumb.  No offense intended towards the original artist in discussion here.

As for a thong.  Well I  understand that in many places in the world that is pretty much the standard.  (Thank god not  here I DO NOT want to see 80 yr old women in thongs).  The way I would judge that one is to say what would I do if my 13 yr old tried to leave the house in one.  The answer is that I would beat her within an inch of her life and then chain her to the water heater - so to me I have to say yes a thong = nudity.

p.s.  I don't actually "beat" her that's a figure of speech for emphasis = D

I am:  aka Velocity3d 

Quote - This argument of 'I want to view nudity, but only if it's tasteful' isn't very strong IMHO. If someone willfully and knowingly chooses to view images containing nudity then they must be prepared to get what they asked for! They have effectively chosen to be their own censors, so why should they be given the opportunity to complain bitterly that they wanted nudity but 'not that kind of nudity'.

 

Using the same logic, those whom insist on, or have chosen to exhibit distateful nudity in a place with a rather general type of audience should be prepared to hear some backlash and complaints. This 'they get what they asked for' works both ways.

To use your own statement, but slightly modified:
They have effectively chosen to use an attention attracting exibit, so why should they be given the opportunity to complain bitterly that they wanted attention but 'not that kind of attention'

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote -

The complaints were that the gallery arrival pages were looking like the backs of porn magazines with all of the close up shots of T & A. 

The thumbnail policy still allows for people to upload their nude and violent images, and it still allows those who want to browse the gallery without the nudity filter on, without being hit in the face with dozens of extremely tacky blown up body parts.

 

And still apparently frustrates the hell out of artists caught in the middle.

kalonart.com

Quote - And still apparently frustrates the hell out of artists caught in the middle.

Very much so! And it's a very unfortunate too.
A case of a few attention seeking bad apples ruining it for a lot of others.

To comment back on the original posters image, as en example, an auto generated thumbnail of it's entired image would show such a tiny amount of nudity, and in such a small part that it certainly doesn't fall in what i would find uncomfortable viewing in a thumbnail form. It is much more inconspicuous then the 'NUDITY ADVISORY' thumbnail of the past, which would have shown up if I had the nudity filter on.

If I had some more conservative or more sensitive office people lurking around I may not choose to view it full size. At home, I'd probably look at it full size. We have art nude of a rather similar nature hanging on a wall (and it's much more tasteful then the bud girls posters our 17 year old boy has in his room).

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote -
Very much so! And it's a very unfortunate too.
A case of a few attention seeking bad apples ruining it for a lot of others.

Yes, some people have no sense of self control: give them an inch and they want a foot, give them a foot and they want a yard. So because some showed no self control the situation in the gallery got out of hand and more and more people started to post such thumbnails in order to generate views. As I said before you can't have a rule that is loosely open to interpretation.  So to prevent "interpretation" and "What about this!?" or "Why not this?", Renderosity clearly stated "absolutely no nudity in the thumbnail."  That is not open to discussion or debate and cannot be misunderstood. No nudity is no nudity...of any kind.  They even stated what body parts are considered "nudity."

Quote - To comment back on the original posters image, as en example, an auto generated thumbnail of it's entired image would show such a tiny amount of nudity, and in such a small part that it certainly doesn't fall in what i would find uncomfortable viewing in a thumbnail form.

Yes, I agree. However, "give an inch, take a yard."  How do you "measure" acceptability? With a pair of calipers? or perhaps blowing it up in a graphic program and counting number of pixels the nude area covers? It's not possible.  If you start to allow some nude images to be resized using the auto thumbnailer, then you have to allow all because you will always have someone crying foul.

"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 - PS: urbanarmitage if that is you in your avatar, I think I'm going to move to South Africa! 

 

Yep, that's me, and yep, i'm now red as a beetroot!

I am mostly a wildlife, birdlife (no puns intended) and landscape photographer but I dabble in Poser too.

 

Quote - > Quote - PS: urbanarmitage if that is you in your avatar, I think I'm going to move to South Africa! 

 

Yep, that's me, and yep, i'm now red as a beetroot!

I am mostly a wildlife, birdlife (no puns intended) and landscape photographer but I dabble in Poser too.

Where did your gallery go?

"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 - Or investors, or paypal, or people considering buying the bondware storefront software, yeah.  Not about the community at all.

Yup.

