Like 90-95% of the pictures are of just a naked woman with maybe perhaps a nice background these days. But it's worth is when you see those truly original pictures.

Uh-oh - here we go again.... ;-D

3-D Arena | Instagram | Facebook

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.
-Galileo

Occasionally you can even be surprised by a "naked in the Temple". An earlier thread gave me an idea I'm working on. Not great art, but the humor factor should be good. I don't mind wading through all the Naked Vickys, the good stuff makes it worthwhile. And a lot of times there's something in a temple pic that helps me technicly (although obviously not with my spelling), or gives me an idea to try.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=beton

Some of the best Poser art is not in the Poser Gallery. For instance, my current favorite at the link above.

Hmmm... how about a nekked Vicky standing on a Bryce sphere and holding a smaller Bryce sphere. Bet noone ever did that.

"An Example is worth Ten Thousand Words"

Well, at the risk of offending most of the community, I also hate elves, fairies, faes, sidhe, magick, fantasy and most of the "porn pretending to be art". And you can add pouty lips on most of the Victoria models, too. :) Cantankerous old git, aren't I?

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

I for one think there is a lot of creative and nice posts. You may be tried of naked Vicky but my only bitch is Naked Micheal, Gee whats pretty or creative about his thing showing.

Love is Grandchildren.

Well, not really. lol Just playing with a new character idea. Staff Sgt. Steph reporting for duty as ordered. Marque

Sorry, she's not nekid, doesn't have a sword but she's ready for duty... quick render in P4. Marque

Hiram...that's a great site. That's what I wish would happen more often...when someone finds something special in the galleries, that they would clue the rest of us into it. I'd probably never find Beton on my own, but the gallery has a wealth of interesting images on it. Thank you!

Yeah I don't know why those posters bother with naked women. Its not like women bother making pics of naked men. Why give attention to one half of the human race when it doen't give attention back. I'd say stop giving praise to women and start giving praise to other things in life. Women aren't the center of the universe, anymore.

Hiam that link is great, thank you, really...the Stranded is one of my favorites. I saw this in the Mag a little while ago. Great pic......and Marque, very nice indeed....Sharen

hmmm try viewing some of the better artists :) Everyone i think has done a naked vicky in a temple at somepoint though.. my favorites lalverson wasmuh Beton June As Shanim Xena pjero TT and many more :)

Are posters posting for other people or for themselves? It just may be, for those posters, those fantasy women are meaningful, even though they look pretty repetitious to others of us.

Yeah, it's all the same...

Stormrage - Well, I've NEVER done naked Vicky in a temple, figuratively or literally ;) I recommend a petition to include a titty / temple combo ban within the TOS... MODS..? And what the hell am I doing in the Poser forum?

"You may be tried of naked Vicky but my only bitch is Naked Micheal" I've noticed a lot more nude Mike pics showing up lately as well, along with more gay and lesbian embracing/kissing scenes too. Not that there's anything wrong with that... :) But as long as she's not floating and has some sort of facial expression, I say bring on the temple pics! ;) That's an interesting question Dialyn...although I know everyone says we're supposed to make art for ourselves and for personal enjoyment, I end up making most of mine for other people. That extra little bit of motivation keeps me from letting it look like junk. ;) SnowS Hoping his pictures are worth 1001 words. 1001 Words

my DeviantArt page: http://snowsultan.deviantart.com/

I do not speak as a representative of DAZ, I speak only as a long-time member here. Be nice (and quit lying about DAZ) and I'll be nice too.

I don't do too many nudes, since I think being teased is nicer than being shown everything, besides which erotica isn't my creative focus. However, I've noticed that when I do post something with some feminine curves showing, the responses are condiserably increased. People usually comment on the "artistry" of those renders (which is nice of them, of course, but...) It amuses me that so many people, especially we Americans, find feminine nudity to be beautiful and artful, but heaven forbid that a bit of nether male flesh should show! There's a "I can do without the dong" dude in every crowd. Well, fine, don't look, but we guys are just as human as the women we admire. If I'm going to include nekkid Michael or Dork in a picture, I'm not going to censor his groin just to avoid the negative comments of a few uptight guys. So there! :-) As another oft-repeated but not universally believed point, nudity does NOT necessarily mean "porn" or "sex." Thank god!

Actually I find dressed figures are more interesting than nudes...what is concealed and revealed in a person tells more of a story than pictures showing everything hanging out and exposed. Clothes gives us history, and a perception of how the person is seen by us and how they see themselves...it adds to the interpretation of a character rather than detracting from it...for me. But I'm clearly in the minority of people who want to see a story told other than Adam and Eve.

Context is everything. Originality has nothing to do with subject matter, per se--it's what you DO with that subject matter. But yeah, canned pose, canned lights, props, figure, texture, background from blah blah blah in the MP--who cares? The whole penis-phobia thing is about fear--I think a lot of (young) men are afraid that if they look at too many penises they'll get turned on; which would make them gay. Of course, if it's a man and a woman having sex in a video or whatever, the penis is no prob; the more the better. Weird planet we live on.

Why not sell complete PZ3s--figure, lights, textures, camera--everything ready to render, no creativity whatsoever required. Brilliant, I tell you!

I like it Mosca, can't say I understand it but I like it. for any that are interested there is a similar thread over at the OT forum entitled "Poser hot 20". one Idea brought up there (though I'm sure it has been brought up many times before) was the Idea of having a two image per week upload limit. the Idea behind this is that perhaps people would be more choosy about the images they post and slowing down the posts might mean that really good images wouldn't be lost in the deluge.

Thanks, w! I don't understand it either--it's mostly about playing w/ space and scale. Even cutting the dl limit to one per day would help. The whole hot 20 thing has been going on forever; Legume vs. Vicky, concept versus execution. Yawn.

{I also hate elves, fairies, faes, sidhe, magick, fantasy and most of the "porn pretending to be art".} How else can people legally make nude pictures of children? Call them "fairies" and there you go! Oh, wait, the artist says the character is "400 years old" and that's why she (never a he) looks about 10 years old. Okay, whatever. Two fairies cavorting in a garden? Take off the wings and you have two nude children. And before you jump all over people and say "Well, just skip over the ones you don't like". I tried that- you STILL have let the thumnbnails download and even then, some thumbnails don't really show what the picture is. Then again, do real artists post their images here, looking for a "cute face" or "this rockz" comment? No- they work as a commercial graphic artist and their compliment is that they get paid $50 an hour to do something creative.

Thank you for that great link, Hiram. I stumbled across Beton's work early on and am still inspired by it, but I haven't enough time for the Galleries these days :( I really, really appreciate a link to other artist's favorite works. Was going to post one myself, to occdoug's page, but I can't seem to find him...? Maybe I'm spelling it wrong? A limit on posts per day is an excellent idea. I just got back from a 2 month roadtrip and the very thought of all the images I'll need to wade through is daunting!

