All light emitting objects btw/

In the OLDEN DAYS when Poser was young-the galleries were a place for showing work-and getting constructive (usually) criticism.

I'm baffled- I posted this-which at least I thought was an interesting render even if cliched subject. Perhaps at least a nice use of light emiiters.

Looking for constructive criticism. One comment. Not even a comment about the robe not fitting right on the thigh. Maybe a depth of field suggestion? Nope!

I do Know I wont post in the Renderosity gallery-at least Poser again. It's a waste of time- and rather discouraging. Of course I might try finding some of the current popular styles-and emulate them with the latest garb and hair-just to see what happens. :-)

Anyone suggest a gallery where I might at least get a "nice-but could use...." Or even- GAAK! That color scheme is HIDEOUS! -1 stars!

Maybe plain default lighted renders without shadows really are 20X "better"?

Maybe I just need some SLEEP! :-)

Here over renderosty a critic forum excist.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showforum.php?forum_id=12474

Try here :)

La vie est éternelle. L'amour est immortel.

“Dwell on the beauty of life. Watch the stars, and see yourself running with them.”
― Marcus Aurelius,

And now some critic :)

The effects are nice, but the lights are to much chaotic. It looks like they come all from a wrong direction.

The warrior should be more focused and the skeleton should go more in DOF.

The Pose is a bit unatural for this scene.

And the outfit need overworked, different texture and material. :)

La vie est éternelle. L'amour est immortel.

“Dwell on the beauty of life. Watch the stars, and see yourself running with them.”
― Marcus Aurelius,

I'm not certain this venue is entirely what you might be after.

Here's my take: an image made in Poser involves...

-- a sense of composition
-- several technical components such as shaders, posing, lighting, etc
-- message: what is it you want to say

The critique gallery Ladonna mentioned does not allow technical discussions such as shaders and such. I know: I tried and was told to stay on topic. Well, I really thought I was on topic.

Just fyi :glare:

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

Quote - I'm not certain this venue is entirely what you might be after.

Here's my take: an image made in Poser involves...

-- a sense of composition
-- several technical components such as shaders, posing, lighting, etc
-- message: what is it you want to say

The critique gallery Ladonna mentioned does not allow technical discussions such as shaders and such. I know: I tried and was told to stay on topic. Well, I really thought I was on topic.

Just fyi :glare:

Really? This is odd.....How can I give constructive critic when I can not give tips in specific stuff?

La vie est éternelle. L'amour est immortel.

“Dwell on the beauty of life. Watch the stars, and see yourself running with them.”
― Marcus Aurelius,

I think that most people are happy to just look at the images and probably wouldn't have anything to say; however, maybe if you specifically asked for constructive critisim in the description people would leave it.

Looking at just that image in the gallery, I don't get the impression you're fishing for it, and I'd rather not leave unsolicited feedback. I'm sure others have similar thoughts... or maybe they really don't have any feedback and they think it's just fine.

Thanks for the critique! There are no actual LIGHTS in the scene- all lighting is emitted by the objects themselves. No point, spot, IDL, or infintie lights. The only control is ambient intensity and color.

The lights are from the candle objects (the candle body is whitish and the flame yellowish) and the lamp flame is yellowish. They are all omnidirectional (360 degree radiators). The bluish light is emitted (360 degree) by the globe on top of the wand. So-they can't be from the wrong direction-since they are arranged in space where the actual objects are. There IS no way to control falloff of intensity. There is a candelabra behind the skeleton emitting the light at the back.

I think you are right about the poses-and I SHOULD add DOF to blur the skeleton to show that it is not a GIANT skeleton right on top of the sorceress-but at a distance

Quote - And now some critic :)

The effects are nice, but the lights are to much chaotic. It looks like they come all from a wrong direction.

The warrior should be more focused and the skeleton should go more in DOF.

The Pose is a bit unatural for this scene.

And the outfit need overworked, different texture and material. :)

Thanks Robyn! It seems that the Critique gallery is useless then. I just found a WIP gallery-I might try there.

Compostion-message- I think I got caught up in the fun of technology with the glowing objects-an endless test renders to see if it worked-and lost the message.

I suppose it looks like a bald V4, in a red and blue peasant dress-holding an odd axe-and a wand emitting blue light. Perhaps the skeleton is horrified at the color scheme of the outfit? "-)

Quote - I'm not certain this venue is entirely what you might be after.

Here's my take: an image made in Poser involves...

-- a sense of composition
-- several technical components such as shaders, posing, lighting, etc
-- message: what is it you want to say

The critique gallery Ladonna mentioned does not allow technical discussions such as shaders and such. I know: I tried and was told to stay on topic. Well, I really thought I was on topic.

Just fyi :glare:

Okay, how about to make the lights more soft. ( Or the effect from the lightemitter) Try with a softer ambient color and value.

As I can see, the candles are oversaturated. To Vivid.

Imagine a dungeon. There is no way to archive such a vivid light with candles in a dark Dungeon.

La vie est éternelle. L'amour est immortel.

“Dwell on the beauty of life. Watch the stars, and see yourself running with them.”
― Marcus Aurelius,

Don't give up on the Art Critique forum. It's underused but is exactly what you're looking for. Of course technical comments are OK there. We should use that forum a lot more. If you post there I'll respond. If I don't respond, PM me to remind me that I said I would!

I actually like where you're going with this image. Of course the lights wouldn't look quite like that in a real dungeon, but I've been real dungeons (lots of times) and the reality isn't as interesting as your take on it here! I like the vibrancy of your lighting.

The skeleton looks odd to me, and is too distracting. It looks as if it's about to grab the girl, while she appears disinterested in it. An anomoly. The girl's pose, the direction of her gaze and the candles/lamps all drag the eye to the right of the picture ... but then there's the skeleton doing its thing on the left. That's the compositional feature I'd want to resolve.

Free stuff @ https://poser.cobrablade.net/

Quote - > Quote - I'm not certain this venue is entirely what you might be after.

Here's my take: an image made in Poser involves...

-- a sense of composition
-- several technical components such as shaders, posing, lighting, etc
-- message: what is it you want to say

The critique gallery Ladonna mentioned does not allow technical discussions such as shaders and such. I know: I tried and was told to stay on topic. Well, I really thought I was on topic.

Just fyi :glare:

Really? This is odd.....How can I give constructive critic when I can not give tips in specific stuff?

I wondered the same thing, Ladonna, but the point was fairly adamantly made, so I let it go. I think a lot of it is because people know I'm more of a shader-junkie than an artist, and the mods wanted to keep the discussion on an artistic rather than a technical level.

For me, it's all one and the same. :blink:

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

Quote - The skeleton looks odd to me, and is too distracting. It looks as if it's about to grab the girl, while she appears disinterested in it.

First I saw the many light effects then I looked more closely and realized what the image wants to tell. And there I had the same feeling as you. Also: the skeleton's hand that touches the girl is too dark to make the effect that it probably should do.

Second thought: again a thread about missing criticism in galleries. It's not as often as DAZ vs. Poser but ... weird and in a few comments this will turn into another debate about "art"...

deviantART.

In your image posts you can requests critiques and comments usually provide them even without explicitly asking for them. There are also groups specifically dedicated to tutorials/techniques.

