You know what? Renderosity ticks me off a lot with their gallery restrictions. If I render an image with a product from DAZ or anywhere else… I am not, and neither are you, allowed to link to that item, be it free or commercial, from your gallery image text!
What we need is a real gallery that’s going to let people exchange real information without stupid restrictions like that! Seriously! (that is, without any ridiculous restrictions on nudity)...
I’d like to dump R.com, but I don’t see a realistic alternative.
Renderosity’s gallery is terrible. The file size restrictions are also a joke. Personally, I use deviantArt. I know there are folks that don’t like dA either, but it’s worlds better than Renderosity’s gallery in features and in acceptable use policy.
On DA you have NO size restrictions, can upload as often as you wish, link to whatever site you need to and best of all, you get exposure to far more then just our little corner of the net. Not to mention you can add freebies to your gallery and not wait to have them approved.
The notification system for viewing new works from people you ‘watch’ on dA is also leages better than the crap E-mail notifications from Renderosity’s gallery. It makes it SOOOO much easier to check everything new from folks whose work you like.
I refuse to post at rendo. Nothing really against DA… just don’t like the site, it feels creepy and weird to me. Ever since AZ went down I really have not had an online gallery presence
DA’s settup is a little strange to me as well… but I’ll learn, I guess. And though it really hasn’t occurred to me, I’ve seen quite a few other communities that use DA… so I think it’s the only realistic alternative to posting at R.com… as soon as I get all my stuff up on DA, I’ll change the links on my signature…
I was surprised by the puritanical attitude displayed at renderosity.
I was also frustrated by the fact that only some of the items used were cited, as I was sometimes inspired and wanted to know what the person used. I give great credit to individuals there for answering my site mails and helping me with issues, questions, and general learning.
One thing I at least think I notice about renderosity is that the images are sometimes, or often, lacking in “sharpness, fidelity” for want of a better way to put it. I have looked at the same image at both renderosity and Deviant and I find that the Deviant art image has more presence… am I imagining that or is it something others notice….. I don’t know the reason for this.
I find “puritanical” an interesting choice of words since the most popular images and products are usually nude pinup based. As far as image quality, DA simply allows larger file sizes though presumably the non fullsize popups resize by default so there’s probably some accidental image stretching.
I was surprised by the puritanical attitude displayed at renderosity.
I was also frustrated by the fact that only some of the items used were cited, as I was sometimes inspired and wanted to know what the person used. I give great credit to individuals there for answering my site mails and helping me with issues, questions, and general learning.
One thing I at least think I notice about renderosity is that the images are sometimes, or often, lacking in “sharpness, fidelity” for want of a better way to put it. I have looked at the same image at both renderosity and Deviant and I find that the Deviant art image has more presence… am I imagining that or is it something others notice….. I don’t know the reason for this.
BTW Rendo is far from puritanical. THe only nude images they will not allow on the gallery is nude images of children and obvious porn, which I find quite acceptable. Also did you know that if you click on the image in the gallery it will take you to a larger image.
I think the choice of “puritanical” wasn’t related to nudity, but to Renderosity’s attitude towards anything non-Renderosity being mentioned/linked to from their gallery.
I find “puritanical” an interesting choice of words since the most popular images and products are usually nude pinup based. As far as image quality, DA simply allows larger file sizes though presumably the non fullsize popups resize by default so there’s probably some accidental image stretching.
You are hitting it on the head, I think.
The warnings about images of unclad or semi-clad pinups, together with the many products designed for this type of image.
Could the image quality be related to bandwith perhaps…
For myself, I want to simply see the image as close to what the artist or hobbyist intended, that’s all.