I'll add my 3 cents - new to Poser but a fantasy art fan since 1977 - really tired of naked women who all look like clones - If fact of Renderosity's current constest winners (all great tech & art feats) PunkClown's Frog was my turn on! Now that was a figure with personality!

Thought I would jump in here.. I believe I have a theory as to why so many pics involve Vickie posing in a minimal background. We're often hampered creatively by the tools we're given, and when we (myself included) look at hi-res models like Vickie we feel the need to use them, and also to let the model itself do most of the "talking". So, we pose Vickie provocatively (nude, to show off the remarkable detail of DAZ's creation) in a room element of some kind. We play with the lights and expressions, and render it. Ta-da! Instant art. I believe that most us at least started that way, by playing with the elements and tools we were given with Poser. Often times the figures inspire the images we create, not the other way around. We'll ask ourselves "What can I do with Vickie/Mike/Steph/Dragon/Whatever?" instead of conjuring up an image first, then adapting or creating elements to make it happen. Now, this isn't a bad thing, and I am not saying that people who create "Vickie in a temple" images are all beginners or are uncreative. I'm just saying that this might be the reason for the multitude of similar images out there. Anyone else think this makes sense? -=JFStan=- "I will now accept your praise and adulation!" - Robokopf

FYI, I'm not against nude Mike pics, but it's no different or more difficult rendering him nude then Vicky nude. The criticism against lifeless nude Vicky pics should apply to any render where characters are simply stuck in a scene just for sexual appeal. And strange but true - Vicky in a temple can indeed be done well! :) http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=84140 http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=228231 http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=256749 SnowS

my DeviantArt page: http://snowsultan.deviantart.com/

I do not speak as a representative of DAZ, I speak only as a long-time member here. Be nice (and quit lying about DAZ) and I'll be nice too.

"How else can people legally make nude pictures of children? Call them "fairies" and there you go! Oh, wait, the artist says the character is "400 years old" and that's why she (never a he) looks about 10 years old. Okay, whatever. Two fairies cavorting in a garden? Take off the wings and you have two nude children." Actually, non-obscene CG nudes of children are ALL legal. At least according to the U.S. supreme court. "Then again, do real artists post their images here, looking for a "cute face" or "this rockz" comment? No- they work as a commercial graphic artist and their compliment is that they get paid $50 an hour to do something creative." Real artists make real art, not "commercial art." (An oxymoron if ever there was one.)

Not jumping all over you Johnrender but I havn't seen too many of the nude juvi fairys around here in a while. not since a few months back when the PTB carded all the fairys I'm sure you remember that mosca ;)

SnowS, thank you :) I might never have seen those artists' work if not for your links above.... (Now, if I could just find occdoug's stuff.....?)

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=tuttle

*"And what the hell am I doing in the Poser forum?"* I don't know... slumming? Dude, you do some freaky s***. It's brilliant; I love it. See? I think the real artists (myself for instance) take a look at the Poser rendering and composing capabilities, say 'screw it' and go render in Bryce. Then they post their stuff in the Bryce gallery where the Poseurs never go. I did this at first, but then I decided that if I did the modeling in Poser I could put it in the Poser gallery. Some I put in mixed medium.

Mosca & John Render... First, I agree with JR's point about the fairies. Not sure about the "real artists" though; I am a "real artist", but currently unemployed. I'm using my new found spare time to get to grips with Poser. So far I haven't posted anything in the gallery because I don't feel I have created anything worth looking at. As for the term "art", I believe it's completely redundant in the context we're discussing here. Common usage says that a piece of graphic design is artwork, and is therefore produced by an artist. Whether or not it's "real" art is debatable and pointless (IMO, there is no such thing as "real" art, anyhow). Mosca - define "obscene". In my country, the general definition is "Indecent; likely to deprave or corrupt". Pictures of naked children usually fall into that category.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

Response seen in a previous version of this thread... Most of those posting are guys who can't get a date in the real world, so they use Poser instead...

tuttle.. actually i don't think i have done one either.. *thinking then looking through my art.. hmm nope not one naked vicky IN a temple.. * Mosca.. actually some artists are putting their art here not everyone is looking for comments.. I enable my comments but not ratings.. but honestly I don't care what people say about my art. I use it to gauge peoples reaction to it.. I don't go to a local art gallery to show my art. so can't hear the peoples reaction.. though what defines a real artist? Someone who has sold their work? thinking I have. 10 times over.. Made a fair amount for each piece I did too. Who creates fantastic images? Well mine are mostly pinups but then I don't show the work I have done for pay. A real artist is as ambigous as the truth sometimes :)

Hrm...I thought it was because people rushed out, bought vicky and p4 and didn't have enough left over for clothes.. Pet Peeve, slap a wide mouth expression on vick, import her to bryce and render, ick. I do like fantasy art...not much for fairies(sorry ever since the I came here I have found "fae"s to be some queue word for pornographic, even with thorn's rants about it.)

Tirjasdyn
http://michellejnorton.com

"Real artists make real art, not "commercial art." The ceiling of the Sistine chapel was a commisioned piece.

Cheers, Hiram, glad you like it. :) Now, if anyone out there knows how I can get PAID for doing it I'll give them a coconut & a kiss (or a hand-shake for the guys...)

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=245755&Start=1&Artist=ernyoka1&ByArtist=Yes

Someone once said :"Tits = Hits" I have to conclude that it's true. Of all my pictures, the one that's had the most hits were a picture where the thumbnail made you believe it was a nude pic. As I do VERY LITTLE "real nude" pics, I thought "well let's see what happens if the thumbnail showed some skin" and whaddayaknow? more than 700 hits, closely followed by my only pic where I put [nudity] in the title, becourse it really WAS a nude pic, one of the rare ones (mostly becourse I was just playing with a new set and didn't bother to put clothes on Vicky) It's a bit strange with the nude Mikes...somehow most of them cry GAY to me.... but I really don't know why, and being a straight girl, one should actually expect me to prefere nude men to nude women. I have to admit that I find most of the nude Vickys boring (even if the pic might be great) but nude men in renderings just turns me OFF. The link is to my "no. 1 hit" which actually looks quite a lot like me, hence the title "Trekkie's bath"

Gods be praised I'm not a real artist! I have now a deep and abiding need to do a slew of naked Mikes in temples and post them, dongles adangling. I have done Vicki in a temple and Vicki Naked but not combined the two. I was mentioning the convention to a friend who doesn't do Poser but enjoys seeing a picture of mine once in awhile. He said Vicki, Naked, in a Temple, with a Sword. Sounds like Clue. Emily

i totally agree with the a limit of uplaoding from 3 to 1......this site used to have unlimited uploads until someone decided to upload 40+ pics each just slightly different than the other.....so they changed it to 3 uploads a day.....but that was when there were only 25 thousand members.....now there are over a 100 thousand members ...i totally think it would be a great idea to limit the uploads to one pic per day.....its not the nudes that bug me......anymore.......its the fractals that bug me......and for those of you who say that i should ignore them.....well i would if i could just ignore fractals and enjoy the other galleries ........caue i just dont want to limit myself to poser galleries ....i want to see the 2d galleries and the bryce galleries as well......dont get me wrong....some of the fractals ive seen look great in colour compostion and so forth ....but the majority of them look like they were made with some kind of fractal generator......i dont kow if they make them anyway else but IMHO there a waste of space.....sorry if i offended the fractal community nnuu

tuttle: Find yourself an agent. You are definitely good enough to be doing this as a livlihood. It's hard to break in at first, but you have to be motivated (read: stubborn and persistent). One of these days I'll get there. It's the work of guys like you that inspires me. I'd hate to have you looking at my art on a book cover someday and saying "Gee, I coulda done that."