My brain is just a toy box filled with weird things

Quote - Using the same logic, those whom insist on, or have chosen to exhibit distateful nudity in a place with a rather general type of audience should be prepared to hear some backlash and complaints. This 'they get what they asked for' works both ways.

To use your own statement, but slightly modified:
They have effectively chosen to use an attention attracting exibit, so why should they be given the opportunity to complain bitterly that they wanted attention but 'not that kind of attention'

 

Yes, you definately have a point. I agree that people on the other side of the coin must also be prepared to have the same sort of criticism leveled at them from the opposite camp. My standpoint though stems from the fact that the people who are viewing the nudity have consciously chosen to be exposed to nudity, so vetting that nudity presents a problem for those that use nudity in their art, or for that matter in their canned provocative images (no disrespect intended to anyone here). It directly affects their freedom of expression and the chance to have their work viewed unhindered. As Renderosity says in a great many places, this site is all about art and the artists behind it.

Also, i'm sure nobody is really going to expect people to take them seriously if they complain that some people refuse to view their images because they don't want to or are not permitted to view nudity, and have therefore switched it off. That would infringe on those peoples' freedom of choice.

It is a contentious issue. I just feel that the lesser of two evils (or weavels for movie fans) would be to have a clear-cut line which people may cross at any time, ie nudity or no nudity, and then rigidly stick to that with the TOS. There are obvious exceptions to this of course as dictated by the law in many instances and accepted global moral standards in others.

The only other real possibility that I can see is to have 3 categories instead of 2. Say for example 'no nudity', 'tasteful nudity' and 'in-your-face nudity'. When artists submit their work they would then have to understand that if they are submitting a really risque image, the chances are good that it will go into the third category and not the second.

Again, just my 5c. :)

 

Quote - Where did your gallery go?

 

I pulled my images a couple of months back because of the spate of image theft that was going on. My intention was and still is to resize them and put them back. Work and personal pressures just don't seem to agree. :)

 

I hear ya Acadia! We're on the same page on this one. 

I have no idea how to keep a few people from going oberboard, or how to define where that overboard division is. IRL one sort of has to rely on people's common sense and social graces to know how to stay on the safe side of what's socially acceptable. If Rendo reserves the right to refuse certain things, then they become the great villain. Seems like the flip side of give people an inch... People get used to coming here, and before too long they start feeling a sense of proprietorship of the place, and resenting the commercial side of it. 
There seems to be a hefty pull in a direction of 'anything goes' and it should all be free. I understand the 'feeling' here, I love to lose myself in fairytales too, but it amazes me how many people take it for granted, rather then being grateful.

[I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm almost wishing for how a few things were in my old country when I was growing up, and there people whom went too far overboard were stigmatized by the majority - usually kept them in check]

Things on the internet, much like picking one's nose in a car) give people some degree of anonymity and safety. Safety from being intimidated and stigmatized into not going overboard.

One can post a distateful nude crotch shot borderlining softcore porn, and not have to suffer odd looks and frowns or people keeping distance. Like they would if they hung it in a public place and stood by it to hear comments by people with whom they interact on daily basis. 
Online, the exhibitor has a certain semblance of anonymity. Lot of peope only know each other by a nickname only. The interaction is limited. Our sustinance doesn't depend on each other in here. It's rather easy to post a provocative, envelope pushing image and not suffer much in a way of consequence.

For those viewing it, they are introducing this image into their daily environment, much more then the creator of the image.

I know someone is arguing about not limiting artistic expression. 
Well, for the sake of that argument let's create two groups pro nudes and anti-nudes. However arbitrary and unrealistic the division would be IRL, bear with me for the sake of the argument.

Pro nude's may feel limited by not being allowed to post overboard and provocative nudes. Anti-nudes may feel limited and turned off from coming here by  being bombarded by provocative nude (thumbnails).
Unless both sides agree on the middle of the road course, to not be overly conservative, or to not be overly provocative, the two extreme parts of those spheres of interests will always be in conflict.

Back to the question of limiting artistic expression.
By creating a hostile environment of going into extremes, both sides are suffering.
Seems like the 'popular' opinion is to allow overboard nudity, as if people are worried they will be labeled prude by saying, hey, that's too much for this place.

Heck, I was born and raised in Europe, and done the nude beach thing etc... But I don't walk around the house naked, I don't go to work or to the store naked. I still consider 'naked' to be a form of the expression that is leaning little into the extreme. Escpecially the sexually charged nakedness. So, I don't go insisting on exhibiting it in a 'general audience' type environment. 
I consoder rendo to be relatively general audience environment.

