Attached Link: http://www.posinsolutions.com/

Does anyone know about the company Posing Solutions? I have just been looking at their site and have a few worries about what I am seeing. I thought they were a company offering poses for Poser - however even though it looks very much like they are supplying poses - it appears they are offering their poses in obj format, as in the following line: "Around 5000 male and female superheroes in more than 1000 action poses, each viewed from 24 different angles." To me that sounds very much like they have poses the figures, then saved them as obj formats, and are then selling them. I'm not sure what the legal aspects of it is - but a few people agree the figure on their Superhero homepage looks very much like Micheal, and another couple look like Dork and Poser 4 Hand. Anyone know if it is legit or not? I certainly don't want to buy from them if this is illegal - which is what it is looking like...

The way I read it is that they have rendered the models from all those angles; what you get are those renders. It seems to be a reference source for light, shading, musculature, etc. for more traditional media...

"This is a collection of 2D images created in Poser to be used as reference material for artists." I have just been sent the following information - so it appears they are legit... Since I don't believe there is anything stating that you can not sell your images you make... Though this isn't anything I want to buy myself :) lol (but maybe a cheap option for those not wanting to buy poser themselves :P lol) WiNC

Well, even if I were interested, no thanks. You have to sit and wait for some long intro to load before you can even get in. Me and my wee modem said fuggetaboutit.

lol - you can skip the intro I think - but it is all a flash animation I believe :P

Looks like a ripoff to me. After buying all their disks, you could own Poser and make your own. This is just a CD full of images they created from Poser to sell to companies who use stock images in their publications. Their site gives very little information on what you are actually getting. I already own just about every figure DAZ ever put out so I wouldn't want it either, but it isn't a bad idea. They should have a sampler CD for a lower cost to show what you are getting. That's what I would do.

Poser 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Pro 2014, 11, 11 Pro

I have one of their CDs. Crazy things in the Poser world...

kupa - LOL! Now honestly I wouldn't admit to that :P So it is just pictures of poses? And are they all naked? I suppose it is used as a trance for artists to "copy" from yes? Just bought it up because I was a little suspect at the time I saw it - and was thinking they were full models in OBJ format (after all - I never thought anyone would sell just pictures of poses by themselves :P lol) WiNC

It's just pictures, and I actually paid for the CD, but not because I wanted to use the product. It is very disorganized, btw. What we were looking to examine was how they sort of transformed all of Poser into a clip library, and there was nothing we could do about it.

probably not - unless you could prove that it was a breach of the EULA - which I don't know if it can be classed as a compatition product against Poser4 - though in essence it could be... After all - they have taken poser 4 and placed it all in a product which is to compete against Poser 4... I know a stretch :P But I have been stretching in places against Poser5 - so I should be able to stretch in my support for Poser 4 :) lol i can kinda understand one of the EULA statements now in Poser 5 :) and why it was put in there :)

that was it...

In fact - there could be a angle that could be taken - copyright law states that you can only use 10% of a product/books original content for your own content... If they have used more then 10% of Poser 4 original content for the use of making their own product, it could be stated that they have been in breech of Curious Labs Copyright. It would be the same as someone taking my music - writing it out on paper, and breaking it up into sections to sell as a CD for other musicians to copy (no I'm not that good - just using it as an example). Or for someone to take a movie and then using that movie in their own CD collection. Hell Paramount did their run against companies because of them using screen shots from their TV series Star Trek -and they managed to win a number of court cases over some of the larger fan sites. In essence, because they are releasing their product as compatition against Poser (since they the product is there to remove the use of Poser) one could argue that it is a breech of copyright. I might have issues with the Poser 5 security Kupa - but I certainly have no issues with Curious Labs (or yourself) and I don't like to see people making a buck off a company I feel has been so damn helpful to people. We might have a differences - but I don't like what Posing Solutions is doing here and I'm sure there has to be a way to stop them... it feels - illegal to me... and just wrong :(

copyright law states that you can only use 10% of a product/books original content for your own content... - WinC The 10% figure is a popular myth repeated often... Only 0% is allowed to be copied ;) Oh cooler... this is your cue. :) Otherwise, where have you found it "stated"?