Your first concern: check whether your the image tells a story or is it just a bunch of stuff thrown together. Case to ponder: The last Starfighter (1984) vs. Tron (1982).

Bye!!!

P.S.: it is a community for grown ups so no risk of meeting control freak "mommies" telling "babies" to "stay on topic".

GIMP 2.7.4, Inkscape 0.48, Genetica 3.6 Basic, FilterForge 3 Professional, Blender 2.61, SketchUp 8, PoserPro 2012, Vue 10 Infinite, World Machine 2.3, GeoControl 2

Quote - Anyone suggest a gallery where I might at least get a "nice-but could use...." Or even- GAAK! That color scheme is HIDEOUS! -1 stars!

http://www.cgsociety.org of course.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

@ RV - when I was moderator of the Critique forum, your post would have been on topic. Dunno what's changed there.

@ Eric - When you post a pic, you have to accept there's no automatic right to comments. Picasso didn't leave a guestbook by his paintings. Even posting elsewhere is no guarantee you'll get constructive - or other - criticism.

FWIW, at first glance I think your composition is off; the skeleton takes up too much attention and the pose is awkward.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

1. IMO there's too much much SSS on the skeleton.

2. Candle flames are wrong in both shape and brightness.

3. Candle wax is glowing too much.

4. She isn't holdn't the lighted staff with a proper grip, especially considering how important it should be to her.

5. The problem with her dress and the leg as you mentioned.

6. Her tiara isn't snug enough on her head.

Is that what you wanted to hear?

WARK!

Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.

(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)

most people dont want to hear criticism.

i used to post critiques/suggestions but stopped because it was a huge waste of time. id take the time to write out constructive criticism and then id just get snarky PMs back about why i was wrong. or id take 10 minutes to critique someones work and would point out something like the feet are floating 2" off the floor in their 'pose' and id get a response about how 'i know' - but theyre not going to 'waste the time to re-render'.

and then on the flipside you have people who post stupid preference-based criticism: like you spend weeks working on some elaborate piece and theyll post 'great render, but her breasts are too small'. *
rolleyes*

the more i think about it, the more i believe the whole 'ZOMG WOW thats great!' type comments are just better for everyone all around.

Hmm. You might want to tweak your composition too, Eric. Even if you add dof to blur the skeleton, the image is too heavily weighted towards the center-left. In that area you have figure-figure-light-light-light. The right side of the image is broken; with the door frame and the geometry of it, you essentially have a blue 'strip' that cuts the image off, then to the right of that you have lights like your left border has. So your composition has action all in the center to left region, a blue zone of no action, and a lighted zone of emptiness.

Now this kind of compostion is a valid structure, but only in specific cases. Using these elements, the classic would be something like this; pulling the camera back so you see your focal point, your sorceress, in full length. Change her pose to where she is obviously in motion, and shift figures to where she is spinning towards the skeleton. The blue zone could be left as is by simply placing parts of another skeleton in the process of falling apart and to the ground; moving the staff out of that zone and placing a smaller lightsource in it would mate the two. The unbalanced compostion would then serve a dramatic purpose; your eye would go to the brightest thing first (which by contrast is the blue zone), register what is there, track to the next associated thing (the staff), then the sorceress, and how she's posed would aim your eye finally at her target. So the imbalance becomes the same imbalance you see in a dancer in motion. It becomes a snapshot of someone in mid-action.

Another example of unbalanced composing would be having your sorceress facing one direction at one end of the image, and having just the arm visible, almost grabbing her shoulder. The presence of the arm indicates that something her size is just out of viewing range, which establishes and -implied- balance to the image components. Implied is good enough, so long as it is carefully managed.

I rather like what my editor says on that issue; 'It sucks!' isn't a critique, its an opinion. Like assholes, everyone has one. And getting your shoes filthy, making loud, oderous, embarassing noises, and leaving a pile of socially unacceptable offal behind from a single orifice are traits that are shared by assholes and opinions alike'.

The galleries have become, mostly, a strokefest for a chosen few ;). I never go in the place...lol.

Laurie

Quote - The galleries have become, mostly, a strokefest for a chosen few ;). I never go in the place...lol.

Laurie

lol!!! I wouldn't say the galleries themselves are a strokefest, but there are definitely a couple (One for sure) that will send you a PM if they think you gave them a low rating and hurting they're chances of making the 'Most commneted/Rated' section.

I for one, think MOST people on here can be quite pleasant and helpful. The thing is, if you want actual critique, you have to ask for it specifically. Most people, myself included won't give anything perceived as negative feedback unless specifically asked.

Posting in the forums and asking for that helps a lot too, as a lot of the more vocal people are here in the forums.

-Jeremy

Quote - most people dont want to hear criticism.

i used to post critiques/suggestions but stopped because it was a huge waste of time. id take the time to write out constructive criticism and then id just get snarky PMs back about why i was wrong. or id take 10 minutes to critique someones work and would point out something like the feet are floating 2" off the floor in their 'pose' and id get a response about how 'i know' - but theyre not going to 'waste the time to re-render'.

and then on the flipside you have people who post stupid preference-based criticism: like you spend weeks working on some elaborate piece and theyll post 'great render, but her breasts are too small'. *
rolleyes*

the more i think about it, the more i believe the whole 'ZOMG WOW thats great!' type comments are just better for everyone all around.

I agree, after I got a few hatemails because I critique the render ( In a constructive way) I give it up too.

La vie est éternelle. L'amour est immortel.

“Dwell on the beauty of life. Watch the stars, and see yourself running with them.”
― Marcus Aurelius,

Quote - I'm not certain this venue is entirely what you might be after.

Here's my take: an image made in Poser involves...

-- a sense of composition
-- several technical components such as shaders, posing, lighting, etc
-- message: what is it you want to say

The critique gallery Ladonna mentioned does not allow technical discussions such as shaders and such. I know: I tried and was told to stay on topic. Well, I really thought I was on topic.

Just fyi :glare:

I'm unsure why it was felt it was off topic, I wouldn't see it as off topic.

@Eric - I would give the critique gallery a try and see if that is what you want.

_____________________
.::That which does not kill us makes us stronger::.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

Don't give up too soon, I only started uploading renders in the gallery here during last year. I have had both positive and negative comments although by far the most were positive. In the few nagative comments and the person in question took the time to say why they felt it wrong and and what could be done to improve it. In each case I did make a point of thanking the person and did try the changes suggested. While such comments were very few I did learn something about that particular render and also had something I could keep in mind for future renders.

Like some of the others have stated here, I am reluctant to leave negative comments on renders unless it is clearly asked for although I do mention in the comments on renders I like why I like and image or parts of it. The reasons for this are two fold, firstly I do not feel I am skilled enough to judge others (as it may seem by some) and I really would not want to discourage anyone.

I use Poser 13 on Windows 11 - For Scene set up I use a Geekcom A5 - Ryzen 9 5900HX, with 64 gig ram and 3 TB storage, mini PC with final rendering done on normal sized desktop using an AMD Ryzen Threadipper 1950X CPU, Corsair Hydro H100i CPU cooler, 3XS EVGA GTX 1080i SC with 11g Ram, 4 X 16gig Corsair DDR4 Ram and a Corsair RM 100 PSU . The desktop is in a remote location with rendering done via Queue Manager which gives me a clearer desktop and quieter computer room.