Recognizing that that there's a time and a place for things doesn't make one a puritan. When I see generalizations floppantly throuwn around like that, i have a hard time giving the rest of what the same people say much weight (besides an emotional vent.) I'm not op the opinion that every emotion needs to be catered to.

[bleh, I'm out of time to reread and wrap this up, so I'm hitting send]

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote - The only other real possibility that I can see is to have 3 categories instead of 2. Say for example 'no nudity', 'tasteful nudity' and 'in-your-face nudity'.

There is that word "Tasteful" again.

Please define "tasteful" so that the definition and understanding for everyone is the same?

IMHO it's not possible because as I said before it's a highly subjective word because everyone has their own views and beliefs based on a variety of factors from geographic location to moral upbringing and everything in between. What is tasteful to you may not be to me, etc.

"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 - [Work and personal pressures just don't seem to agree. :)

hehe, you could always move to Canada ;)

"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

That's why I always use a 'Nudty' flag on some of my images.  Where thumbnails are concerned, I just be a little creative about it; using colorful background, facials -- that kind of thing.  It doesn't make any sense with all this censorship and whatnot, but, as stated from the others, it is Renderosity's TOS, and it should be abided whether we like it or not.

To PerfectN, great image, you have a good sense of imagination -- hope to stop through your gallery next time.

JB

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Asus N50-600 - Intel Core i5-8400 CPU @ 2.80GHz · Windows 10 Home/11 upgrade 64-bit · 16GB DDR4 RAM · 1TB SSD and 1TB HDD; Graphics: NVIDIA Geforce GTX 1060 - 6GB GDDR5 VRAM; Software: Poser Pro 11x

Quote -
Yes, you definately have a point. I agree that people on the other side of the coin must also be prepared to have the same sort of criticism leveled at them from the opposite camp. My standpoint though stems from the fact that the people who are viewing the nudity have consciously chosen to be exposed to nudity, so vetting that nudity presents a problem for those that use nudity in their art, or for that matter in their canned provocative images (no disrespect intended to anyone here). It directly affects their freedom of expression and the chance to have their work viewed unhindered. As Renderosity says in a great many places, this site is all about art and the artists behind it.

 

True, I agree with you on most points, except on one. I don't like the gallery thumbnails to be loaded with austentatious nudity, or with austenatious nudity warning. I think the thumbnails should have a level of discretion, and be a fair representation of what's in the image. That way the viewer can choose.
This whole thing is not really about nudity, but about allowing the viwers a decent tool to be able to chose whether to view a certain image or not.
To be honest, I've seen a number of images that have no nudity at all that are still too provocative to be viewed in all social circumstances, and to a degree I think that nudity in itself is being unfairly singled out here, and has taken on a meaning of content not necessarily acceptable to a broad varied audience. 
Art and artists and their expression forms are still very much subject to audience's acceptance.
So what happens is, if there are too many extremens, people go elsewhere. Artists and viewers alike.

Quote - Also, i'm sure nobody is really going to expect people to take them seriously if they complain that some people refuse to view their images because they don't want to or are not permitted to view nudity, and have therefore switched it off. That would infringe on those peoples' freedom of choice.

 

I've seen quite a few complaints from artists saying things to the effect of, it's not a nude, so I'm not getting very many views, or artists all heated up because they made image with a bare boob and have been asked to tag it as nudity.

Quote - It is a contentious issue. I just feel that the lesser of two evils (or weavels for movie fans) would be to have a clear-cut line which people may cross at any time, ie nudity or no nudity, and then rigidly stick to that with the TOS. There are obvious exceptions to this of course as dictated by the law in many instances and accepted global moral standards in others..

 

We have a content advisory for nudity. A small thumbnail allowing a person to get a general idea of the nature of the nudity (close to what we have now) IMO is suffioent. I can usually see if it's going to be a tasteful nude or a crotch shot by seeing a thumbnail of the whole image, and the thumbnails are small enough that if anyone is looking over my shoulder will not see enough to be offended.
What makes for uncomfortable gallery browsing in general social circumstances are closeup and sexually suggestive crops of T&A.

Quote - The only other real possibility that I can see is to have 3 categories instead of 2. Say for example 'no nudity', 'tasteful nudity' and 'in-your-face nudity'. When artists submit their work they would then have to understand that if they are submitting a really risque image, the chances are good that it will go into the third category and not the second.