There is a cure for people who get tired of naked people. Go to my gallery. After you see that. Naked people will look much better. :-) ScottA

"The ceiling of the Sistine chapel was a commisioned piece." Sure; just working on spec doesn't make you an artist. But it wasn't an ad or an illustration or a canned, inoffensive image designed to fill layout space. A lot of people got seriously torqued about those paintings--they changed everything. That's the difference. "Mosca - define "obscene". In my country, the general definition is "Indecent; likely to deprave or corrupt". Pictures of naked children usually fall into that category." Here the legal definition varies from state to state, county to county. But in general, it means they'd have to be presented in clearly sexual/sexualized situations--that is, the same standard for obsceniy applies to CG images of children as it would for CG or non-CG images of adults. Everybody's so hysterical about this deal--a friend of mine just sent me a picture of her toddler sitting on a potty chair. It's cute as hell--are you saying it's obscene? Where's that at? "...a few months back when the PTB carded all the fairys I'm sure you remember that mosca ;)" Sure do. I also remember that they reversed their decision and invited me to repost the "questionable" image. And another image of mine using the same (naked) figure made it to #1 in the Hot 20. Here's what the TOS currently says on the subject: "No depictions of young humanoid characters in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context." In other words, non-eroticized nudes are ok.

hey scott I like your work :) reminds me of saturday morning cartoons:) which is a big compliment btw.. Reminds me of things that are cute precious and time well spent :)

Hiram - thanks for the vote of confidence, I'll get a bit more practice in first & see what happens :) Now, where was that free temple model I was looking at...

Like I've said before about fairies and I'll say again. ANYTHING 400 years old ain't gonna be cute and innocent. Its going to have a cigratte out of its mouth and be jaded all to hell and its middle finger is going to be permantly stuck in the upright and straight position.

Hiram: Here! Here! Most of the art of the Renaissance - paintings, frescos, mosaics, murals, architecture, music - was commisioned by some wealthy businessman, royalty, or the church. JS Bach, DaVinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael, Donatello (and other Ninja Turtles!) were all handsomely paid for their work. In my case, "real" art is defined by the skill of the artist in how he/she uses the tools available and the presentation resulting, not fame or pocket book (or lack thereof). Square blocks painted on canvas or paint splattered willy-nilly (seemingly in a fit of spasm) are not art (sorry - that sums up my basic feelings about most abstract art, especially that of the latter half of the twentienth century). Would you call someone whose only trick is making a coin disappear in the same manner everytime a "real" magician? No, that's a 'one trick pony', a 'one hit wonder', a hobbyist, amateur, but not a "real" magician. As for naked people scurrying about rendered scenes, I have no problem as long as it is done tastefully and with a purpose (even if just to be erotic). Frazetta had more "Vicky's in a temple with a sword" type art than I can remember, but he was a professional, "real" artist, whose art had a purpose - even if pandering to the nether regions of the male anatomy. ;) Kuroyume

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

-- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone

Mason: You owe me a keyboard!!! Kuroyume

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

-- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone

:) Victoria makes her feelings known.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

i wouldn't touch this subject with a 10 ft. Naked Vicki......

I Love Faries and made enough money off them, I bought a new computer. I also like posting 3 images if I choose. *****Heres Punky Fairy to give you Fairy haters a smile.!!!

Love is Grandchildren.

A tasteful nude is fine. Lately though, it's just a naked Vicki in a scene with no reason for the nudity.
There's even a certain merchant who's items I can't take a look at while at work because sure enough, in the middle of their scene renders is a naked Vicki for no reason.

As for the Hot 20, it's pretty obvious when it's being manipulated. And those who said it are right. It's not called the "best" 20.

...... Kendra

"Square blocks painted on canvas or paint splattered willy-nilly (seemingly in a fit of spasm) are not art (sorry - that sums up my basic feelings about most abstract art, especially that of the latter half of the twentienth century)" Kuroyume i felt the same way like you did but later learned its not whats painted on the canvas but how its done.....if your gonna take a regular rolling brush and make a red line across a huge white canvas than fine ...its crap.....but do that same huge painting with say............. a pin .....and you would probably respect it alot more ......its not really the subject matter its more in the line of the technique that is used .......the same can be said about poser.....2 poser pics....pretty much the same......but one of the pics the artist made the clothes ....made the textures......made the hair and so forth ...while the other just got the props from vendors or free stuff and didnt make the textures and so forth.....which one are you gonna respect more?.....i dont mind people using other peoples props and textures.....but leave some room for yourself to add your own touch to it instead of giving credit on your gallery pics to the artists who created them ......and the only thing original person did was adjust the lights and not even pose the character .....big deal ( sorry for goin off topic abit ) nnuu

---Like 90-95% of the pictures are of just a naked woman with maybe perhaps a nice background these days. But it's worth is when you see those truly original pictures.----

It's the same way with anything that is created on a computer. Years ago, only the hardcore computer geek owned a computer. Now a days everyone owns one and there are TONS of professional programs that the average computer user can create with. Just look at how many CRAPPY web sites are out there, or all of those web sites that look the same (like so many Amazon.com rip offs)

I never claimed to be a 3D artist, but I enjoy learning and playing with Poser...the first time I loaded Vicki nude I was AMAZED at how realistic she looked, just posing her seemed awesome to me and that's what most people are posting. If it was easy enough for everyone to create a digital masterpiece then it would get OLD fast. It takes real skill and creativity to produce something that's a cut above the rest and some of us may never get there, but at least it's fun trying.

So I just say that you sit through all the "cookie cutter" pictures so that you really appreciate something truly unique when it comes along.

I'd like to see more variety. There is a sameness to a lot of the posts. It seems to me that Poser is tailor-made for one-panel comics, for example. More humor would definately liven up the gallery.

Attached Link: Real Art Here

*"Square blocks painted on canvas or paint splattered willy-nilly (seemingly in a fit of spasm)"* I'm not a Mondrian or Pollock fan, either, as you may see if you go [ here](http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=264351&Start=1&Artist=Hiram&ByArtist=Yes) or [here](http://www.alembicdesign.com/gwydion/art.html).