Snarly, Mackis, Blackhearted, Tool_pe_pe, Adroge, DaleB, Ladonna, Kim, Laurie and Robyn and Mr. Samuel Therapy- thanks for the feedback!

Thanks for the feed back! I see all the points- as I said to Robyn, I was caught up in the glow of working with the effects-and lost sight of the story. Partly because it took soooo long with soooo many test renders-since we can't SEE luminous objects in the preview.

There are shadow artefacts-it may be that I need to add ONE light at a low setting to smooth those over- I have my Samples set pretty high-using dimensions render python script.

The three parameters that can be adjusted are the Ambient value, color/texture, and SIZE. There is no falloff control for ambient objets.

But you need to render to see the effect of every change. The staff needs to be deleted and redone-I have three staffs actually- one visible in camera-the other two with high Ambient values-and set at a 90 degree rotation. But somehow I could NOT parent them to V4's hand-(she was not among the choices) so when I tried MOVING her hand up towards the skeleton-the staff stayed behind.

If the staff is a prop, it needs to be parented by "Object" -> "Change Parent". Fair warning, it might move on you, and it's a pain to get it back where your posed hand is. In instances like those, it's best to parent things in the default pose, fine tune it (possition it), so it then moves with your new pose already parented. That's what I do at least. There might be an easier way though.

Thanks! I know at some point Poser decided that I should NOT be able to select V4/ hand as an option. It was happy to let me select ANYTHING BUT V4!

Quote - If the staff is a prop, it needs to be parented by "Object" -> "Change Parent". Fair warning, it might move on you, and it's a pain to get it back where your posed hand is. In instances like those, it's best to parent things in the default pose, fine tune it (possition it), so it then moves with your new pose already parented. That's what I do at least. There might be an easier way though.

way to step up with the critiques and advice everyone....

now where is the gallery I submit to if I just want ego-boosting smoke blown up my backside regardless of the mediocrity of my render :P

Just kidding of course... I agree with the origional post that it does really sting to post a work to the sound of crickets. I never used to have that problem when I first started rendering but now a lot of the time there are parts of the render I am really proud of and parts that I know could be better but I hear nothing what-so-ever.

Quote - way to step up with the critiques and advice everyone....

now where is the gallery I submit to if I just want ego-boosting smoke blown up my backside regardless of the mediocrity of my render :P

why, here of course! And a couple others I won't mention...lolol. :P

Yes, I know. I'm evil. :P But I've seen renders where I'm screaming "My EYES!" and there are folks who go "Beautiful render" "This is awesome" etc...

I have to wonder if they are either blind or insane.

A member of a clique I guess ;).

Laurie

I have a suggestion for the candles. They are blown-out white, though I realize that their ambient needed to be set high to make IDL effective. Make their ambient gentler, and then compensate by using an unseen high-ambient emitter.

If you use P8/PP2010, the emitter needs to be hidden inside the candle/flame, and then the candle/flame must be set to not cast shadows and not be visible in raytracing. Avoid reflections that would see the candle, because only the hidden emitter will show! This is a major shortcoming of setting the visible candle prop to be not visible in raytracing, but if you don't do it, the emitter will be blocked.

If you use P9/PP2012, it is both easier and better because the emitter geometry does not need to be physically concealed within other geometry, but only needs to be set to be an emitter while not being visible; i.e., the render shows the IDL emitted, but does not show the object itself. In fact, you can use a cylinder which is considerably larger than the candle; this will be seen by more rays and so the IDL light will be more even.

Another option is to use a point light in combination with the IDL, and this is what I find usually works best, especially if you wanted to apply SSS to the candle. For that, you need a geometry such that rays will both enter and exit the wax. A simple cylinder will not work well. Instead, you want a cylinder with a recessed depression -as formed in real candles- with the point light placed down inside that well.

If the playset is all one piece, the P8 technique won't work. The candle/flame would need to be a separate prop so that their properties can be different.

Poser 12, in feet.

OSes: Win7Prox64, Win7Ultx64

Silo Pro 2.5.6 64bit, Vue Infinite 2014.7, Genetica 4.0 Studio, UV Mapper Pro, UV Layout Pro, PhotoImpact X3, GIF Animator 5

Frankly-I'm enjoying the feedback- I can start a second thread for those who want smoke blown! :-)

I make copies of each candle- and turn OFF "visible in camera"- then turn off transparency for the flame- and crank up the Ambient value-the problem is it still makes the visible candle body too bright. I'll have to play with ramping up the IDL intensity-and add a fill LIGHT

Quote - > Quote - way to step up with the critiques and advice everyone....

now where is the gallery I submit to if I just want ego-boosting smoke blown up my backside regardless of the mediocrity of my render :P

why, here of course! And a couple others I won't mention...lolol. :P

Yes, I know. I'm evil. :P But I've seen renders where I'm screaming "My EYES!" and there are folks who go "Beautiful render" "This is awesome" etc...

I have to wonder if they are either blind or insane.

A member of a clique I guess ;).

Laurie

Hi Sean- I just saw your post. I am using the Large Emitter NOT seen by the Camera technique in PPro2012/ Unfortunately- it still makes the visible candle body blown out-due to proximity.

I am using SSS. I think I can use my rudimentary modelling skills to make such a candle cylinder with a depression on top.

Thanks! I think you may have described this on the RDNA forum awhile back.BTW: thanks again for the Lightsaber emitter set up!

Quote -     I have a suggestion for the candles. They are blown-out white, though I realize that their ambient needed to be set high to make IDL effective. Make their ambient gentler, and then compensate by using an unseen high-ambient emitter.

   If you use P8/PP2010, the emitter needs to be hidden inside the candle/flame, and then the candle/flame must be set to not cast shadows and not be visible in raytracing. Avoid reflections that would see the candle, because only the hidden emitter will show! This is a major shortcoming of setting the visible candle prop to be not visible in raytracing, but if you don't do it, the emitter will be blocked.

     If you use P9/PP2012, it is both easier and better because the emitter geometry does not need to be physically concealed within other geometry, but only needs to be set to be an emitter while not being visible; i.e., the render shows the IDL emitted, but does not show the object itself. In fact, you can use a cylinder which is considerably larger than the candle; this will be seen by more rays and so the IDL light will be more even.

     Another option is to use a point light in combination with the IDL, and this is what I find usually works best, especially if you wanted to apply SSS to the candle. For that, you need a geometry such that rays will both enter and exit the wax. A simple cylinder will not work well. Instead, you want a cylinder with a recessed depression -as formed in real candles- with the point light placed down inside that well.

     If the playset is all one piece, the P8 technique won't work. The candle/flame would need to be a separate prop so that their properties can be different.

Doh! Yes, I've encountered that issue with proximity to the emitter. You might try one of these cheats:

reduce the diffuse value for the candle/flame
set diffuse value to zero, and use alternate diffuse instead
set diffuse value to zero, and use a (low) ambient setting instead

I have such a candle in the RDNA community gifts; just re-scale it to make it more slender.

Poser 12, in feet.

OSes: Win7Prox64, Win7Ultx64

Silo Pro 2.5.6 64bit, Vue Infinite 2014.7, Genetica 4.0 Studio, UV Mapper Pro, UV Layout Pro, PhotoImpact X3, GIF Animator 5

I am most impressed with this thread. Good on you, Eric, for starting this discussion. I gave up showing anything in galleries because of the gadflies and the people that will take art and call it their own.