 

I'd love to have three or four gallery categories for a lot of reasons.
LOL, this would cause even more contention, but it would be nice to have a PG rating to the images. G, PG, PG13, R, NC17 and X... LOL and a DDD ;)
That way one can see the softer nudes, and not have to be exposed to NC17's and DDD, or Y shots. 
I could just hear it... I know it's a crotch shot, but his goodies were all tucked in, so it's not really a crotch shot ;P
What a logistical nightmare that would be!

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote -
I could just hear it... I know it's a crotch shot, but his goodies were all tucked in, so it's not really a crotch shot ;P
What a logistical nightmare that would be!

That is more true than  you can even imagine!!!!!

"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 -

I could just hear it... I know it's a crotch shot, but his goodies were all tucked in, so it's not really a crotch shot ;P
What a logistical nightmare that would be!

That is more true than  you can even imagine!!!!!

 

Oh, gosh, I've seen one of the more recent threads where there was a debate which hair should be labeled as pubic hair and which shouldn't, literally getting down to splitting hairs. Can I say, oyyy!

But what do I know, perhaps splitting (pubic) hairs is a budding new form of artistic expression. ;P

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Jeez, this thread is a hot topic. Took a little while to read through since I was here earlier on (I don't get email notification most of the time when there are posts).

I feel it should just be understood that if you are coming to Renderosity's gallery, you will see a lot of nude flesh. Complaining about is almost like logging into hustler and then complaining about finding nudity. Almost.
Doesn't make any difference to me one way or the other; except, I would personally rather just have thumbnails that show the whole picture. Anything else is bullshit, IMO.
Wonder if it could be made so that you could set your own thumbnail preferences?

Conniekat8
raunchyminds? penis puppetry?
Why you dirty kitty, you! :lol:

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

Well, if we are to have an expectation fo near hustler like atmosphere, then we shouldn't be mixing architecture, faeries, book illustrations, and other subject attracting mass audiences.

Also, with near hustler atmosphere, we shouldn't have our feelings bruised when other communities with more focus on technique and skill improvement and less emphasis on gratuitous nudity with mediocre art and technical skills don't take us as seriously. 

As much as I would like it, it's not realistic to want to have it both ways. 
It's much like wanting to be respected in the morning ;)

Quote - Conniekat8
raunchyminds? penis puppetry?
Why you dirty kitty, you!  

:-x

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

O.k., maybe hustler is exaggeration ;(
Still, I do expect to see nudity in the general gallery here on every visit.

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

When you're dealing with people who absolutely refuse to turn nudity off, but can't handle dealing with anything but a very subjective concept of "tasteful nudity", well, you've got problems. You have to deal with people who want the world to be an impossibly ideal place where everyone else has to somehow unreasonably anticipate what are the limitations/capabilities of every single one of those people, and accomodate it all. If the world really could be ideal, the way it would be ideal is if people simply didn't get so uptight and worked up about silly things.

Maybe Rendo ought to consider forcing new arrivals to view a page full of images of varying amounts of nudity. Next to each button would two checkboxes labeled "Acceptable" and "Unacceptable". When the user finishes "judging" the images, that user would be assigned a "nudity rating" (say, a value between 1 and 10, where 1 = "prude who would complain about the scantily clad figures on the sistine chapel" and 10 = "I'll look at anything without feeling the need to complain to Rendo about it"). Then an artist could assign a value to each of his images. Folks who have a rating less than that value would not be permitted to view it. Ultimately, only folks with a rating of 10 would be allowed to view everything.

The only way to convince some people how dangerous it is to start "judging" others and their work, is to give them a taste of their own medicine and judge the "judges". Once people start getting rated by their own choices, and given or denied freedoms based upon how tolerant they're willing to be, then you'll see these folks stop judging and complaining so much.

People tend to do things only when they think they can do it without impunity. As soon as they receive a taste of their own medicine, they back off really quickly.

> Quote - The complaints were that the gallery arrival pages were looking like the backs of porn magazines with all of the close up shots of T & A.  > > The thumbnail policy still allows for people to upload their nude and violent images, and it still allows those who want to browse the gallery without the nudity filter on, without being hit in the face with dozens of extremely tacky blown up body parts.

 

As we can see, that problem is now solved - now you get it rubbed in your face even if the nudity filter is on.  :blink:

My Freebies

Quote - Maybe Rendo ought to consider forcing new arrivals to view a page full of images of varying amounts of nudity.