[ Store | Freebies | Profile ]

a sweet disorder in the dress kindles in clothes a wantoness,
do more bewitch me than when art is too precise in every part

Incorrect April - 10% of a document can be used for Academic use (therefore you are legally allowed to repeat a small part of a document in your assignments, and books as quotes etc.) This is also used for the copying of screenshots in tutorial books (like Dummies) and other such stuff. I could find it but it might take me a while (I have to find my copy of New Zealand Copyright law books from University)- and it isn't written (that I remember) as "10% of your product is useable for academic purposes"... it is longer - you know how laywers are :P You could be right about it not being usable in Posin Solutions position - because I can't see how it could be seen as a academic product. I have just read through the EULA for POser 4 (can't find the one for Pro Pack) and can see a number of terms Posin Solutions might be breaking - but the problem is - cost of lawyers and such have to outweigh how much Curious Labs think they could be lossing from this company. I would thin Curious Labs have looked into it - it just miffs me when I see a company doing something like Posin are... It would be far to sell a book of your own original art (that is what Poser is for after all - original art) but what they have done is taken poses (and probably a number from Poser, or Free sources here, or Schlabber) and have just rendered a number of pictures to sell to poeple. No original art, etc... and no where on their site (that I have seen) do they give credit to Curious Labs, or even make reference to Poser software being used. Frustrating...

frustrating indeed...

gotta love your long responses Kupa :) lol

that's what responses look like when you're wearing an issue-based ballgag ;-)

LOL!!!!!

How about that weather?

It is certainly a pitty Poser 4 didn't come with Poser 5 Content Distribution Section D, or G... but again I can see why they are included now. I think (if memory does me correct) it comes down to what is a program and what is documentation. I think that was the arguement used in Paramounts case against Fan-Sites, was that the content of the websites were in conflict with their copyright rights. I feel for ya Kupa - must be a pain when you have to face these issues... that is when I start programming for money I'm going to create programs that no one wants. In fact they will be that unwanted even warez groups will ignore them :) I know there is a flaw in that thinking somewhere - I just haven't figure it out yet :)

Ick, to think that someone would want that!?! I feel sorry for the poor slobs that get tricked into buying that when they could get poser 4 for less & get so much more bang for the buck!

Attached Link: http://www.keytlaw.com/Copyrights/fairuse.htm

*Incorrect April - 10% of a document can be used for Academic use (therefore you are legally allowed to repeat a small part of a document in your assignments, and books as quotes etc.)* - WinC That statement is misleading. You may be trying to referring to "fair use." You still can not unrestrictedly "use" any part of someone else's product as part of your own other than for "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research" which fall under fair use. See linked page above. :) As for selling rendered images made with Poser... you can tell how legal that is by the continued existense of posinsolutions. :/ The weather is great, or so I'm led to believe... I haven't seen the Outside World (tm) in a while, I heard it's very high res! I'm not sure I have the hd room or processing power for it.

[ Store | Freebies | Profile ]

a sweet disorder in the dress kindles in clothes a wantoness,
do more bewitch me than when art is too precise in every part

I'm not sure what the conceptional problem is here. They're not selling the figures so there is no way the product will hurt Curious Labs or DAZ. I don't even think they are aiming this specifically at the Poser or 3D market. More likely it is intended for traditional media artists. There are already similar pose books in the market place for artists. The only difference is that this product is a cd instead of a book and that instead of a camera or pencil artist they are using Poser and DAZ models. If we can sell "art" prints created with Poser and DAZ models why can't they sell reference images created with the same tools? Am I missing something fundamental here? - Jack ps. whether this cd represents a good value is an entirely different story.

We're lining up some AMD processors running P5 here to stave off an early cold snap.