Teque

Hi Sean

Thanks- I'll go looking for it and try your idea below!

Quote - Doh! Yes, I've encountered that issue with proximity to the emitter. You might try one of these cheats:

reduce the diffuse value for the candle/flame

set diffuse value to zero, and use alternate diffuse instead

set diffuse value to zero, and use a (low) ambient setting instead

I have such a candle in the RDNA community gifts; just re-scale it to make it more slender.

TeQue

Glad to hear it! Perhaps if we get enough interest in the forums-we can continue to do this-for other images as well! It's nice to not be creating in a vacuum. I thought it was one of the reasons for an online art community.

Quote - I am most impressed with this thread. Good on you, Eric, for starting this discussion. I gave up showing anything in galleries because of the gadflies and the people that will take art and call it their own.

Teque

Right you lot...

I'm no longer on the staff here but I suggest you all start posting in the Critique forum. Last time I looked in it was very quiet. You folks could do yourselves and others a big favour by becoming active in there.

If you're fed up of the back slapping and ass kissing that goes on, do something about it. Get involved in changing the process and maybe others will be interested in doing the same.

You've had word from a staff member in here that discussions about improving shaders are definitely on topic and I said the same so if you get any grief in that department, refer the complainers back to this thread.

Who knows? If enough of you get involved, you may be the start of a shift in attitudes here. Slow process, I know, but it has to start somewhere.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

Yay! I mean........yes sir.......... she marches brightly over to the Critique Forum

Quote - Right you lot...

I'm no longer on the staff here but I suggest you all start posting in the Critique forum. Last time I looked in it was very quiet. You folks could do yourselves and others a big favour by becoming active in there.

.......

Quote - Right you lot...

I'm no longer on the staff here but I suggest you all start posting in the Critique forum.

"It stinks!" - Jay Sherman

WARK!

Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.

(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)

I think there are (at least) three types of criticism that I’d label:

Esthetic Criticism – How the work affects the viewer/critic emotionally, whether they find it attractive, moving etc. – almost completely subjective.
Craftsmanship Criticism – Evaluating composition, use of color, space, light perspective, texture etc.
Technical Criticism – Looking at the detailed techniques used to accomplish something, shaders, algorithms, formulas, render artifacts etc.

Types 1 and 2 are probably more what people generally think of as art criticism I would guess. That’s from a traditional media perspective though. You probably don’t see much commentary on the percentage of whatever oxide the artist used in his pigments. People who are more familiar/comfortable with that type might see 3 as irrelevant or even undesirable.

Type 3 is perhaps somewhat more unique to 3D CGI, but it is certainly relevant as it often ties directly with number 2. One example here is the candles being ‘blown out’ no pun intended. The solution of course lies in the technical realm. There’s probably always going to be some tension for people who see the technical as distracting from the artistic. I think that it has to be an integral part of the whole but it may take careful presentation in small doses to bring some of the traditionalists along.

In the galleries, you’re probably going to get mostly Type 1. Everyone has a valid opinion in that area, even if they are too hurried or whatever to elaborate. I like the dungeon setting and the POV from behind the skeleton. Moodwise, the setting should probably evoke either dark, sinister, creepy etc. or it could even be funny, but I don’t get either, just neutral.

I’ll bet a lot of people don’t really feel qualified to give type 2, even if they have an opinion. I certainly never studied art theory. I may have a vague gut feeling on perspective for instance, but I wouldn’t necessarily know how to express it beyond the most simplistic terms. I can say that the lights are too ‘bright,’ details ‘washed out,’ you can’t tell the candles are candles and not glowing magical cylinders.

Type 3 not only requires technical expertise, it can become very detailed specific to the software and even the version. I don’t think that the gallery is really conducive to that. That’s where a critique forum may be especially valuable.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken

It was quite apparent - to me at least - from this thread that technical discussions were considered inappropriate in a critiques forum.
No problem.
I feel we do need a forum or discussion group where this sort of discussion might be appropriate. People appear quick to say: "not good to do here!' without suggesting where it might be good.

I'm rather sensitised to being inappropriate in a forum: I've had a lot of feedback that whilst I've got valid points, perhaps, this "wasn't the time or place". Or something.

Still looking for that "time or place".

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

It is pointless to discuss with moderators: they would never admit of having being wrong.

The only sensible way is to move somewhere else, something which is going to happen anyway after the discussion ends in you being banned.

Bye.

GIMP 2.7.4, Inkscape 0.48, Genetica 3.6 Basic, FilterForge 3 Professional, Blender 2.61, SketchUp 8, PoserPro 2012, Vue 10 Infinite, World Machine 2.3, GeoControl 2

Quote - It was quite apparent - to me at least - from this thread that technical discussions were considered inappropriate in a critiques forum.
No problem.
I feel we do need a forum or discussion group where this sort of discussion might be appropriate. People appear quick to say: "not good to do here!' without suggesting where it might be good.

I'm rather sensitised to being inappropriate in a forum: I've had a lot of feedback that whilst I've got valid points, perhaps, this "wasn't the time or place". Or something.

Still looking for that "time or place".

Refer to my previous post. :)

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

My 2¢, Eric..

Looking at it, my eye went to the right side, up to the Lantern, to the Girl's face (and wondered where the light on it was coming from), to the staff head, then towards the left lantern...Oh-there's a skeleton! What's it up to?

I'd zoom in on the girl and throw a bit more light on dem bones.

Hope ths is helpful...

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

The Wisdom of bagginsbill:

"Oh - the manual says that? I have never read the manual - this must be why."
“I could buy better software, but then I'd have to be an artist and what's the point of that?"
"The [R'osity Forum Search] 'Default' label should actually say 'Don't Find What I'm Looking For'".
bagginsbill's Free Stuff... https://web.archive.org/web/20201010171535/https://sites.google.com/site/bagginsbill/Home

Quote - most people dont want to hear criticism.

i used to post critiques/suggestions but stopped because it was a huge waste of time. id take the time to write out constructive criticism and then id just get snarky PMs back about why i was wrong. or id take 10 minutes to critique someones work and would point out something like the feet are floating 2" off the floor in their 'pose' and id get a response about how 'i know' - but theyre not going to 'waste the time to re-render'.

and then on the flipside you have people who post stupid preference-based criticism: like you spend weeks working on some elaborate piece and theyll post 'great render, but her breasts are too small'. *
rolleyes*

the more i think about it, the more i believe the whole 'ZOMG WOW thats great!' type comments are just better for everyone all around.

This is true. And I think it might be a global internet phenomenon. I've seen the trend repeated over and over at photography posting sites.

Only extremely rarely are comments based on the posting itself. They are almost always social and reciprocal in nature.

You get comments by giving comments. But they are unlikely to be of any use to you.

That said, I understand that RDNA started a dedicated forum for criticism. It might be worthwhile having a look there.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

The only downside I've experienced in the Critique Forum is low traffic. I have a fair amount of people I follow and critique, some of whom I subscribed to back when the Critique forum and gallery were the "Critique Club." I'm more cautious about giving critiques after that experience, because lots of people said they wanted critiques and then either openly admitted they couldn't handle critques in general and left, or argued with every critique anyone gave them. So even when people think they want critiques, they can find them intrusive in practice. That said, I'm still thanked fairly frequently by those I give detailed critiques, and most of the people I give them to weren't in the Critique Club.