 

Yes, that's how the gallery front page works now.  I guess mission accomplished.

My Freebies

Further proof that my idea of isolating the nudes to a separate gallery won't work. In pjz99's screenshot, count 'em, THREE crotch shots with the nudity filter ON!   I fuggin-luv-it!!!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

AMD FX-9590 4.7ghz 8-core, 32gb of RAM, Win7 64bit, nVidia GeForce GTX 760

PoserPro2012, Photoshop CS4 and Magix Music Maker

--------------------------------------------------------------

...and when the day is dawning...I have to say goodbye...a last look back into...your broken eyes.

But the real question is, are they tasteful crotch shots?
[ducking and running]

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

I'm not even going to bother with the Kevlar, to me, I've stated such in previous posts on this thread.  I have some great opinions on this subject, and I do, sadly find myself with the degenerate tired eye roll at "consorship!!" and people jumping on soap boxes.

As for great images not being viewed because of a cropped thumb?  WRONG........ sorry to dissapoint you.  I've done that experiment.  My complete black square, yup, thats it a black square, thumbnail got more views than any other picture i have.   So all the complaints about cropped no nudity thumbs somehow curtailing the ability of images is totally dead to me.

Now, I understand there's some mild nudity, which it seems rediculous its cut off from thumbnail view.  However, if it stops the big ol crotch shots, horking huge nipples in my face, and big ol man stuff hanging out dangling all over......... I'm good.  Believe me, thumbnails like those?  To me that says "Come see the quick poser porn!!!".  I have NEVER once been enticed to view any of those images with thunbnails that focus on genetalia, or breasts.......... because its telling me what the artists main interest and focus is.

I like nudes, really i do, but i no longer comment, or even truly keep open any picture that has nudity for the sake of nudity.   Pin ups, poser sceenes with "jane" just nude someplace with no real feeling behind it.  

Its gotten to a point (and people, i'm a pervert so this is sad), that I see that breast popping out of a shirt, or a nude vicky on a park bench and all I can think is "WHY is this figure naked?  There's no purpose to it", and its closed and forgotten instantly.

Now now i'm not saying no one has a right to make nudes.  I dont see anything offensive about the aforementioned image.   The problem is, the rules are made to stop the oncoming wave of trite, ill thought out smut images that flood the whole gallery.  I am SO sick of that floodgate...... and I agree with the remanufactured peddled out imagery that gets this onslaught of re-used formulae with the ooos and ahhhs.

Now, recently I put up an image for a music room of a guitar that was sharp and clean and nearly got completely ignored, evey by the critique group i'm in, except a small handfull.

I put up aphrodite with a bare breast?  Different story.

I'm seriously considering finding other forums and communities for art.  I could care less about the thumbnail policy, I think there are larger things going on here that are bigger problems.  I've been here for years now, and have things with extreme high ratings....... yet not once never made AOM, got any of my images on the newsletter, nothing.   Granted its possible I suck, but I'm doubting it considering I make a living at this.

I'm not equating nudity w/ 'bad art' or non-nudity w/ 'good art'; just to get that straight from the start.

---

I'm not at all surprised that nude renders are popular.
Half? A Third? of the entire internet is nude and porn. Whatever the percentage, there are billions of nude and porn websites.
So the amount of nudes in an open art gallery such as Renderosity's seems to be in the general ballpark of the internet as a whole.

What is surprising to me is that there aren't enough people in an art community interested in serious artwork to make more of an impact in the ratings vs. the fan clubs.
If members here want the art galleries to be taken seriously by the 3d community in general, then they have to stand up and be counted; so to speak. If the members just ignore the cheap nude crap images and let the fan clubs decide which are the best images, then the gallery deserves to be treated as a joke.

A big drawback to this for me is that 'My Recent Views' is visible on my gallery page. So if I want to go and rate a garbage nudie pic as the garbage it is in my eyes; it ends up on MY gallery page. That's absurd to me. MY gallery should just what it says, Mine; my own work.
Then there is the fact that the act of rating an image as garbage, adds a view to it's counter, making it more likely that an image I think is terrible would make it onto the Most Viewed List.