Turtle.. ROFLMAO!~

Yawn.... Somebody bored? Oh well, lets have a go at the faerie pictures. Yawn.... As for the following comment by SamTherapy, the inanity of it staggers the mind:- "In my country, the general definition is "Indecent; likely to deprave or corrupt". Pictures of naked children usually fall into that category." May I suggest you think about what you wrote? If pictures of naked children usually fall in to the catagory of things which are "likely to deprave or corrupt.", then what will actual real live naked children do to us? Aggghhh? In fact, virtually the whole of humanity must be depraved and corrupt because they see or have seen their children or siblings or friends naked. No wonder that certain societies are so repressed, when there is such totally wooly thinking going on. Please SamTherapy...tell me that you have no influence on any decision making process which affects anyone but yourself.... please???

Is it just me or is there a pattern of naked chicks staring at the moon from behind? 2 moons in one package. Anyways I think a lot of people are more into getting views than anything else...

lol@turtle

What's up with naked chicks just staring out into space in default position riding on the P4 horse or people who post images 24hrs a day non-stop?

Well, I don't know. When you compare Nekked Vicki with other examples of what people call art (think... Turner Prize, think... David Hockney, think... Pollock...) I know which I'd rather look at. But at the same time I really would like to know how these guys get away with it. I mean, if I shat in a jug and stuck it in a display cabinet nobody would offer me 1,700 for it. Instead, I'd be arrested. Where's the fairness in that? Hmm? Anyone?

And I think Rendo entries should be restricted to one per person per year. See how many temples you'd get then.

Stormrage said ... **Who creates fantastic images? Well mine are mostly pinups but then I don't show the work I have done for pay. ** Same here, and I create MY art for myself. And I like naked women :) I don't give a crap if they are in a temple, in a bed, standing in a room with a whip. I like em. I'm one of those single guys (except I'm a girl) who can't get a date so creates Poser nudes snicker My commercial work is completely different. I've only done one single nude for money. And it wasn't in a temple or with a sword. Most of the stuff I get paid for is humorous, or scene work.

Well I should just keep my nose out of here. I am not wanting to be flamed. I have not done any Nudes, a few of my images they do not have clothes on but you can not see anything, there is a plant in the way or something. And I do tons of Faerie and Elf art work. So I am sorry that did offend me. Go look if you like at my gallery there are a few that show some skin but nothing that needs the budity tag other then some of the promo images I did to show off so characters and textures I helped make. But they are not in Poser gallery they are in the Product showcase gallery. Other then that I do Not do nudes. But you will find plenty of Elfs and Faereies in my galleries. I do not love to look at nudes, that I will admit but there are some nude art works out there that are wonderfuly done. To each their own. But do not lump faeries and elfs all in the same as nudes. Thanks. Backs off the soap box

Um, Hockney and Pollock aren't valid artists? Ay, ay, ay. I won't argue, we're all entitled to our opinions, but to voice my own, I think they're both artists of remarkable accomplishment and influence. I just saw a production of "Giulio Cesare" at the San Francisco Opera with sets by Hockney ... I wish there were Poser versions of those magnificently whimsical sets for nekkid Vicky! ;-) Pollock? OK, but are you familiar with his earlier work? Some truly striking stuff, if you like painting and its history. Sorry to veer OT but I cringe every time I see someone say things like "Warhol was an idiot" or "Legume doesn't make art, he makes controversy" or "Philip Glass doesn't make real music" or "Jack Kerouac's writing isn't writing, it's typewriting." No offense to tuttle or anyone else intended, I'd just rather discuss the merits of various creative endeavors than see them dismissed. Hm, Turner prize ... Damien Hirst? Heh heh ... good one for debate. He did some funny "spin art" with David Bowie, ahem. Maybe we can agree, there. Oops, veered way off topic ... I better take my clothes off and get back on board ... where'd I put that sword?

No offense taken xoconostle. I'm very traditional with my artistic tastes is all. If I say an artist is naff, I'm just stating it from a personal perspective, not telling anyone else what to think. I've had people say I'm a bit of a philistine in my views, but I just say it as I see it. For illustration (pun intended), Shakespeare is generally accepted the best writer that ever lived, but speaking personally, I'd rather stuff wasps up my arse whilst licking piss off a thistle than read ten words of one of his plays. See, it's just what flicks my bean, nothing more. I have no artistic pretention ;) Hmmm, what a gross paragraph that was. My apologies. I guess I never really got over going to the same school as that popular pop-art pappa David Hockney.

Pollack may have been good, but I cannot condone cans of paint hurled at a canvas as "real art". An accident, an act of natural law, just art, okay, but "real art", no. See, there's the difference. Human art is an act against nature, the construction of something from disorder or away from basic regularity (pigments, base, brushes, canvas, wood frame, marble stone, clay, whatever the mediums and tools) and forcing a sentient decision upon it that makes a statement or aesthetic by the use of experiential skill. One cannot precisely (or even grossly) control the trajectory of flying paint and whatever control there is isn't enough to be considered 'talent' (barring those who use an airbrush and possibly spray paint since there is control of a tool and skill involved). If I took a large chunk of marble and dropped it from 50 ft up, then took a piece and said, "This is Art!", would you agree with that assessment? I certainly wouldn't. There is no precision, skill, direction, and very little applied consciousness to the execution of the final product. Now, if, before hoisting it up to be smashed, I had used my experience (and possibly technology) to examine the marble and then produced carefully selected cracks and breaks so that when it landed, it resulted in (nearly) the form to which I was aiming, that would be "real art" (as well as skill worthy of global fame! :) Otherwise, it is, as I stated, an act of natural law with a little human intervention. Although there is a minute amount of conscious effort (such as which direction should the paint be generally directed), it's not enough to help it rise above the murkiness to the level of "real art." Rant over ;) Kuroyume

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

-- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone

Thanks for the flames, Isaac. I was merely stating the legal definition of "obscene" in the UK, I did not say I agreed with it, did I? My point is, there is no accurate description of obscene, and any sufficiently pissed off public figure can (and often does) use that very inaccuracy to his or her advantage. It's a pyrrhic victory to be "right" but branded a pornographer, particularly a child pornographer, yes? For the record, I dislike faery pictures because they bore the tits off me. Now, would you like to reconsider what you wrote?

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

You guys are really hung up on technique and technical proficiency; like the software isn't doing most of that for you (art for people who can't draw, right?). It seems kind of arrogant to me--all you have to do is figure out the software and you're suddenly making "art." That's not art--it's barely even craft. Isn't there a conceptual aspect here that's being ignored? Is art just decoration? Something that looks nice hanging over the sofa? I have a story I like to tell in moments like these (which we seem to have here every few months): once I was at the Walker museum in Minneapolis, looking at a bunch of big, gorgeous Rothkos--door-sized canvases with rich bands of color. This guy walks up, pushing a kid in a stroller. "Sheesh," he says. "You or I coulda done that." "Maybe," I said. But what I WISH I'd said was, "maybe, DUMBASS, but it didn't occur to us, and wouldn't occur to us in a million years, to make images like these, to think about space and color and form in this way, you ignorant fuck, and that's why this guy's work is hanging in this museum and you're just some pinhead pushing a stroller."

besides the fact that people (organics) are hard to draw by hand and that Poser(high res characters) gives ppl the chance to use them "as they see fit" and that clothing is still very hard to use. and that many, if not most of the props available, in both the market place and free stuff are fantasy based. it's not a brain teaser to figure out why so many Vickys in temples, prisons ect. exist. when I post a pinup I get hundreds upon hundreds of viewings when i post non-nudes I get 10's upon 10's of hits. If you want more non-nudes leave comments, show your friends and make some your selfs. the artist shouldn't have to ask you to vote it into the hot 20. just do it.