I think a good indicator of being open to critique is whether someone mentions an aspect of their work they struggled with, or if their gallery seems to show some sort of change or growth.

I go to the gallery all the time because I have so many subscriptions. There's a lot of amazing and inspiring artists here. Eric Walters - if you'd like me to add you to my subscriptions and critique your work as it comes out, I'd be very happy to. Your work is very interesting, and I'd really enjoy it. Just to warn, though, I often get backlogged on my comments. My new images notifications are presently up to 23. Only some of those are from people I critique, but enough so that it will take me a bit to go through all of them. So if you don't see comments from me, it's probably just because I've gotten behind on my comments again.

Looking at that thread, I was the only one who thought the discussion might have been more valuable in another forum. I had and have absolutely no official position, and didn't think my post implied I did. I certainly didn't mean it as some kind of reprimand. It was just (as I said at the time) that the post specifically involved a Matmatic script and I didn't think anyone who came to that forum could critique it. I also thought none of the people who could critique Matmatic code would even find the thread to be able to do so (which they didn't, unfortunately). To quote myself, "nor was i trying to say that it should be expunged from this forum as forbidden or some such." So expressly not even suggesting (let alone dictating) that critique of Matmatic scripts be forbidden, let alone technical aspects of renders.

I did actually suggest the Node Cult at RDNA, since I didn't know of a material specific forum here. And I also asked that maybe it was time for a forum like that here, but no one said anything. That said, there are already lots of theoretical material discussions in this forum, and I don't know if people would find them as easily if they moved.

Edited to clarify: Robyn actually did comment on the prospect of an equivalent to the Node Cult here, but no one who actually had power (unlike me) did. And that was a frustrating time when the RDNA forums were transitioning. It's so much better now.

Thanks for your two pennies! I absolutely got lost in the efforts to make pretty lighting with objects-and my "story" got lost along the way. Working on THAT aspect right now.

Quote - My 2¢, Eric..

Looking at it, my eye went to the right side, up to the Lantern, to the Girl's face (and wondered where the light on it was coming from), to the staff head, then towards the left lantern...Oh-there's a skeleton! What's it up to?

I'd zoom in on the girl and throw a bit more light on dem bones.

Hope ths is helpful...

Add some DOF.. It needs some depth...Also the render masters over at RuntimeDNA will help you out. Thre is a section for analyzing renders in their forums.

My Renderosity Store

Hi Kobalt- please do!

Quote - Eric Walters - if you'd like me to add you to my subscriptions and critique your work as it comes out, I'd be very happy to. Your work is very interesting, and I'd really enjoy it. Just to warn, though, I often get backlogged on my comments. My new images notifications are presently up to 23. Only some of those are from people I critique, but enough so that it will take me a bit to go through all of them. So if you don't see comments from me, it's probably just because I've gotten behind on my comments again. Looking at that thread, I was the only one who thought the discussion might have been more valuable in another forum. I had and have absolutely no official position, and didn't think my post implied I did. I certainly didn't mean it as some kind of reprimand. It was just (as I said at the time) that the post specifically involved a Matmatic script and I didn't think anyone who came to that forum could critique it. I also thought none of the people who could critique Matmatic code would even find the thread to be able to do so (which they didn't, unfortunately). To quote myself, "nor was i trying to say that it should be expunged from this forum as forbidden or some such." So expressly not even suggesting (let alone dictating) that critique of Matmatic scripts be forbidden, let alone technical aspects of renders.

I did actually suggest the Node Cult at RDNA, since I didn't know of a material specific forum here. And I also asked that maybe it was time for a forum like that here, but no one said anything. That said, there are already lots of theoretical material discussions in this forum, and I don't know if people would find them as easily if they moved.

Threads like this restore my faith in the forum. Amazing how helpful and positive people can be at times. After all the fight, bickering and general bad feeling recently, this is a refreshing change.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

Quote - Threads like this restore my faith in the forum. Amazing how helpful and positive people can be at times. After all the fight, bickering and general bad feeling recently, this is a refreshing change.

QFT - it's getting so I don't want to read any threads in the Poser forum at the moment.

My Freebies
Buy stuff on RedBubble

The one piece of advice that helped me a great deal was to use "the rule of thirds", so I'm going to pass that along to you.

http://www.digital-photography-school.com/rule-of-thirds

And the most important piece of advice that I can give you is to strive to please your own eyes, not someone else's. You can't please everyone, so don't even try because you will always end up feeling inadequate and let down.

By all means listen to tips and advice given by people and strive to learn and improve on techniques with each project that you do.

Don't try to learn everything all at once, because you will never learn anything that way. Concentrate on 1 or 2 elements per image, and work on those over and over again in any project that you do, until you hone the skill before moving onto other techniques. Aways try to incorporate something new that you are learning to do into an image: basically leaving your safe zone, while continuing to utilize what you have already learned and "mastered".

Doing this you will always get you something that pleases your eye because you have worked with techniques you know well and can put together in a pleasing way, while concentrating your efforts on the 1 or 2 elements that you are working on learning.

"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

The folks who actually do comment ( unlike most folks who come in here bitching about getting no comments themselves, though they don't comment on others work themselves ) are usually commenting on hundreds of uploads a day and don't have time to give an in depth critique.

When folks do give honest critique they usually get their asses chumped off by the artist... or the artist comes in here becrying rape and murder about a negative comment... so most folks who do comment have learned just to give vague comments.

...I think

Quote - The folks who actually do comment ( unlike most folks who come in here bitching about getting no comments themselves, though they don't comment on others work themselves ) are usually commenting on hundreds of uploads a day and don't have time to give an in depth critique.

When folks do give honest critique they usually get their asses chumped off by the artist... or the artist comes in here becrying rape and murder about a negative comment... so most folks who do comment have learned just to give vague comments.

...I think

To me a "gallery" is a place where finished pices of are are put up for display. When I put an image into my gallery it's because it is finished and created to please my eye, not anyone else's. If some people like what I've done, great. If not, they wouldn't have liked it no matter what I had done, probably because their taste in art, colour, placement etc, is vastly different than my own.

Now granted, I don't get me wrong, I want to hear from "fans" and "non fans" alike. Yes, it's nice to get gushy comments, but if you don't like something I've done, you should never be afraid to speak up and say so. But don't just say "that piece is crap!" or "OMG! That Suxxors!" At least tell me why it makes you feel that way. Now that doesn't mean I'm going to rework the piece to try and please you, but it would be nice to know why people like and dislike something.

"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 wanted to add that art is very subjective and a unique experience. No matter who the artist is, or what piece of work they have on display (painting, sculpture, etc etc), it provokes an emotion in everyone viewing it.

Sadness, happiness, laughter, confusion, anger, uneasiness etc etc etc.

If the artist can create an emotion in someone, even if that emotion is confusion or anger or leaves them shaking their head wondering what the artist was thinking, then I'd say the artist did their job!