Oh weather is nice outside - we are just coming into Summer, and from what I'm told that is the Season to be outside and doing stuff which has nothing to do with computers... Um - - - - okay - I don't know anything to do without computers... I think I really need a life :) April - yeah - that is it :) Fair Use - which I believe Posin is kinda breaking isn't it? I mean - damn it! You are right - there is very little you can do against it, unless you argue that all pictures made with poser are bad.. The thing is - It is like one of those situations where you just want to go around there and bop them on the nose :P WiNC

HEY! No picking on our powerful AMD internal heating systems! I have saved a lot on heating this winter :P

"There are already similar pose books in the market place for artists" Wel no - those books are usually tutorial guides, or are books full of original art. What Posin are doing isn't original art - it is stock poses rendered on many different angles so that artist can use them in pictures, or as reference material. Buying one of the art books, or Tutorial Guides, doesn't go in direct competition against Curious Labs - I personally think Posin's offering is direct competition - because if you buy their stock poses, you remove the need for poser (if you are interested in just stock poses that is :P) But again - Kupa has already said their hands are pretty much tied on this - so I'm not going to push. But you know me - I'm passionite :P

I didn't really see enough examples on their site to tell if all the poses were stock from Poser. If so, then I think at the worst they are only being "tacky" and unimaginative. I really don't see much difference between their use of stock poses and the hundreds of stock pose images at this site. As the saying goes... "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." I'm still not sure that this is really competition for Poser. If all I wanted was reference material I'd buy a book or one of those $20 artist mannequins. I certainly wouldn't be spending $349 for Poser. If I recall correctly reference was the intent of the original Poser but it was a lot cheaper too. Poser has gone well beyond its humble beginnings and price. Ah well- opinions are just... opinions. - Jack

Jack, well not everyone here is selling those stock poses for 49.95 and most at least have backgrounds which make them look like art :)

WiNC- Yes. I think I said "tacky", "unimaginative" and even questioned its value. On this we agree. It's not that I'm supporting them. I just don't think they're doing anything illegal nor do I believe they represent competition to Poser. - Jack

Jack, if you created a program that had a figure which you could pose which was not that good (not saying poser figures are bad :P) but its main intension was for reference in 3d art... then someone came along and posed your figure with the stock poses (that you include in your program) then published all those poses from many different angles as pictures (ie - all they have done is remove your frontend and probably more expensive program) wouldn't you feel that they were stealing your work, and trying to sell it as their own?

talk about cheeky, they don't even mention on the site it was all done with Poser, I didn't see a CL or MC logo anywhere.

Attached Link: http://rangi.knowledge-basket.co.nz/gpacts/public/text/1994/an/143.html

WinC, I figgered I'd save you a little work... the link above is for the amended (1997) New Zealand Copyright Act :-) Under US law, April is correct, no portion of a work can be used without permission. The only exception being 'fair use' which is interpreted on a case by case basis, using fairly strict criteria. This from the US copyright FAQ at.... http://www.copyright.gov/faq.html#q47 "Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create a new version of that work. Accordingly, you cannot claim copyright to another's work, no matter how much you change it, unless you have the owner's consent. See Circular 14. New Zealand law is a bit more specific however. As of 1/1/98 no more than 3% (or 3 pages in the case of a literary work) can be used & that is *only* in cases of "Criticism, review, news reporting, Education, Public Administration or Library/Archives"

thanks Cool - to tell the honest truth I didn't have time to go around looking for it - I have a programming assignment (payroll system) which I have to finish and I'm having problems trying to get around OOP useage in Visual Basic 6 (darmn I wish we could learn C++ in this damn university - they just removed the class sigh) So thanks for the link - I need to have a read up on it again anyway since I might be publishing my own novel sometime in the near future, so want to get back to present copyright laws etc... Okay - so it is now it is 3% (sure it was 10% when I looked) :) I did my Copyright Business paper in Massey University in 1996 - and haven't really kept mush up with it - but yes - it is the "fair use"... thanks a million cooler :) I still think however that Posin is breaking the law - I just can't see how it can be enforced since there is nothing in the Poser 4 EULA that is really being broken... sigh - I just hope they buy Poser 5 and try doing the same thing with the new figures :) WiNC