Well Sam, let me quote what you said again. "Mosca - define "obscene". In my country, the general definition is "Indecent; likely to deprave or corrupt". Pictures of naked children usually fall into that category." The latter part looks like your opinion to me. I don't know of many countries where pictures of naked children are "usually" considered as obscene or indecent by the legal system. Otherwise almost every house in the country could be raided for the pics in the famly album. Even UK law makers are not that stupid, quite. As to public figures stiring the mud to their own purposes, yes, I'm sure that they do. Just as you tried doing in your post. So, please, do try to keep your "legal" statements accurate and separate from personal opinion. :)

"...and that clothing is still very hard to use." Not for me. I'm wearing several clothing items as I write this. No, but seriously--clothing hard to use? For who?

trying to figure out if Mosca's last statement was classifying me as an artist or software user.. People who buy my works would say artist. People watching me use poser would say software user. Depends on what you get out of it

No, but seriously--clothing hard to use? For who? Playboy bunnies dont quite have the concept down yet...and I for one, am glad they haven't :P

Isaac, yes, there is a difference between innocent family album pics - but not always. There have been several high profile cases in this country in recent years where some unfortunate has been dragged through the legal system and the popular press for taking "inappropriate" pictures of their own children. Under the current climate of paedophile hysteria in the UK any and all pictures of children or child like creatures are viewed with suspicion. And yes, UK law makers are that stupid. Now, I'll ask politely that you refrain from accusing me of trying to stir the mud. As for the matter of my opinion, I'll state it again, since you didn't seem to get it - I don't like faery pics because I find 'em boring, I don't give a damn if it's represented by a child figure or an adult, to me it's a twee image of some "sweet" creature with wings. Turtle's pic above is the best take on the genre, and I'd prefer more of those.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

It's not that clothing is hard to use (except for me in the cloth room of Poser 5) but it is hard to find the right clothing. Try finding a modern skirt for Vicky that is longer than two inches. They are there but not very many. Try finding a blouse that isn't low cut. There are normal looking clothes, but not all that many compared to the endless scanty armor outfits. And poor Mike, what a bore he is. He looks better naked than he does in the clunky jackets that he is often stuck with. And do I want to have to paint all the clothes on in post work? If I had that much ability, I'd be trying to make money as an artist myself.

Storm-- Art is about what you say, and how you say it. I think lots of folks here have the "how" part down, at least within the narrow confines of the prevailing semi-realist, comic-book-cover aesthetic; it's the "what" that we seem to have trouble with sometimes--all those look-alike images flooding the galleries. There's also a disturbing tendency in the forums for people to reject any art that's happened since about 1880 because it's weird or non-representational or difficult, which means that we're doomed to spend eternity paging through hundreds and hundreds of nearly identical, pre-imagined Vic-a-likes in the galleries. My personal wish for R'osity is that we all try to think about the "what" part at least as much as we think about the "how" part--but the "how" is ultimately easier and more like instant gratification (push the button and "art" comes out!), so I'm not holding my breath.

i don't know Mosca.. Artists have always painted the past the present the future or what they want for any of that. their dreams Most work from what they know.. That's the world around them.. and lets face it todays world is a cookie cutter type thing. Unfortunantly. I try to portray the differences even in my pinups. I was actually bowled over when someone said one of my pieces regarding a punk hairdo woman was beautiful to him because she was NOT the normal barbie doll. I like to see the weirdness the strangeness. the difference in today's world. Sure I do fantasy but most of my work is what I see today.

ohh.. my point S my point is that we emmulate what we like.. what is popular. To many here on rosity naked vicky in a temple gets comments. because now it's a running joke. People scream that the pink? or was it purple pony got the hot 20 or whatever because of nefarious reasons. The true artists here don't care about the hot 20. The ratings. True artists don't care what you say about their art True artists don't worry what is said they worry only about their next piece. That's what I do.. If You don't like my art fine.. that's your choice.. but don't call most of us not artists because we use a piece of software. Poser has opened up my creativity where before it was held under by my lack of drawing ability. I take time with my work. I refine my skills and talents. I create because I want to. And I create what I want to. Most of us do.

My opinion is that there is perhaps too much "technique" and too little "story". I don't like to "put down" too easily the pictures that are posted. It's true that there are many beginners or inexperienced, but I think that there are also many talented image creators that post here at Renderosity. The problem is that apparently, many good image creators, if they have 2 hours for an image, are likely to spend 110 minutes on technical or aesthetical challenges (the best lighting, the most luscious environment, and so on), and maybe only 10 minutes on thinking about the story that's implied in the picture, and how the elements of the image can add to that story, and not only to the visual appeal. In other words: even naked Vickys in temples with swords can be ok, if you can see that they are there for a reason, and this reason is described in the picture in order for it to make the story of the picture interesting. I don't have much free time for creating my images, and probably neither do i have the technical skills that some of the great Poser image creators have, but when I make a picture I try to make either a story, or a symbolic content, emerge from the picture and it's elements. Sometimes I succeed in that, many times I don't, but that's another story. :-)

Nekid Vickie with a sword in a temple...Sorry...heh. ~EA

"...and you're just some pinhead pushing a stroller"

Careful, my strollers always contained my best work. :)

...... Kendra

OK...the temple is the small indentation on the sides of your head, aft of your eyes. It's not funny, if you have to explain it, blah, ah well :)

Ok. She's naked and no temple....she's not Vicky and more horse faced than even Judy. But I hope you like her..... Happy Halloween!!!!!

"But I want everyone to love me! If they reject my art, they reject me. I am not loved!"

"The reason for this is of course that people tend to need affirmation, so those who have the strongest desire toward this will more often than not post the kinds of images that they have learned most folks want to see."

Okay, which of those two lines got your attention best? The emotional outcry that by passed the thought process or the more long-winded (need I say boring) clinical explanation of why we behave as we do (er some of us). [More boring intellectual stuff to follow, since I tend to be the boring intellectual type and not really given to emotional outcry, so be (yawn) forewarned of what follows. :O) ]

Art, music, etc., is no different. It tends to work on the emotion and less on the intellect. Not a hard and fast, but as a general rule we respond to things around us, form likes and dislikes base on emotional connection rather than an intellectual one.

So does it really surprise anyone that sex sells? Or that naked vicki in the temple is popular? Or that folks tend to gravitate toward the quick fix, by-pass the mental process, and go straight to instant gratification?