"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 wanted to add that art is very subjective and a unique experience. No matter who the artist is, or what piece of work they have on display (painting, sculpture, etc etc), it provokes an emotion in everyone viewing it.

Sadness, happiness, laughter, confusion, anger, uneasiness etc etc etc.

If the artist can create an emotion in someone, even if that emotion is confusion or anger or leaves them shaking their head wondering what the artist was thinking, then I'd say the artist did their job!

Amen to that! Well said, indeed. I myself don't expect a lot of vocal followers, but the ones I do get I cherish. I do mainly Pin-up styles or sometimes just plain odd stuff, so I expect my art is just more of the 'same stuff' already in abundance out there. So when a few people decide to leave a comment, I take it as I might have done something to make it stand out.

P.S. Wonderful gallery, btw, Acadia.

Sigh...

Someone who turns out as having the disposition of an anally retentive internet troll in the galleries mentioned having just gotten PP12, so trying to be helpful I mentioned them looking up BB work and Snarly's script so they could make the most of their new software. The result: 3 angry letters in my inbox. The person could have just accepted the comments for what they were or ignored them, but the jerk just had to go off because I didn't post a generic "fantastic" comment and five star it. What a waste of bandwidth the person is.

If you can't accept comments either don't leave your gallery open for comments or don't post things to it.

Now I need to make an unartistic commentary about anally retentive internet trolls, in general of course, and post it to the galleries.

WARK!

Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.

(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)

You should post this in the other thread going where criticism is being openly discussed as unwanted.

I think Rendo needs to have a gallery checkbox that explicitly says I want encouragement and no suggestions for improvement.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - It was quite apparent - to me at least - from this thread that technical discussions were considered inappropriate in a critiques forum.
No problem.
I feel we do need a forum or discussion group where this sort of discussion might be appropriate. People appear quick to say: "not good to do here!' without suggesting where it might be good.

I'm rather sensitised to being inappropriate in a forum: I've had a lot of feedback that whilst I've got valid points, perhaps, this "wasn't the time or place". Or something.

Still looking for that "time or place".

Ok.. I'm trying to see if i'm reading correctly. It wasn't staff that stated it shouldn't be there. Daidalos actually gave permission for it to be posting. Am I missing something?? :)

Material forum is an idea.. was this ever brought up to admin? do you know?

_____________________
.::That which does not kill us makes us stronger::.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

Also I wanted to add... if you guys feel you want something added on the site you are welcome to post a suggestion in the Suggestion Forum.

_____________________
.::That which does not kill us makes us stronger::.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

I love the site just as it is. If you made it better I would get no work done at all.

I'm rather happy the gallery is full of dreck from people who get pissed about advice. Otherwise I'd be in there all day, too.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - I think Rendo needs to have a gallery checkbox that explicitly says I want encouragement and no suggestions for improvement.

Which is a sad state of affairs IMO. Encouragement is fine at times, but it is not good all the time.

WARK!

Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.

(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)

Quote - > Quote - It was quite apparent - to me at least - from this thread that technical discussions were considered inappropriate in a critiques forum.

No problem.
I feel we do need a forum or discussion group where this sort of discussion might be appropriate. People appear quick to say: "not good to do here!' without suggesting where it might be good.

I'm rather sensitised to being inappropriate in a forum: I've had a lot of feedback that whilst I've got valid points, perhaps, this "wasn't the time or place". Or something.

Still looking for that "time or place".

Ok.. I'm trying to see if i'm reading correctly. It wasn't staff that stated it shouldn't be there. Daidalos actually gave permission for it to be posting. Am I missing something?? :)

Material forum is an idea.. was this ever brought up to admin? do you know?

It was a while ago, so my already dodgy grey cells have lost most of the details of what exactly happened, Kimberly. All I know is that it left me with a sour attitude - which you mods have had to deal with in the past, for which I apologise - and consequent disinterest in further posting.

And no, I didn't put the idea into any suggestion box anywhere. My bad.

I would love such a forum or even gallery, Kimberly. I really think that there is a lot to explore with Poser materials these days. Centralising discussion would - I think - be a really good thing. Materials could include texture creation, which I'm quite involved in and which can't really be separated from shaders. There's a lot to learn and a lot to share. And this is the forum to do this in!

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

Quote - I think Rendo needs to have a gallery checkbox that explicitly says I want encouragement and no suggestions for improvement.

Already an option - nobody uses it though

My Freebies
Buy stuff on RedBubble

Quote -

It was a while ago, so my already dodgy grey cells have lost most of the details of what exactly happened, Kimberly. All I know is that it left me with a sour attitude - which you mods have had to deal with in the past, for which I apologise - and consequent disinterest in further posting. And no, I didn't put the idea into any suggestion box anywhere. My bad.

I would love such a forum or even gallery, Kimberly. I really think that there is a lot to explore with Poser materials these days. Centralising discussion would - I think - be a really good thing. Materials could include texture creation, which I'm quite involved in and which can't really be separated from shaders. There's a lot to learn and a lot to share. And this is the forum to do this in!

I'm sorry it happened like that. Its been awhile since that happened it seems, I don't believe I was back on staff then. I understand tho and I hope that we can work on issues like that so that we don't see your sour attitude. S

I will bring the Material forum up to the staff and we will see from there. It depends on how many people would use the forum for admin to make a new forum. :)

_____________________
.::That which does not kill us makes us stronger::.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

"Materials could include texture creation, which I'm quite involved in and which can't really be separated from shaders. There's a lot to learn and a lot to share. And this is the forum to do this in!"

I would love to see a forum which covered materials and textures even more since Poser 9 and 2012 which have generated much discussion about the material room. I am sure it would be more popular than some of the forums that already exist. Just as long as it does not become full of threads with the same old suspects banging the same old drum, but that that is down to the moderators (who I accept do a difficult job) and little to do the remit of the forum.

I use Poser 13 on Windows 11 - For Scene set up I use a Geekcom A5 - Ryzen 9 5900HX, with 64 gig ram and 3 TB storage, mini PC with final rendering done on normal sized desktop using an AMD Ryzen Threadipper 1950X CPU, Corsair Hydro H100i CPU cooler, 3XS EVGA GTX 1080i SC with 11g Ram, 4 X 16gig Corsair DDR4 Ram and a Corsair RM 100 PSU . The desktop is in a remote location with rendering done via Queue Manager which gives me a clearer desktop and quieter computer room.

Quote - I'm sorry it happened like that. Its been awhile since that happened it seems, I don't believe I was back on staff then. I understand tho and I hope that we can work on issues like that so that we don't see your sour attitude. S

I will bring the Material forum up to the staff and we will see from there. It depends on how many people would use the forum for admin to make a new forum. :)

Thank you, Kimberly... that would be lovely. And it's okay if the concensus is that there wouldn't be enough visitors to warrant a separate forum... the most important thing is: you tried. I really respect that! Thank you.

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

Thanks Kimberly!

Quote - > Quote - I'm sorry it happened like that. Its been awhile since that happened it seems, I don't believe I was back on staff then. I understand tho and I hope that we can work on issues like that so that we don't see your sour attitude. S

I will bring the Material forum up to the staff and we will see from there. It depends on how many people would use the forum for admin to make a new forum. :)

Thank you, Kimberly... that would be lovely. And it's okay if the concensus is that there wouldn't be enough visitors to warrant a separate forum... the most important thing is: you tried. I really respect that! Thank you.