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

I think that last time this kerfuffle came around, someone suggested that it could be possible to use a thumbnail generated from a slightly different (i.e., covered up) version of the image, as long as the slightly different image didn't look like it had a cheesy slapdash covering. In otherwords, I could have used an uncropped version of my "Naked Catgirl in a Temple with a Big Fish" where she was nearly naked, and had her naked in the main image. I was able to get a cropped thumbnail OK on that one though. (Except that it seems almost impossible to get a thumbnail down to 15K in size. I had to go with 100x100 pixels and the worst quality jpeg. Meh!)

*"But the real question is, are they tasteful crotch shots?
[ducking and running]"
*Absolutely!! You mean to tell me there are 'other' kinds of crotch shots?

BWAAAAAAA- HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

(also ducking and running....dang it, Conniekat! No fair, I wanted to hid under the sofa!)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

AMD FX-9590 4.7ghz 8-core, 32gb of RAM, Win7 64bit, nVidia GeForce GTX 760

PoserPro2012, Photoshop CS4 and Magix Music Maker

--------------------------------------------------------------

...and when the day is dawning...I have to say goodbye...a last look back into...your broken eyes.

I dont even bother going to the galleries. Im sick of Vickie renders with big, ugly boobs. All they do is slap a texture on it and dial in the chest as high as it can go. No wonder why Poser is frowned upon. Just rate the gallery XXX and have done with it seeing thats all anyone uploads anyway.

Quote - I think that last time this kerfuffle came around, someone suggested that it could be possible to use a thumbnail generated from a slightly different (i.e., covered up) version of the image, as long as the slightly different image didn't look like it had a cheesy slapdash covering. In otherwords, I could have used an uncropped version of my "Naked Catgirl in a Temple with a Big Fish" where she was nearly naked, and had her naked in the main image. I was able to get a cropped thumbnail OK on that one though. (Except that it seems almost impossible to get a thumbnail down to 15K in size. I had to go with 100x100 pixels and the worst quality jpeg. Meh!)

 

I see your point with this but I still think that making a separate thumbnail to 'cover up' parts of the real artistic image (note i'm not referring to Huge Naked Gazongas In A Temple With A Small Vicky Attached) detracts and quite probably destroys the artistic value of the image by presenting the prospective viewer with something that is not a true representation of the original piece of art.

The other thing of course is that, as people have said on the forums before, if the thumbnail does not display the nudity that the full sized image does, the possibility exists that someone may miss the word 'Nudity' and open it thinking it is safe/acceptable for them to do so. They would then be presented with something that they weren't expecting which could piss them off and possibly even maqke them shy away from that artists altogether.

Acadia, the way the weather in my country is going at the moment if I visited Canada it would be like taking a vacation in the Bahamas! :)

 

You people need to wise up, this was never done for the users here, nor does it have anything to do with art.  It's to make the gallery look like it has less nudity in it than it does - purposefully intellectually dishonest.  Stop kidding yourselves.

My Freebies

I can attest to acadia...after my bitching and reposting of my thumb which I clearly painted a bikini on to cover the breasts on Rhapsody - I was banned for 3 days like some isolent fucking child.
The nazi mods then went through my gallery and removed 5 or 6 images which they deemd in violation of the TOS. Further to that, I was informed that one more violation would result in my permanent ban from rendo.

To be honest, if anything renderosity does thwarts or keeps anyone from making another gratuitous nude daz figure shot (dialed up boobs, unrealistically long tallywhacker), Hey, I'm all for it.

Poser is frowned upon for lots of reasons, this being one of them.  This is a 3d art site, I never saw any advertisement of it as porn, soft porn, or cheap thrills.   After a while, an observer becomes TIRED, yes dead TIRED, of "bodacious brunette #17".    Basically, you've seen one, you've seen them all.  I'm well aware what private human anatomy looks like on both sides of the coin, so do most people, we don't need physiologically impossible references to jog our memories.

Its amazing, but did you notice the gratuitous nudes, or nudes without purpose are generally overstuffed in the POSER catagory?    Its a pretty rare day I see vue, maya or the 2d art galleries filled with nudes.  Why would that be?  Oh wait...... Poser figures come nude, outfits cost money, and with a relative knowledge of the program you can make a resonable facsimilie of a nude female and render it with a plain background and no other trappings in what...... less than an hour?

Lets face it folks, Poser is the primary tool for the "I failed art class, but want to make my own RPG avatar of Lolita the nude overbulbous breasted swordslinging warrior!".  If you don't believe me, take a look around at other art sites, do a search for the medium of poser.  We're not alone.  Check out the overinflated Furrette renders with mammaries so large she could feed an entire nation of pack cubs.    Vickie, and even heaven forbid Mike, with such anatomical impossibilities jammed in your face, its no wonder people hear the word "poser" and go UGH!.

