Loading...
> >

Let's appreciate/discuss today's new releases - more ongoinger thread

1…3940424445…66

Comments

  • backgroundbackground Posts: 588
    edited August 2

    It was just an observation, I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

    Post edited by background on
  • BarubaryBarubary Posts: 1,230

    Well, looks like someone discovered the art of wlop.

  • jmucchiellojmucchiello Posts: 603

    WendyLuvsCatz said:

    that forest village looks wonderful

    just waiting to see if they sort out the pricing before I decide what to do, I want to encourage not discourage such products

    I'm curioius if the artist has other buildings with similar architecture in other assets for sale? 

  • ravenraven Posts: 20

    background said:

    It was just an observation, I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

     

     

    Let's be honest, nobody does! :)

  • richardandtracyrichardandtracy Posts: 7,095
    edited August 4
    Hmm. If they followed the applicable regulations at the time, they had to give a month's notice in writing. Maybe, in a largely illiterate society, that's why nobody expected the inquisition. Regards, Richard.
    Post edited by richardandtracy on
  • SilverGirlSilverGirl Posts: 2,804

    Feminine Laying Pose set... once again proving that I am not, apparently, feminine.

     

  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 10,297
    edited August 5

    SilverGirl said:

    Feminine Laying Pose set... once again proving that I am not, apparently, feminine.

     

    It could be a great opportunity to create a pose set, that you would like and accept.

     

    Post edited by Artini on
  • memcneil70memcneil70 Posts: 5,272

    Artini said:

    SilverGirl said:

    Feminine Laying Pose set... once again proving that I am not, apparently, feminine.

     

    It could be a great opportunity to create a pose set, that you would like and accept.

     

    After midnight when I was up with a 'charley horse' and 'zoomies' I saw your note @SilverGirl and didn't want to pursue what pose set had dropped. Now I have seen it. Totally with you. But what I saw is the objectification of women that I faced until the late 60s. Welcome to the new age. Generally I don't want to mention these sets or the outfits, much less buy them. @Artini, I realize that there are folks who do renders of a certain type that these poses will fit perfectly. Good for them. Zeddicus has been improving on doing normal womens' poses overall and I do buy those.

    I have put in my cart https://www.daz3d.com/urban-wasteland-for-urban-sprawl-3 and https://www.daz3d.com/gobo-quadlight-kit, as well as the DAZ+ freebies and a few other offerings from their side.

  • SilverGirlSilverGirl Posts: 2,804

    Artini said:

    SilverGirl said:

    Feminine Laying Pose set... once again proving that I am not, apparently, feminine.

     

    It could be a great opportunity to create a pose set, that you would like and accept.

     

    My biggest objection is the naming convention. I have as much issue with "masculine" poses that are all ragey and combative.

    I love a lot of that PA's other pose sets, with people doing normal things in normal ways. Because you don't need to be trying to entice someone into bed in order to be female. 

  • richardandtracyrichardandtracy Posts: 7,095

    Yeah. I got fed up with hip dislocating 'walking' poses, and started my own series of freebies (https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/513261/g8f-walking-everyday-doorway-poses-sets/p1). The ones available just didn't look 'normal', 'practical' or 'Pain-free in the long term' to me. 

    Regards,

    Richard

  • LeanaLeana Posts: 12,738

    background said:

    It was just an observation, I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

     

  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 10,297

    I just wonder what kind of feminine poses would look great and acceptable by most of the users.

    For me grimaces in expressions provided by certain artists is a big no, no.

     

  • MimicMollyMimicMolly Posts: 2,321
    Artini said:

    I just wonder what kind of feminine poses would look great and acceptable by most of the users.

    For me grimaces in expressions provided by certain artists is a big no, no.

     

    I think most do want the pinup poses. But "regular," more casual lying poses designed around the female and feminine-shaped figures are always great, because those can more easily be adjusted to masculine and male figures.
  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 10,297

    Ok, thanks for your thoughts.

     

  • joannajoanna Posts: 2,198

    Artini said:

    I just wonder what kind of feminine poses would look great and acceptable by most of the users.

    For me grimaces in expressions provided by certain artists is a big no, no.

    I think it's the other way round, and the problem is with the naming, not the poses themselves: that those poses aren't "feminine", especially in a more detailed definition by Dictionary.com "having qualities traditionally ascribed to women, such as sensitivity or gentleness" and even the broad one ("being or relating to to a woman or girl"). The more accurate naming would be something along the lines of "seductive," "titillating," "tempting," and so on, so using "feminine" to describe them creates the wrong impression of what the poses are and possibly leaves bad taste too for users who expected something else (i.e. poses not being "feminine" in either of the definition, but presenting "feminine" in a very narrow and somewhat inaccurate perspective).

    Again, there's nothing wrong with those poses, and I'm sure they're popular (even I would consider getting them to create some fun posters of my characters, probably including males too) and no one wants them gone or something. The way I see it, the "ick" is only in naming them "feminine."

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 40,035

    yeah feminine is usually modest in the traditional sense 

    those are raunchy poses

    and feminist poses would be an entirely different thing, more what my characters would be doing with finger poses not acceptable here cheeky

  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 10,297

    Thanks, @joanna and @WendyLuvsCatz

    I judge poses by the quality and the usefulness for me, not by theirs names.

     

  • tsroemitsroemi Posts: 3,460

    Artini said:

    Thanks, @joanna and @WendyLuvsCatz

    I judge poses by the quality and the usefulness for me, not by theirs names.