Is poser "reference" material anymore. It seems to me Poser art is a direct part of the end product. How may Poserites Pose their scence(s) and then paint/draw them? Everthing I've seen uses Poser (and Bryce, Vue, etc), to create a direct image, not as a artist reference. I'm sure there are people who do(I',m one of them), but I don't think that is the main market anymore. Look at Renderosity, Daz, etc, they don't seem to be selling "reference" material.

Hmmmm, I don't think I like where this is going. This thread pretty well sums up a growing trend with Poser I'm less and less happy with, I'm going to call it the "Who's Render is it anyway" trend. This mostly has been discussed in reference to non-commercial licensing of free stuff, and I can support that, after all, it free. But this thread is apparently extending it to the content that comes with Poser. Now, I can understand not distributing actual objects or other Intellectual Property, such as the actual mesh or morphs for Don and Judy et. al., but having to invoke fair use doctrine to sell your own renders? To me, this borders on rendering (sorry) Poser useless as a professional tool. Are we supposed to keep a record of what percentages of pre-made content we use with every render? Must we then go to court to establish whether our render indeed belongs to us? Isn't a major selling point behind Poser the content that comes with it, or can easily be obtained? Now, I consider myself more of an illustrator than an artist, and am about as commercially savvy as a feral rock, but I have sold a print of my art before, back in my Amiga days, and the thing is, had I needed to get permission from the software makers involved, I would have lost the sale, proceeds of which were hugely helpful at that period in time. Curious Labs maintains that render a Poser figure from multiple angles and selling the resultant renders are competition for Poser (why buy Poser when you can just buy some prerendered images of Posed figures? However, isn't Poser itself (at least it started out that way) an attempt to bypass needing a live model. Does not Poser compete with these live models, why pay a model, when you can get models with Poser than can be posed in any position, at your convenience, with out the cost and hassle of obtaining and dealing with real models. Moreoever, as Poser has grown, adding more complex rendering and animation capabilities, does this not compete with 2D software? Why draw each model and pose by hand, carefully rendering the form, the lighting and shadows, when Poser does all that for you? Should Adobe proscribe selling textures for use with Poser, because then you would not need to own Photoshop? Where do draw the line? Regards- Lemurtek

Doesn't DAZ's license have specific language against using their figures for clip art collections?

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=605491

gryffnn > Doesn't DAZ's license have specific language against using their figures for clip art collections?

No, because last time everyone was in favor of clip art collections (see link). ;P

Hey, what is wrong with you people? Well I don't want any more restrictions on my usage of Poser and Poser addons. If you deny someone the right to do a clip art collection then CL or DAZ will at some time deny you the copyright of your Poser images. Thats a fact. CL and DAZ are business, if they could, they would tax you every time you hit the render button or exhibit a rendering.

Lemurtech, Here, Here! ah heck I gotta go Time thing you know. - TJ

I agree this is getting way too restrictive. Someone who is satisfied with a collection like this is not a potential customer for Poser anyway. In fact I would say that CL could potentially LOSE customers through this new restriction. So many of the PSP groupies who love to share tubes want Poser just so they can do so. Remove that incentive and they have no reason to purchase.

Kupa, Say it isn't so! I don't want it to be cold in Santa Cruz yet, I want to go down there next weekend!! :) Boni