Art, like people, exists on many levels. Whether it be
"Fluff", "Commercial", or "Art Gallery" quality that we are going for, we as artist seek to connect with our audience based upon like and dislike, and momentary state of mood. Ours and theirs. If it were not so, we would not post our art for others to see. We share our art, we want others to appreciate the effort we make. But the length to which we will go to gain that approval differs, just as does artist talent. I do not blame folks who have learned to cater to their fans, nor fans for liking the art they like, or even naked vicki in the temple (which I have never done, and may probably never do).

I will keep doing the kind of art I do because that is what I am about, and I hope that there are a few who enjoy it. It would be nice if one day I happened to do something that was totally awesome, blew everyone away, and got me noticed in the Hot 20 or landed me lots of hits and glowing praise. But, whether it happens or not, I challenge myself to do the best I can do, and I try not to take it all so serious that I lose sight of what really matters. Taking pride in what I do and being able to share that joy with others. To me, this is what makes the gallery worthwhile. So, if only one person find enjoyment in something I have done, than the effort was not in vain.

So, keep posting those naked vickies in the temple. I will keep skipping over them, and scanning the Gallery for the kind of art I like to see. Art that looks like the person who did it cared enough to take the time to put some heart and soul into what it was they did (and some naked vickies in the temple fall into this category). This is the kind of art I like, it doesn't have to be great but it does have to show signs that the artist who made it cared enough to do as good a job on it as they could.

Well, just my two-cents for whatever that is worth.

I'm always happy when someone likes an image I've done or finds it inspirational, or moving, or whatever, I'd venture to say that most of the artists that post are ... but it really wouldn't matter to me whether I got any comments or not ... I'm still gonna' post what I want to, whether anyone likes it or looks at it. I've done nudes, I think the human form is very beautiful and quite artistic ... I've done a few elves, a few faeries ... it's what I wanted to do at the time, and I'll probably do more if the mood strikes me. If someone is not interested in looking at it, so be it. But one thing I wish I saw more of is feedback. If you're tired of all the bland nude Vickies, then give some feedback for gosh sakes. That's actually why I ever started posting images here in the first place when I joined, but never really got much at all, so I quit posting at all for a long time. Everyone is at a different level of their abilities and artistic expression ... but no matter what level someone is on, shouldn't be hampered by what someone else wants to see or not see.

Turtle, that image is so funny! Some of the images I've seen have nudity for no reason at all. It does nothing for the image. Some of these fantasy outfits for Vicky I just won't buy. Like armour suits for Vicky. Get real! When would a woman have worn something like this? And DAZ seems to have overkilled the fairy wing thing lately. Who in the hell buys this stuff? I'd prefer a nice set of angel wings if I wanted wings.

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

"It's a pyrrhic victory to be "right" but branded a pornographer, particularly a child pornographer, yes? " This may apply to you, or it may not. But for anyone calling every nude PT/PS render 'kiddie porn', I got news for you... You are more than welcome to view my gallery... I use the PT Milgirl mesh a LOT (I find it more flexible and useable than Vicky), and quite a few of the images are nude. Now, if you can point out any actual pornography with aqny PT/PS milgirl mesh (as in, genital contact, masturbation, sexual acts with anything/anyone, or sexually suggestive poses), I'll be more than happy to publicly eat a plate full of horse manure at the time and place of your choosing. Fair enough? IMO, the only ones doing the aforementioned branding are the ignorant, and those who have or are harboring (IM-not-so-HO) repressed paedophilic fantasies of their own. I suspect the latter can't stand the sight of a nude PT/PS mesh, lest they get a hard-on or some noise. (and no, I'm not picking on SamTherapy here, but I did want to address the point itself.) Now, since I have none of these chains upon my soul, and since I find nothing but beauty and joy in creating and viewing an innocent image of fae folk or any other folk no matter what their age, old or young (be they nude or not), I have no problems with posting nudes in either Vicky or PT/PS Milgirl meshes. If at some time I feel like working on the geriatric end of Vicky's lifespan, I'll prolly post nudes of that too (which gives me an idear... stay tuned :) .) So - is it art? I honestly couldn't give a flying fuck if it is or not; I enjoy making 'em, and if folks enjoy seeing 'em, then so much the better. Art isn't a definition, which is why it defies all attempts at reducing it to one (or two, or three...) As for 'nekkid vickies' in general, I could care not either way. I don't count clothes, I look at execution and technique. Early on, I did the 'stare into space' thing, but as time progressed, I got (I hope) better. Everyone else will as well, more or less. HTH a little, /P

Hmmm...pretty in depth arguments considering we're just talking about computer pictures of naked women. I'm afraid I'm in the "is it really worth all this discussion?" category...but I like Turtle's Fairy! I'm going to have to make me a few of those!

"You may be tried of naked Vicky but my only bitch is Naked Micheal, Gee whats pretty or creative about his thing showing." So, what's so pretty about Vicky showing her thing and tits! At least Mike has SOMETHING to show, all Vicky has is a fur ball. At least Mike is anotomically correct in that area. Maybe by the time vicky 16 comes out (and still not correct)people will finally get sick of looking at her, fur ball and all. Now, you scroll through the gallery and you see many naked Vicky pics with 100's of hits and a piece of really good work with very few hits, makes you wonder what type of clientele Rosity is attracting. Just how many of those 1000, 1500, 2000 people on Rosity at any given time are here for the content and help or just here to view naked pics.

Dang, Peng. I actually don't disagree with you. Somebody feel my forehead...

did ya'll see Legume's temple/sword/gorilla image? that said it all.

Guess I live in the wrong time. Should have been born in Greece or something where both the male and the female form were found beautiful. Yes, there is plenty of nude Vickie's and it's damned hard to get cool clothing for Michael or P4 Dork....but I'm female, and I like Men...clothed or unclothed. The male form is just as beautiful. I render what I like and display if I feel like it. I admit that most of my renders are texture tests that are never put up in the gallery because that's what caught my interest in Poser--making textures...snicker...and I learned to make an art out of rendering against a black background for those tests (it'a all in the lights). Myself, I wouldn't mine more naked Michael pics, or Michael anything pics...but Fems still rule the Galleries. And as a female, I should feel good that we dominate so much in the gallery...*shrug* but I do like to look a pretty guys... Liz Pope Dreamspinner

Missed this one: "Hiram: Here! Here! Most of the art of the Renaissance - paintings, frescos, mosaics, murals, architecture, music - was commisioned by some wealthy businessman, royalty, or the church. JS Bach, DaVinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael, Donatello (and other Ninja Turtles!) were all handsomely paid for their work." Mozart died young and destitute; Rembrandt was deep in debt when he died; Van Gogh was driven mad by rejection and sold only one painting in his lifetime (to his brother); Emily Dickinson lived in an attic and wrote hundreds of poems, none of which were published before her death. Aesthetic success does not equal monetary success; just as often, the opposite is true.