Your welcome guys. I can't promise anything. :)

_____________________
.::That which does not kill us makes us stronger::.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

I hope it comes soon! I just wrote-and deleted some suggestions on a render- all elements looked great- except-it looked like the shoe was floating on the temple floor-and the background was full daylight-with blue skies and clouds- and the figure was lit by torches-or a very late sunset.

I was going the suggest using Ambient occlusion-and adding an image based light-using the background-then I decided to not say anything- I could not be the ONE to give it a 4...

In a texture-materials-lighting gallery- I could have said something. :-)

It's probably not practical (which is probably why I've never seen it), but a more structuref format for criticism would be interesting. Separate options to comment of mood, composition, lighting and materials might help people think about the elements of an image, especially those not accustomed to doing critique. In terms of feedback, if someone got 5's on everythig else and a 2 on lighting, It would help emphasize the area the needed to work on. A tutorial with examples on had to do good criticisms would be interesting as well. - maybe even a critique of the month where some good critics did their thing on some brave soul's image would be fun. A lot of people don't have a formal art background and criticism is a skill like creating.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken

That sounds like a reasonably good template to work from, lMckenzie. Never thought of it that way, but let say I give you this image:

...and let's say we were to look at it from the standpoint of the merits you mentioned (and a few):

-- mood
-- composition
-- lighting
-- materials
-- pose
-- special (cloth sim/specular effects/sss-in-the-skin/special effects/natural effects)

I think this could really bring some qualitative discussion about one aspect or another. Say Bagginsbill wanted to discuss the shader: he could focus on that. Or Carodan could talk about the hair room effort (not visible here, not done here) or... you get my drift. And the whole artistic process would be dramatically enhanced from a technical aspect, and would ALSO leave room for those who are truly of an artistic bent who could speak to the feel of a scene, like KobaltKween, to whom I owe ever so much - in terms of enlightenment - in actually "seeing" a scene. As Betty Edwards said in "Drawing on The Right Side of the Brain":

"Seeing is the problem, or, to be more specific, shifting to a particular way have seeing. You may feel that you are seeing things just fine and that it’s the drawing that is hard. But the opposite is true..."

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

An intriguing concept! That's just it. It was a fine image-except that she appeared to be floating above the floor-and lit by reddish gold light-on a blue sky day. But then maybe the other folks just liked it-without paying attention to that sort of thing. There was no way to say I liked it-without giving it a 5.

Quote - It's probably not practical (which is probably why I've never seen it), but a more structuref format for criticism would be interesting. Separate options to comment of mood, composition, lighting and materials might help people think about the elements of an image, especially those not accustomed to doing critique. In terms of feedback, if someone got 5's on everythig else and a 2 on lighting, It would help emphasize the area the needed to work on. A tutorial with examples on had to do good criticisms would be interesting as well. - maybe even a critique of the month where some good critics did their thing on some brave soul's image would be fun. A lot of people don't have a formal art background and criticism is a skill like creating.

Robyn

Maybe I can make a few comments- and they could be broken down into ratings? Do we need numerical ratings if we are just trying to learn and improve?

I'd say that it is technically a "cut above" the average gallery post- in that you are using the tools available-which many don't. . The skin, eyes, and hair look good-the little bit of soft reflectivity on the cheek looks good the cloth is very good- the focus is on the character.

I'm not sure what the artist intended-but From MY perspective- which is not necessarily the ONLY perspective I have some suggestions- In terms of realism-I think the background is a little too flat- it would react at least a little to the spotlight- the head would cast a shadow more specifically- and maybe a hint of diffuse specularity on the wall paper-but I think that is why you picked this image. I might crop the right side a wee tad as well.

BTW: the hair fall very naturally- she is more "real" than the background- perhaps BB could suggest some material options.

Great, Eric! Thank you.

This is the sort of constructive comment that would MAKE a gallery entry worth submitting, don't you think? And we could qualify our remarks by tags: "gonna address the lighting" or "something about her expression leaves me ambivalent" or...

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

Good example Robyn. The main idea I suppose is that an image is the sum of its parts. Having a materials forum (or a lighting forum etc.) isn’t a bad idea, but it tends to balkanize things that should be viewed together. Each one often affects the others, e.g. lighting affects mood and materials etc. Ideally, you want to address that synthesis or synergy. Having it in one place may facilitate that. It might also give people an opportunity to get some cross-pollination between the ‘nerds’ and the ‘touchy-feelys’ :-) Having some organization would help keep the flow of artistic comments from being interrupted by the technical or comments on lighting for instance being separated by comments on posing etc.

It’s just a vague idea. I haven’t thought too much about the devil of the details. Clearly, it’s not something that the gallery or even the forums are really set up to handle. The categories need to be thought out so as to be workable and not too many. I just threw out some and duh, forgot posing. Maybe a ‘General’ category would be good as well. Very off the top of the head, maybe a ‘summary’ with the image, the individual category ratings and the average rating; below that, some kind of collapsible sections for the individual categories.

I can see how such a design would actually still contribute to the problem of splitting things up. If the character’s pose undercuts the mood or atmosphere of menace the artist was trying to evoke, where does that comment go, in ‘mood’ or ‘posing’? Being able to link references might help, e.g. ‘Love the creepy atmosphere but her pose…’ where ‘pose’ could link to a suggested improvement in that section. Hmmm, the more I think about it, the more complex it becomes. At any rate, I doubt it’s something Renderosity would want to tackle. My initial thought on the complaint issue was just have an easy or easier way to link related posts in different forums so the critique post can stay ‘pure’ with a link to the technical dissuasion in a theoretical materials forum – which can be done now, albeit manually.

“Do we need numerical ratings if we are just trying to learn and improve?”

Strictly speaking, maybe not; they may help as an easy scoreboard of specific areas that people view as needing improvement, just like a report card. Speaking of areas, and as long as I’m dreaming, it would be cool to have a feature that allowed you to link a comment to an image annotation. Currently, you can post a copy of an image and circle a problem area, but that bloats the thread with multiple images. I’d like to be able to draw an annotation on the original image and have it appear only when someone clicked or hovered over a link in the comment. It would probably need some kind of floating popup image window to avoid having the image always visible, reducing room for comments, or jumping back up to the top of the thread. Ah well, another crazy idea :-)

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken

“And we could qualify our remarks by tags” Tags are something I had thought about. If they could be standardized and implemented in the comment interface, it would be easy to highlight a section and apply a tag the same way you can do with fonts. Of course, you could do it manually (lt) lighting comment (lt). Ideally, people could select which tags they wanted to see – assuming the software could selectively show/hide text on that basis – might not be practical. It would allow freeform commenting without the collapsible category scheme, while still allowing you to see specific categories of interest. Untagged text would of course be displayed by default.

The main problem would be getting people to actually use them consistently. A hybrid approach might work; an editor with collapsible sections. By default, you’d only see the general section but you could expand the individual categories and put text in any you wanted and have the tags created automatically. Naturally, I want to see a tag cloud as well :-)

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken

You will get better tips for your image if you are more specific about what you want to accomplish. So if you want to get feedback on your lighting, explicitly ask for feedback on your lighting and what you try to do. Otherwise it will often go like this:

Artist: "Please give me advice on making my image better"
Critic: "You should have some highlights. Try a spotlight two feet above the camera."
Artist: "I tried to light my image with only indirect diffuse light to see how it worked. I do not want to use spotlights."
Critic: "Then add some reflection to the eyes."
Artist: "I used a ready made shader; all those nodes are too complicated for me, so i rather not add reflection. Anything else?"