Sadly, people who make real art with poser, even new users trying their best to learn all get lumped into the "poser's for pervs" catagory.

Art, in and of itself, is meant to be viewed.  There's been arguments about this, "I'm making it for myself!"..... if that is so, why post it where other's see it?   That is a whole other argument best saved for another day.  So ....... when making, or posting an image, one has to ask oneself...... "Is my creation something I foist on viewers, or is it something I want them to enjoy?".  The "rights" of artists, well.......   I suppose it all depends on the purpose of your work.   Is it to throw a point at someone, or are you creating something you want others to enjoy?

If your answer is that you made it because YOU like it, well thats perfectly fine, but your moral standing, your vision, and your creation just might not sit right with everone and might meet restrictions.   Thats not so difficult to understand.

As for the bikini not being acceptable, we are not talking rocket science here.   It is a false representation of the actual image.  In effect, false advertising.   Even though it says nudity because it is flagged, well, I'm seeing a bikini or bra on...... perhaps the nudity is that there is some areola coldness?  I don't really know until I open it.

Though showing no nudity at all could also be construed as false advertising, when cropped the viewer knows there are hidden parts of the image not seen and at least can take a guess.

This could be hashed out nine ways to sunday.  There will always be those that oppose it, find something wrong with it, and those who could care less, or outright accept it.  Personally, I find there are better things to think about then wether or not renderosity accepts nude thumbnails.....

PerfectN: Forgot to add.   This is not meant as an insult in any way, and I do feel for your predicament.   However, considering the TOS regularions, and you have argued them before, I have to ask, seriously, how did you manage to not meet the regulations?     The TOS from my recollection states that covering up the nudity on a thumb is not allowed.

I've seen that happen to a few artists now, and I am left pondering if it didnt work the first time, why would it work a second?  (not saying you personally did this twice).   If I recall as well, from other arguments back and fourth with mods, it was stated somewhere there was no "grandfather clause" and all gallery images (even past ones), needed modified thumbs.

Again, I am sorry for your predicament.

I wasn't aware of the grandfather clause, and I completely understand. I also agree with you in that these are the rules of renderosity. However my problem is thus:

1. The is obviously a great deal of complaint over the thumbnail policy. To what great harm is there to modify them in order to allow for putting clothes in the thumbnail. The intial hair up my ass was that with my picture Rhapsody (which has been pulled until a newer thumb can be provided) I wanted to convey the image as fully intended. The picture consisted of a woman riding a winged horse sweeping down over the ocean where a group of dolphins were playing and splashing about. I was pissed because I was forced to put in a typical gallery headshot and I felt cheated. I think one of the mods told me that its a misrepresentation of the image - what bullshit!. If I show a headshot with a nudity tag or a painted thumbnail with a nudity tag - BOTH don't give an accurate representation.
   I agree with various posters that there are some poser artists that portray unrealstic images, but if that is there thing - then god bless 'em. My work is a far cry from that and its unfair that the masses get penilized for the few. But again, I understand there are rules in place. What I DON'T  understand is their absolute refusal to be open to other options and the somewhat anal, arrogant stance of some of the mods. Most of whom are untalented hacks. As we used to say in art school - "those who can...do, those who can't preach"

Quote - *"But the real question is, are they tasteful crotch shots?
[ducking and running]"*Absolutely!! You mean to tell me there are 'other' kinds of crotch shots?

BWAAAAAAA- HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

(also ducking and running....dang it, Conniekat! No fair, I wanted to hid under the sofa!)

 

This kitty is hiding under the bed. 
You can hide under the sofa, you slender thing you - I don't fit under there. :P

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote - I dont even bother going to the galleries. Im sick of Vickie renders with big, ugly boobs. All they do is slap a texture on it and dial in the chest as high as it can go. No wonder why Poser is frowned upon. Just rate the gallery XXX and have done with it seeing thats all anyone uploads anyway.

 

I look at it on occasion, but seldom comment on nudes.
Perhaps I should start commenting on some images with something to the effect to "I don't see why nudity was necessary to tell this story" or saying that nudity detracts from it.
Or, what's the point to it....   Of course, before too long I'd end up being accused of being a major grumpy prude, and that would make it uncomfortable to hang out around here. 
I have all the conflict and arguing I can tolerate already.
So... I dunno what to do... :(

I dio think if nudes and sexually provocative images were stigmatized a little bit more then they are, it may push some people into little more artistic growth, and would change the overall atmospehere a tad, and perhaps gain Poser some respect.