And I could go on and on about the schlockmeisters who've made sacks of money peoducing utter crap--Rockwell comes to mind, and that creepy what's his name, the so-called "painter of light," and that South American guy who paints those hideous round people. Yech.

So where do you fit in?

cherokee69= "You may be tried of naked Vicky but my only bitch is Naked Micheal, Gee whats pretty or creative about his thing showing." Excuse Me, but I'm an old woman and only had Sisters. I have never got over calling it (male organ) THE THING! :O). As for all"" Vicky has is a fur ball.""" Well we called that "IT"! A Thing and a It. Our Parents protected us girls, and using the proper words was not done way back then. Anyway a lot of this is just bullshit and we all know it. But it has been fun. Thanks to all who liked Punky Fairy.

Love is Grandchildren.

I'd like to say thanks to Dreamspinner, all my female friends enjoy male nudes, glad to find a woman here that likes to work with and look at them as well.

"So where do you fit in?" Smoky bars, big cars and tattooed, tequila-drinkin' women.

Yeah Dreamspinner, that's cool. Most, if not all of the female friends I have would rather look and play with male nudes instead of female nudes, well, there are a few lesbian friends that prefer females.

First- That picture of the little kid with a cigarette and her middle finger out needs a good spanking from her parents. Oh, wait, that's a "fairy". That's right, I forgot- if the child has wings, then it's a fairy. As for "telling a story", that foreword by Steve Cooper (in the Poser 5 manual) had me on the floor in stiches. Imagine- poeple using Poser to "tell a story"! Priceless! Take a look at the galleries here and what you do see? Naked women (and "fairies") staring blankly into space for no other reason than to stand there blankly. Some "artists" (and I use the term very loosely) don't even bother with a background- "Here's a nude lady [because I have't figured out how to use the 'Conform' menu item] in a default pose with a default textures with the default hair. Look at me, I'm at artist!" And don't get me started on the "item of the day" pictures! It seems that when someone releases the next "item of the day", everyone and his brother has to make an image of it. For one example (of many): the DAZ gorilla. After it came out, picture after picture after picture used it! Geez, enough already! Use some imagination! But, there's the key word- "imagination". Not many people seem to have it. They have the tool to make incredible pictures, but we get naked women in a fantasy setting with a dragon. Ho-hum. Why do we even bother?

BRAVO JohnRender...you hit the nail on the head or is that Vicky on the head.

.

Whilst searching JohnRender's Gallery, I find: " Sorry, but no files match your search " So - since you've appointed yourself the Grand Poohbah of All That Is Art, please, show me what you think to be art. The World awaits your munificent artistic judgement... [/sarcasm] I don't mean to pick on you in particular, but so what if 10,000 people decide to post renders that show R'osity/DAZ's latest wonder-widget? I think it's kinda fun sometimes to see how a zillion folks each interpret what they think a given item should do in a render. Also, if you compare the average generic render of today with the average generic render of 5 years back, what do you see? The hum-drum renders in the galleries today, even at its worst, is still good enough that if transported back in time, Digital Blasphemy would've paid in blood to post copies of 'em. Art isn't a static thing - each aspect evolves in its own venue, after all. (Incidentally, how do YOU know that's a child in Turtle's render? Please, point it out, step by step.) Thx, /P

I guess you're having a slight imagination dry spell then JohnRender because I don't see any images in your gallery. ;) If everyone would try doing less complaining and more creating, this would be a much more friendly and interesting place. Whining about how the galleries never change won't help change them. Either do different or do better. SnowS

my DeviantArt page: http://snowsultan.deviantart.com/

I do not speak as a representative of DAZ, I speak only as a long-time member here. Be nice (and quit lying about DAZ) and I'll be nice too.

What I have learned thus far from this thread.

Don't say bad things about any art posted to the gallery, no matter what you think of it or how it might compare to anything else that might be considered art.
Naked women get more hits than naked men, and in general naked anything gets more hits than not.
Fairies can have attitude.
There are some great artist here that only seem to get discovered when someone mentions them and post a link to their Gallery.
Everyone here is a great artist. Even the ones who do not have anything posted in the Galleries.
Artist who get lots of hits are resented by artist who get few hits, because apparantly their popularity is not based on talent but on cliques, and naked vickies, and other factors that discriminate against the rest of us.
Popularity or number of hits seems to be the indicator by which art work is measure, judged, or given approval. So, if you do not get lots of hits, your art work is lacking somehow. Which some have pointed out should not be the case, and others have strongly indicated that it is not relevent.
The Hot 20, Dr. Legume, some Artists here, probably me, and maybe you - piss some folks off.

Did I miss anything?

Shadownet, "6) Artist who get lots of hits are resented by artist who get few hits, because apparantly their popularity is not based on talent but on cliques, and naked vickies, and other factors that discriminate against the rest of us." EXACTLY correct altho many of people will disagree with you one this but it's absolutely true. Cliques are like that as we all know, not admitting truth when everone else around them sees it.

Just so those who get a casual glance of the bookmark poster's name above and think it is me, it is not. I am Mehndi, not Meandhi.

:)

You guys are just soooo f*kkin' funny! I just love this place! Some of you people are just too serious.;-) I have quite a few renders posted. (take a look I love gettin' the hits..LOL) Some of them are just nudes. I'd like ta think they're art. Being a "paid" graphic artist doesn't mean I get to do what I want AND get paid for it. Here is where I post the stuff that I like to do. I like the attention, the occasional comment, after all what is art without an audience... even if it's only yourself. Doing a nekkid Vic in a temple with a sword is simple, that's why it gets done. Hopefully the people doing them will learn and produce more interesting pics. If it upsets you so much put a petition together to add "Nudes" and "faeries" to the Galleries.

Are there still people who look at the top 20? Yeah, there's cliques in the galleries. There's cliques in the forum-- you and I are participating in one right now-- the let's bash nude Vicki-- oh yeah, and nude Mike while we're at it-- clique. So boring. If you don't like a picture in the forum, you have the option, if given by the artist, to say so. More than that, you have the larger option to make a better one. Three guesses what I think is the best critique of art. One more comment-- the slamming a picture because it has a naked woman in it and no reason for her to be naked-- that's called a nude in art terms, it's a genre, it may be executed in a shitty style, but it's a legitimate genre. And the only one, barring Bison picts, that's been around literally forever. Nudes will outlast us, that's a given. If they don't, well, a world that hates the human body that much won't be worth living in anyway. Emily

<< naked anything gets more hits than not>> Hmm..., my most viewed image has no nudity at all, whereas my most recent nude has stranded at some 170 views or thereabout. I guess I must be doing something terribly wrong here ;-)

http://www.roobol.be

My biggest hits are for graphics making fun of Poser 5. No nudes. One temple. Sometimes the theme is more important than the presentation.