This probably has happened to anyone given some sort of critique for renders, but not too often. Because after it had happened often enough, the critic's desire for giving answers to general requests like "give me some feedback" will have vanished, because the critic got the feeling of wasting his or her time doing so. Also, i think it makes a good impression when you want to get useful feedback, to actually put some work into it getting it (even if it is only to write one or two sentences on what you want to have).

You are welcome Robyn!

Quote - Great, Eric! Thank you.

This is the sort of constructive comment that would MAKE a gallery entry worth submitting, don't you think? And we could qualify our remarks by tags: "gonna address the lighting" or "something about her expression leaves me ambivalent" or...

OK! After hours and hours of test renders- I've got the candle blow out resolved-using point lights-which still blew out the exposure-until I dropped them to 2-4% with Inverse Square falloff. This has been a real trial! I almost had it yesterday- a nice 5 hour render-only to notice that poser had lost the morphs-the dials were still there-but they did not do anything. I fortunately had saved the character out earlier-so was able to replace her.

I could increase the IDL samples and irradiance cache even more-and redo with a light to make the Thanator claws more visible-but I think I'md DONE with this scene!

I learned a few things- one was to make the point light icon HUGE so I could see them-also that I can't put the point light in the lamp without it blowing out the wall spec.

Thanks for the feedback-quite a different scene than what I started with...

Fun, Isn't it?

You realise of course that normal life doesn't exist for you anymore, Eric... you're one of us. Don't try to escape. Just give in. You know you want to.

MWAHAAHAAHAAHAAhaahaahaahaa!!!

{Tiny voice in the back}

Please, can I have more???

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

Hi Robyn

It's all true! I went to my favorite brew-pub for some food -as I do quite frequently. It was about 3PM. I mentioned to one of my waitress pals that I was hungry enough to eat the condiments as appetizers. I had not eaten since the night before-stuck on lighting my scene. Not so sure she GOT it I could not tell her the .pmd had gotten corrupted and lost all the morphs! :-)

Quote - Fun, Isn't it?

You realise of course that normal life doesn't exist for you anymore, Eric... you're one of us. Don't try to escape. Just give in. You know you want to.

MWAHAAHAAHAAHAAhaahaahaahaa!!!

{Tiny voice in the back}

Please, can I have more???

Robyn:

1. She looks nervous and it doesn't come off really well from my perspective.

2. I don't think as an artistic choice, going with an antiscopic reflective material for her shirt was a good idea.

3. Shouldn't there be shadows on the wall?

4. Did you put a reflect node on her chest? It looks like the pendant is reflecting off of her.

5. The earring's loop shadows are off. They are really detailed for one part, and not so detailed for the rest.

WARK!

Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.

(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)

Quote - Robyn:

1. She looks nervous and it doesn't come off really well from my perspective.

I thought the expression was interesting. Certainly not your typical blank stare.

Quote - 2. I don't think as an artistic choice, going with an antiscopic reflective material for her shirt was a good idea.

Why? You don't believe in satin? That is the correct specularity for it.

Quote - 3. Shouldn't there be shadows on the wall?

I'm sure the shadows fell where they should. Poser doesn't make that stuff up. The light source is inverse square falloff and is lighting the wall but it's weak.

Quote - 4. Did you put a reflect node on her chest? It looks like the pendant is reflecting off of her.

Good call there. Looks like Fresnel reflection shader was used? I suspect setting high blur (softness) was left out of the shader. Was this from EZSkin? The string is reflecting, too, except where it gets close (inside the bias.) Gotta watch those bias values. The default .3 inches is too high.

Quote - 5. The earring's loop shadows are off. They are really detailed for one part, and not so detailed for the rest.

Which is an accurate result for an area light source where blur increases with distance between shadow and object causing the shadow.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Thanks for your comments, WinterClaw and Bagginsbill. Bagginsbill has pretty much devined my lights, clothing material (actually, not a shirt, a gown) and pose intent correctly. I'm amazed - shouldn't be but am anyway - how you picked up that I used inverse square fall-off on all the lights. I guess you see an effect ... which can be caused by only one thing. I may have been a bit sloppy trying to solve my shadow problem... the light on the table (point, RT shadows, Inv Sq fall-off) initially left horrible artifacts on her skin from - I'm assuming - travelling through a structure such as the lampshade. So, initially, I turned the shadow blur radius up to 12. Same artifacts. Then I turned the shadow samples up from 19 to 60. (min bias stayed at .8) That took care of the artifacts.

I might try a render with the SBR at like 2 or something and see what happens.

Oh, and yeah: sick of the catatonic look most figures appear to have... she's by herself by the fire wondering if she really wants to go out tonight, and someone suddenly appears and takes a picture. Yep?

Oh, the skin shader. I'm trialing different stuff with matmatic - haven't actually tried SG EZSkin yet - so this is a bastardisation (nicely termed "variant") of James and Post 240 ... BMST is next. :biggrin: I live in matmatic... still very much the best tool anyone's ever made for Poser. Ever. And, like Poser, as incompletely explored and used.

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

The first two comments were personal preferences. For the 3rd, I guess I need to work with inverse square falloffs more. On 5, how quickly the front part of the shadow blurred surprised me, so I made mention of it.

Robyn, with your background story, I understand the reasoning behind the look a little more and it seems appropriate for that situation.

BTW, which hair is that? It looks nice.

WARK!

Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.

(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)

It's Violet Hair by Lady Little Fox, over at dna - worth every penny.

Tbh, when I first did this scene, the lighting was quite different. I didn't feel the 3 point lights on the wall were doing enough and the shadows were looking really bad, so I turned the ceiling into a massive source of light. Which would have worked fine in an office scene, but as my friend KobaltKween suggested, didn't somehow mesh with the surroundings. The decor was old country home: fluorescent ceiling lights? Somehow something didn't work. Then I realised that I needed shadow: dim lights were part and parcel of that scene, but I didn't want her hidden in obscurity, either, so a desk lamp. Which presented its own set of challenges.

The earring shadows you mentioned are off. I tried setting my shadow blur radius down to 2, and her face went dark with lots of blotchy shadows everywhere. Back up to 16 and she's well illuminated but - as you observed correctly - shadows are off. :glare: Dang.

Monterey/Mint21.x/Win10 - Blender3.x - PP11.3(cm) - Musescore3.6.2

Wir sind gewohnt, daß die Menschen verhöhnen was sie nicht verstehen
[it is clear that humans have contempt for that which they do not understand]

Metaphor of Chooks

Comments? Suggestions ?The title is Bad Intentions... The bad character was supposed to be a Sith Lord- like the Emperor in Star Wars-but is now mutating towards demonhood.I need some horns and a different outfit. BTW: I can't seem to get the right robe sleeve to behave properly (dynamic).

His teeth are supposed to brown and decrepit looking btw. I'm using the hdr image to light-

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: Anyone know a gallery where constructive criticism may exist?