Boni

---

"Be Hero to Yourself" -- Peter Tork

WiNC, Yes I would feel annoyed if someone did as you suggested. But I'm not sure that you even read my comments in their entirety. 1) Based on the Posin' website it is not clear to me that they used only the stock poses included with Poser. 2) Poser's primary purpose is no longer the mere posing of figures for use as artists' reference material. I suspect that most Poser users don't use it for this at all. 3) If Posin' is using only stock Poser poses then they are only doing what many Poser users already publicly do. While true that they do not add a background or colour or clothing, etc there is no law that say "art" or reference material has to be good, labour intensive in production, imaginative, completely original, etc, etc, etc Does the Posin' product allow one to create additional poses or adjust lighting or modify character features or augment figures with additional figures and props or change surface textures or expand its features with additional add ons or, or, or...? Unless these features and more are available I think it requires an incredible stretch of the imagination to consider this as any sort of real competition to Poser. If I tried to convince the Poser crowd that Posin' is an adequate substitute for their beloved program I would die of embarrassment as I was laughed out the door. The Posin' stuff isn't even clipart as there would be no point in using the images directly either as cut and paste paper images or as scanned digital insertions. At best it is visual reference material only. One might even argue that they add enhanced value by offering many additional angles thus saving an actual Poser user from expending the effort of twisting a virtual dial. If I were religious I might expect CL to soon receive a copyright infringement lawsuit from God for the unauthorized use of His original designs and models. I mean really, He isn't even given the courtesy of a credit line. Perhaps He will be joined by all the portrait artists, photographers and figure sculptors and they will initiate a class action lawsuit against CL. Ridiculous? Well, there ya go... - Jack Ps. This posting has no legal validity and in fact, is probably illegal. After due and diligent examination it appears that each and every alphabetic character or word is not original to the author but has merely been rearranged in suitable order for easier assimilation. Perhaps it would be if the characters were posed via backwards italicizing or texture mapped with multiple colours. But that's another story... - Jack

Lots of companys will pay more to have some one else do it for them...it happens all them time. Most photos you see in advertising(print) and even in a great deal of commercial websites use stock photos, drawings and art. Someone even noted that adverts for p5 used p4 images that had been around for awhile.... Companies think in terms of man power as well, it might be cheaper to buy the program, but the man power and company time could make it more expensive. Corel, gives a way tons of images with corel draw for royalty free use, and has a whole website of stock images for sale. Advertisers don't give credit for things in their ads...using poser to create royality free stock images shouldn't a problem as far as I can tell.

Tirjasdyn
http://michellejnorton.com

The main "Illustrator's Figure Reference Manual" book series published by Chartwell in 1987 aren't in print any more. You'll be lucky to find them used; I got them remaindered in 1992. I have three of them (24 angles for each posed model), and they're ok, but the lighting is flat and the photos were taken in color but printed in manually separated muddy spot colors (brown and blue, BION). Also, some of the models pose more stiffly than others, probably because they used only three angled cameras (models held their poses on a turntable with 8 positions). The original publisher (Quarto) doesn't have any book-specific information on their website; apparently their business is selling art books to smaller publishers. If anyone here is familiar with a substitute series, please post info.

I can see how the actions of Posin'Solutions could be vexing. However, I seriously doubt they have rendered every possible pose from every possible angle. Not to mention their clip art is only nudes. Now if they rendered every piece of clothing from every possible angle and every prop from every possible angle (in every possible color) then it might be competition for Poser. As it is, it's just about useless!

There are several Japanese series here is one, Bijutsu Shuppan-Sha Basic Pose #1152 ISBN#4-568-30049-5 Daily pose #1007 ISBN#4-568-30047-9 Moving Pose #1223 ISBN#4-568-30048-7 Couples Pose-1 #891 ISBN#4-568-30051-7 Couples Pose-2 #437 ISBN#4-568-30052-5 These books contain nude figures as well as clothed ones (similar to the "Illustrator Figure Ref, Manual's"), therefore are not for children under age.

Sorry for getting off topic.

Another series is POSE FILE/1 through 9, and up. Is is usually available at Art Stores. All nude figures, sports, dance etc. There are one or two other series available. These books contain nude figures(similar to the "Illustrator Figure Ref, Manual's"), therefore are not for children under age.