Poser is a rather versatile tool, but as long as it has a reputation of being popular in low quality CG porn (or borderline porn) creation, it will not get the respect it deserves.
I mean look at the wikipedia's description of Poser... One of the three major related subjects to Poser is Poser Porn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poser_porn

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Porn. But, I am aware of the fact that in most of the societies around the world, when regular daily things, ats, politics, sciences etc... are too closely related to pornography, nost people stop taking them very seriously.

Sure, nudes can be artful, but not every nude is art, and also, looking at rendo's galleties on would be left under the impression that most pieces have to have nudity in them to be art. Well, that's bass ackwards. If one looks at art at large, nudity is not the majority of art, and most artistic nudes in general have a very subtle understated sexual component.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Quote - What I DON'T  understand is their absolute refusal to be open to other options and the somewhat anal, arrogant stance of some of the mods.

Don't blame the moderator team for this, it all comes from Rendo management.

My Freebies

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

AMD FX-9590 4.7ghz 8-core, 32gb of RAM, Win7 64bit, nVidia GeForce GTX 760

PoserPro2012, Photoshop CS4 and Magix Music Maker

--------------------------------------------------------------

...and when the day is dawning...I have to say goodbye...a last look back into...your broken eyes.

LOL yes lets save the sermons.   Sadly, good or bad, in an art forum we all tend to get lumped in together.   The fact is, its renderosity's site........ if we dont like it well, thats our problem.   Sort of like no smoking in restaurants, just because I dont like it doesnt mean they are going to let me light up.

I've seen your image, PerfectN, and i see nothing wrong with the image itself, and yes, its not quite nudity for nudity sake, thank goodness.   I can see how cropping that might take away from the zeal of the ambiance of the image as a whole.........   However, instead of the overdone headshot, how about focusing on a dolphin instead?  With a nudity tag we can surely get the idea there's a nude person in there........

That is, unless there's a nudity clause here now on fish, and animals too lol.

If its any consolation, those who know and respect your work, don't need a thumbnail at all to tell them the calibre of what lays underneath.

And...... thats a good point to everyone.  For those with a fan base at all, who have been here a while, are part of the critique group or are favorited at all, those who've seen your work really don't ever NEED a thumbnal to want to go look at your new stuff.

I agree, its harder for new users and unknowns...... but i'd hope those people don't immediately go gunning for porn shots anyway to have to worry about TOS.

I wasn't blaming the mods only (they could offer their input and suggest other alternatives - Im not saying they aren't doing this however) - I blame rendo as a whole.

Good point Tiari and thanks for the compliment.

Quote - That is, unless there's a nudity clause here now on fish, and animals too lol.
.

 
There is, at least for catgirls.

There is, at least for catgirls.
Oh no, I have to model some underwear for the cattails! 
I wonder if vue environment provides underwear for cattails.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!"  Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store  BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/news.php?viewStory=13431

*I wasn't blaming the mods only (they could offer their input and suggest other alternatives...)*

Yeah, cos I can see you'd really value the input of us nazi talentless hacks, right? :rolleyes:

Let's put this topic to bed. Again.

The reasons for the change in policy have been given again and again and again until I'm sure you all are as sick of hearing them as I am of repeating them.

Just for posterity's sake, I'll post them here again - and you can find them at the attached FP article too - before locking this baby up - since I see nothing constructive happening here at all. Again.

*One of our goals is to promote artists and show the world the wonderfully creative art work that is expressed through digital mediums. Another goal is to have consistency of the rules and presentation across all areas of our site: Galleries, Free Stuff, Tutorials, Blogs, Homepages and the MarketPlace.

In order to reach both these goals, we need to change the way thumbnail images appear to match the rules in the MarketPlace and the weekly newsletter. Thumbnail images across Renderosity will no longer contain nudity or graphic violence going forward.

Artistic nudity and violent images may still be uploaded to the galleries, and will still be marked with the appropriate content advisory warnings. The only thing that will change is what can be displayed in the thumbnail image.

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.

In addition, we want to feature artists from the Art Charts in the weekly newsletter. However, since we don't allow nude thumbnails in our weekly newsletter, we can't do that until after we make this change.*

---

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