Heya roobol, obviously you are the exception to the rule on that one! I mean, everyone else says it is so, so it must be so, right? That's why I summed it up the way I did. :O) Oh, but you sort of qualify for #4 since I was not familiar with your art work prior to this post. Very nice. I have added you to my favorite artist list. I was of course being facetious with my list. So long as there are artist, there will be artistic temperament. I am ROFLMA at just how hot and bothered some folks can get over someone stating what is to them a negative comment about art in general. :O) This started with a simple Title and comment: "I'm getting a bit tired of the Poser galleries...Like 90-95% of the pictures are of just a naked woman with maybe perhaps a nice background these days. But it's worth is when you see those truly original pictures." I say shame on Whatthe for daring to have a personal opinion. So, now, 116 posts later... (hey that's more hits than some of my pictures get, lol!) Nobody else can see the humor in this? I guess I am just plain sick.

" And the only one, barring Bison picts, that's been around literally forever." How about... NUDE BISON! Woo-Hoo! I think women and animal paintings have been around roughly the same amount of time, 'cept back then, the female representations made Voluptuous Vicky look like a flat-chested schoolgirl. Some female-shaped fertility fetishes had more than two breasts as well... Anyone for a 1,000-breasted Ceres waving a sword in a greek temple? (ugh... where would she ever find a bra that fits?) /P

Yeah but Snowsultan would have to do it since it would definitely be a picture worth 1001 words. :O)

Heya shadownet, thanks for the compliment; my most recent nude is now at 173 viewings (very large grin). But to be honest, I only use poser for draft versions; for the final render I prefer real models. You know, the ones that actually talk back when you say something to them ;-)

http://www.roobol.be

Well, if I could get real models I wouldn't be using Poser as much either. Great work, just the same. Oh, you can probably bump up the number of hits you get if you move it to the Poser Gallery. From what I'm told, people there go in for that sort of thing. :O)

"Well, if I could get real models I wouldn't be using Poser as much either." Hell, if I could get real girls I wouldn't be using Poser at all. Just kidding. I can get dates. Really.

I think the term "Artist" gets thrown around Way Too much nowadays. We should start using more specific terms:

I would have to say that rendering pictures in Poser does NOT make you an Artist. For example, anyone can use a camera, but does that make you a "Photographer"? Not really. If my 5 year old cousin uses her "Crayola Crayon" picture creater to create pictures on the computer does that mean She's an Artist? No.

For those of you who create soley in Poser, I would actually consider you more of a "3D Compositor" or "3D Designer" (One who creates a composition or a design). You are basically composing a picture from existing objects. But, if you created the figures yourself, then I'd consider you a "3D Modeler".

If you use Poser to create a base for you to bring into a painting program where you actually use some painting skill to "Enhance" the final artwork, then your more of a "Postwork Designer" or maybe even a "Technical Designer".

There has got to be a better/more specific way to describe what you are doing because there is no way you can lump all artists in one group. I mean, come on, can you really compare the work of Van Gogh to someone who clicks a "Character" button, clicks a "Pose" button, clicks a "Light" button, then clicks the "Render" button?????

Yes, you can. But is it a fair comparison? That is the real question. If Van Gogh had Poser would he have used it? Is Poser an artistic tool or a cheat for wannabees?

Oh boy, so according to DarthMarklar, I'm a 3D Compositor with Postwork and Technical Design skills! Maybe I can tack Photoshop Clone Technician, Tablet and Stylus Operator and Multiple Masking Layer Consultant on there too. :) I can't say that I agree with specific titles depending on your artistic skill. A kid who's practicing boxing after school and Lennox Lewis aren't in the same league either, but they're both boxers. Yeesh, why does everyone have to make things so difficult? "Yeah but Snowsultan would have to do it since it would definitely be a picture worth 1001 words. :O)" Oh no, I'm not touching that one. ;) SnowS

my DeviantArt page: http://snowsultan.deviantart.com/

I do not speak as a representative of DAZ, I speak only as a long-time member here. Be nice (and quit lying about DAZ) and I'll be nice too.

"There has got to be a better/more specific way to describe what you are doing" Having fun with a CG art program and sharing the results. Is that specific enough? /P

*Maybe I can tack Photoshop Clone Technician, Tablet and Stylus Operator and Multiple Masking Layer Consultant on there too. :)*

An artist doesn't need to list thier tools (a painter doesn't need to say "Brush Specialist"). How about if I downloaded images from the web and resaved them as NEW jpegs in Photoshop? Does that make me an artist??? I mean, I used Photoshop.

I think the issue I was trying to make was, there's got to be a difference between a "person creating art on a computer" and an "artist working on a computer".

A kid who's practicing boxing after school and Lennox Lewis aren't in the same league either, but they're both boxers

This may be true, but if I own a pair of boxing gloves, does that make me a boxer? Those are the people I'm talking about, the ones who claim to be something because they own the tools. How many of you know someone who thinks they're a computer whiz, but they can barely even turn on thier system?

Having fun with a CG art program and sharing the results.

I've attached a pencil drawing I did over 10 years ago...I think they look pretty good considering I didn't have a computer.

"An artist doesn't need to list thier tools " I know, I was being sarcastic. :) "This may be true, but if I own a pair of boxing gloves, does that make me a boxer?" No, but if you actually used them to box, whether professionally or for exercise, I'd call you a boxer. That's what I meant, both Rembrandt and the guy who makes a nude Vicky in a temple with preset everything are artists; one's just more technically skilled than the other. And yes, your image is very nice. :) SnowS

my DeviantArt page: http://snowsultan.deviantart.com/

I do not speak as a representative of DAZ, I speak only as a long-time member here. Be nice (and quit lying about DAZ) and I'll be nice too.

I agree, nice pic. Don't necessary carry the "artist" argument as far as you, but I do think that we all tend to make a distinction in our own mines as to what is art and who is an artist in our opinion. To go more Zen on you, I look at it like this: "there is a way to all things. When one learns the way they are no longer merely a practitioner of an artform but have become an artist."

Okay, where's the spell check. Minds not mines. Not unless you are hunting gold or silver and trying to decide which ore to go with. errrrr. blasted cursed no spell checking thing mumble mumble....

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=271239

No naked humans, no faries, no animals, not popular (I know I'm not around here), not in a clique = poor reception in the gallery. People can say what they want but numbers don't lie.

This is just so stupid... artists are people who create... it doesnt matter what medium you use, may it be oil paints, water colors,a pencil,a crayon, or a computer, or like my husband who makes the programs some of us use .....I've painted walls, drawn with a pencil(great for shadows),done stencils(kinda cheating)...I like fantasy best cuz anything goes, if you havent seen it, it can happen in a picture... the point is___ if you want to limit the posts, or stop the fairy posts or stop any posts......you will never see perhaps some post that may show you how,why,what, or just plain make you laugh, or cringe even P.S. also perhaps if you wish to view the net in its full glory.....get DSL or Cable sorry if your country doesnt have that P.S.S. here's some of my favorite artists right now try a search for hobbit, or turtle(who I dont think has ever done a nekid little fairy) (so her post was very apt, wasn't your 12 year old daughter giving the finger, was no one REAL), duh was art, like it or not ;)

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: I'm getting a bit tired of the Poser galleries..