I can't imagine they're making much money from their crappy product. Its more or less a collection of "clip art." The real question is whether they're using legitimate software and DAZ characters that THEY purchased, or is it just a bunch of high school kids with stolen software churning out copies of CDs on their home computers. I was totally unimpressed with the website and the lack of details of what is on the CDs. And potential customers could mistakenly believe they're getting a real 3D program like Poser, and not just a bunch of images.

Poser 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Pro 2014, 11, 11 Pro

I wouldn't call it "clip art", clip art is usually finished art spots are used "as is" in various projects. I cannot see Posin figures used "as is", they are certainly not "finished art". I think the "reference" title is more approprate (as per jval). The figures are a bit rough, but I can see they might help an artist visualize some positions, or movement.

Actually, it is quite legal... all they're selling are renders. (Steve, I gotta ask - is THIS why everyone's rights are sitting in limbo right now? No offense 'mano, but this is very silly... so what if a pack of people whomp out renders and sell it as clip art? The demographic for all of that clip art aren't going to use Poser in a zillion years anyway... you know that, I know that. Also, they apparently haven't sold all that many in spite of it... So what gives?) Their market is most likely the advert/marketing types who can't afford the time and/or cash to learn Poser or any of that "3D Art stuff", but '...by Heaven they can Photoshop!' You use the images as a base, cutting and pasting and blending into layers, to make a scene that could be presented as a single effort, when in reality it is nothing more than a high-tech collage. I do that in Poser with photographic backgrounds now (my own photos, thanks much :) ), as do a lot of folk in the galleries. I dunno how much these guys charge for a CD, but I can see what they were striving for, and I suspect that in terms of time and money, it would be chaper for a marketing type to get the CD and use it like any other clipart. /P

Lemurtek I think you mis understood me, I mentioned that I used Poser for reference...and I do, but I also use Poser figures and props directly for commerical work, like book covers. The point I was trying to make was "...who is the Poser user now?" I do not think it is used for reference much now. I think Poser figures are used directly in most cases. as I said I do that too. What is the largest catagory/market for Poser? 2D illustrator/artist? 3D illustrator/artist? animator/artist? reference/artist? I know...I know, all catagories use poser, but what is the biggest market for CL?

Hobbyist! :0)

CyberStretch TRUE!, But hobbbyist in what catagory?

Are there more "Still Artists or animators"

Well, at the momoent, Still Artists, most likely. But if the Animators get their Gallery, maybe it would sway more towards Animators.

Still artists...that's my guess too, and of the still artist's, I believe only a small...small fraction use Poser for "reference only", I cannot see Posin as a prolem. I know Poser started out as "Reference", but to a large degree it has moved on. When used as "Reference" Poser DOES do a fantastic job. It would be interesting to see an animators gallery, give the animators a "voice". :o)

The P5 EULA clearly states that selling renders is legal: "You may, however, distribute rendered still or animated images derived from Restricted Content without restriction or royalty to Company, provided you do not violate the non competition clause below." And I do not see where 2D images can begin to compete with a 3D model posing application.

Why is it that every thread I start gets over a 50+ post debate... :) Firstly - No - Rendered pictures might not be illegal... (and shouldn't be if they are art - imho) I think the frustrating thing here is that I can see that legally there is nothing Curious Labs can do... Morally however - I find Posin distasteful. Let me explain why - If I wrote a program which produces fractual drawings - then someone renders a whole heap of my fractual drawings and then sells that as a CD collection for people to have instant fractual drawings, I would see that as someone stealing my customer base. Competition isn't a problem - but what would put salt in the wound is that they used my program to do it. Many of you use Poser as a rendering 3d program... not all of us do however. Some of use bought Poser 4 as a reference product first. I got Pro Pack to use it for rendering :) What Posin is doing - imho, is very simular to my Factrual example. They have taken the stock figures and poses from Poser 4 (or 3) and have rendered those from many different angles so that somoene can spend 45 dollars on their stock reference material, instead of buying Poser. Again competition is grand - but I personally find it very distasteful that they did this using Curious Labs own program. Posin might not be the only one who does this (some examples have appeared for other products) but Posin is the first one I have seen which does do this. Unlike my stand against the Security System in Poser 5 - I can feel for Curious Labs in this situation. I certainly know that I wouldn't want it done to me... No - I don't think Curious Labs or anyone should be able to prevent you from creating art with their product. But I don't see Posin as art, I see it as a product which has been created by Poser, to competite against Poser as a reference tool. I won't say anymore - because I have come to learn when to keep my mouth shut :P lol /me goes back to hiding beneth a rock somewhere :)

LOL My partner and I were just having a little debate over this (she don't agree with me totally either :P) but she said (and I found it funny)... "I don't see what you are all worried about... if someone really doesn't want to buy poser... it would probably be cheaper for them to but a Ken and Barbie doll anyway" :) LOL - thing is - she is right :) I have to luv her :) LOL Bye bye WiNC

OK, easy money for someone. Produce a poseable doll with a USB interface. Plug it into your computer. Start Poser, pose the doll and the Poser figure's pose mirrors that of the doll. No dials, no mouse, the ultimate posing interface. I of course claim all copyrights to this idea.

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

lmckenzie > I of course claim all copyrights to this idea.

To late, someone did that already. ;P

Damn! Wish he'd get it marketed though. OK, how about an electrical device that uses resistance to heat a grid of wires allowing you to toast bread?

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

you mean a toaster?

No problem - I'll just use Firewire instead :p /P

Right there..win you've just put the computer software industry in a nutshell. Cyberstretch perhaps you should read this again: This is giving you permission to sell your images not saying it's illegal. It does say "you may" and "with out restriction or royality to the company" Which means if you get royalities, cl gets nada. Selling your renders is not competetion to CL, make renders in order to replace poser is, there is a difference.

Tirjasdyn
http://michellejnorton.com

I guess there must be a huge market that I just don't understand, people who would buy a bunch of still images to "replace" Poser. I wonder at what point this kicks in. If you sell a CD with 100 nude images (tasteful of course), is this a no no? Do the images have to be related somehow? If you sell an animation of a baseball player, someone could pull the individual frames. Does that fall into the same category as their "sports" CD? The idea of the renders competing with the product seems like a very slippery slope. I don't see a great deal of difference between this and the Rhino or Max folks saying saying you can't sell models you make because people will buy them instead of the software.

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

Tirjasdyn,

You may want to reread my post:

"The P5 EULA clearly states that selling renders is legal:"

I do not say that it states that it is illegal, nor do I infer that CL would, under any circumstances, get any royalties.

OK, so if the hobbyist is the market why make it more complicated? Or were you hoping to appeal to a better class of user? :P later jb

I think you hit it on the nose Praxis. Curious Labs does want to appeal to a "better" class of user. It's been their goal all along to get Poser to be regarded as a serious animation tool by the 3D community. I imagine they have been quite frustrated that it's primarily used for still renders. The animation that Poser is capable of is quite impressive, has been for some time, and with Poser 5, has the potential to be even greater, if they ever solve some critical technical issues.

Does Poser have a problem with the poser figure being too memory intensive for animation? Is the 3D animation community anywhere near as large as the still render community? If it isn't, is it possible CL could lose customers by alienating its biggest market? I know...I know, they want to "expand" their customer base, but you can't please everybody. Somebody suggested splitting Poser into two programs. I'm relatively new to Poser so I cannot really judge how the poser community feels about that.

Just a thought: If Poser ever does reach "professional" status, (which is debatable), how many hobbyists (the current "bulk" of the user-base) would still be able to afford it? And, how would this "milestone" reflect upon CLs' concern for this community?

I find the idea intriguing. Poser Lite with all but the very basic animation tools removed, and Poser AE (animators edition) with a heavy set of Animation capability. The only problem I can see is that some of the features that Still Render people want, like Dynamic Cloth and Hair, are directly tied into Animation. So I think If I were to put myself in CL's shoes, Splitting the program up really wouldn't make financial sense. Unless the AE edition was completely rewritten from the ground up, and the Lite version stuck with the old code base... Hmm...

I apologize Cyberstrech, my reading abilities must have gone down hill that day.

Tirjasdyn
http://michellejnorton.com

*"I think the frustrating thing here is that I can see that legally there is nothing Curious Labs can do...

Morally however - I find Posin distasteful.

Let me explain why -

If I wrote a program which produces fractual drawings - then someone renders a whole heap of my fractual drawings and then sells that as a CD collection for people to have instant fractual drawings, I would see that as someone stealing my customer base.

Competition isn't a problem - but what would put salt in the wound is that they used my program to do it.

Many of you use Poser as a rendering 3d program... not all of us do however. Some of use bought Poser 4 as a reference product first. I got Pro Pack to use it for rendering :)

What Posin is doing - imho, is very simular to my Factrual example. They have taken the stock figures and poses from Poser 4 (or 3) and have rendered those from many different angles so that somoene can spend 45 dollars on their stock reference material, instead of buying Poser."*

My first impression of the site is that the images were targeted mainly to traditional artists (oils, etc) Why shouldn't they put out this product for them?
The artist could either pay a model or copy a human form/hand/etc from a print.
Poser isn't the only program for this.

example: When I get my oils out and want to create a flower on canvas, I can't just pull it out of my head. I have to look at one. I'm either going to use a real flower or get my shape/color/lighting/etc from an image. Should any 3d program tell me I have to use theirs and theirs alone?

The reason CL can't do anything about it is because then they would be setting a presedence by telling users what they can and can't do with a render. I don't know about anyone else here but I wouldn't stand for that.

It would be like Adobe telling you that you can't sell a web design using their product because it takes away their customer base because they could buy the program and do the very same thing. Well, many can't.

My $2 bucks.

...... Kendra

I think a "Poser LE" would be interesting. The best of the existing trans-mapped hair looks very good for stills. I'd settle for clothing with collision detection to conform correctly, doesn't have to blow in the wind. No fancy material room or plug-ins for Max and C4D, a better renderer than P4 but not necessarily the full blown (and reportedly slow) Firefly. Basically a kind of Poser 4.5 All the bells and whistles of Poser 5 are impressive, but in reality, I think things like just eliminating clothing poke-through would better serve the needs of casual users who haven't even pushed the limits of Poser 4

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

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=897208

Since you mentioned poke-through, you might want to check out this thread.

Interesting, Volfin. I don't have Poser 5, so it's nice to find out these things. Obviously, P5 is a blend of the delightful and the despicable. Even if the shrink/clothify/expand trick works, it shouldn't be necessary. Kind of goes along with my idea that a less ambitious package that got the basics right (e.g. poke-through), without some of the other stuff would be welcome, especially for non-animators. Dynamic clothing is great but jeeze guys, get it to fit properly on a still figure first. Shadownet's Gypsy Rose set proves that even conventional clothing can be very flexible for still images. Fortunately, he included plenty of sizing morphs and it doesn't cover the problem parts like knees and elbows. Plain old effective anti-poke technology would mean a lot more to me than being able to automatically animate the Marilyn Monroe over the heating vent scene. Of course, both would be better, but how long will it take and how much will it cost?

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

Kendra, Very good arguement and example there - certainly the opp to mine, and certainly another way of looking at it :) You sure you are not my Partner Cassie? She used the same line on me :P hugs WiNC

*"Kendra,

Very good arguement and example there - certainly the opp to mine, and certainly another way of looking at it :)

You sure you are not my Partner Cassie? She used the same line on me :P

hugs

WiNC"*

Lol, which line was that? I just live with a man who will play devils advocate just for the sake of a debate so I've had to learn to look at things from all angles. :)

...... Kendra

"It would be like Adobe telling you that you can't sell a web design using their product because it takes away their customer base because they could buy the program and do the very same thing."

yeah and Cassie is the same - she might agree with me - but she will debate the other side just for the hell of it anyway :P