     

    Well, I take issue with both in the above mentioned cases devil 

  • joannajoanna Posts: 2,198
    edited August 5

    Artini said:

    Thanks, @joanna and @WendyLuvsCatz

    I judge poses by the quality and the usefulness for me, not by theirs names.

    Again, it's not about the quality. To give you an idea, it's the same problem when an otherwise stunning setting is called "Fantasy Castle" with a promo picture showing some stonework wall, but when you click on the product, it turnes out the "castle" has computers, blaster hangers, and holographic displays in it and very little actual fantasy or castleness. People who click on it, expect fantasy and a castle, not what looks like a spaceship interior, no matter how well made it is. To give you a real Daz example, some time ago users pointed out a hair product with word "afro" in its name as not actually being "afro"—and it had nothing to do with the quality of the product either. Same with those poses. When people see "feminine" they click expecting gentleness, softness, maybe cuteness (following the dictionary definition), and not what can be perceived as lewdness and objectifying females, so yes, they are disappointed, and rightly so, despite the quality of poses themselves. Nobody says (i.e. I haven't seen anyone make such claims) those poses are unrealistic, poorly done or address their quality at all [edited to add: now I see tsroemi did; but the point about majority not linking name and quality still stands]. From what I see they say is that these poses are not feminine, so the name of the product is misleading, and therefore frustrating. Just because you find the poses of good quality (I do to, and others probably too), doesn't mean they are not misnamed/mismarketed.

    Post edited by joanna on
  • SilverGirlSilverGirl Posts: 2,804

    joanna said:

    Artini said:

    Thanks, @joanna and @WendyLuvsCatz

    I judge poses by the quality and the usefulness for me, not by theirs names.

    Again, it's not about the quality. To give you an idea, it's the same problem when an otherwise stunning setting is called "Fantasy Castle" with a promo picture showing some stonework wall, but when you click on the product, it turnes out the "castle" has computers, blaster hangers, and holographic displays in it and very little actual fantasy or castleness. People who click on it, expect fantasy and a castle, not what looks like a spaceship interior, no matter how well made it is. To give you a real Daz example, some time ago users pointed out a hair product with word "afro" in its name as not actually being "afro"—and it had nothing to do with the quality of the product either. Same with those poses. When people see "feminine" they click expecting gentleness, softness, maybe cuteness (following the dictionary definition), and not what can be perceived as lewdness and objectifying females, so yes, they are disappointed, and rightly so, despite the quality of poses themselves. Nobody says (i.e. I haven't seen anyone make such claims) those poses are unrealistic, poorly done or address their quality at all [edited to add: now I see tsroemi did; but the point about majority not linking name and quality still stands]. From what I see they say is that these poses are not feminine, so the name of the product is misleading, and therefore frustrating. Just because you find the poses of good quality (I do to, and others probably too), doesn't mean they are not misnamed/mismarketed.

    ...with an extra layer of "can we just not use gender to describe ways of movement or facial expressions in the first place."  

    Words have power, and there are so many words one can use that are completely unambiguous, don't shoehorn gender preconceptions into it, and are and not likely to give anyone a case of the icks based on the name.

     

  • xyer0xyer0 Posts: 6,322

    TF Diorama is an amazing-looking freebie! Thanks Daz and Tooth Fairy.

  • SilverGirlSilverGirl Posts: 2,804

    xyer0 said:

    TF Diorama is an amazing-looking freebie! Thanks Daz and Tooth Fairy.

    Very detailed! Does anyone know if it's supposed to be from a specific show or movie? (Apologies for ignorance; although I love fantasy as a genre, my media consumption these days is mostly what my 7-year-old wants to watch.)

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 40,035

    is PBR skin pro something new? I am confused by todays sale title 

  • ElorElor Posts: 3,145

    WendyLuvsCatz said:

    is PBR skin pro something new? I am confused by todays sale title 

    It's included with Breast Utilities 2 for Genesis 9:

    https://www.daz3d.com/breast-utilities-2-for-genesis-9--pbrskin-pro

    Maybe you were thinking about PBRSkin Plus who was released two years ago:

    https://www.daz3d.com/pbr-skin-plus

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 40,035
    edited August 6

    Elor said:

    WendyLuvsCatz said:

    is PBR skin pro something new? I am confused by todays sale title 

    It's included with Breast Utilities 2 for Genesis 9:

    https://www.daz3d.com/breast-utilities-2-for-genesis-9--pbrskin-pro

    Maybe you were thinking about PBRSkin Plus who was released two years ago:

    https://www.daz3d.com/pbr-skin-plus

    I saw PBR skin Plus Googling but thought a new update to the PBR shader itself  

    I see reading the full product title not the truncated thumb where the sale title is from

    Post edited by WendyLuvsCatz on
  • maikdeckermaikdecker Posts: 3,037

    Wow, $ 60.- (base price) for a couple felt huts and bones? Anything hidden in that product that isn't visible in the promo pics, 'cause if not that price seems a bit steep even for DAZland

  • ArtiniArtini Posts: 10,297

    This one is more approachable https://www.daz3d.com/jurassic-badlands

     

  • GordigGordig Posts: 10,599

    maikdecker said:

    Wow, $ 60.- (base price) for a couple felt huts and bones? Anything hidden in that product that isn't visible in the promo pics, 'cause if not that price seems a bit steep even for DAZland

    I'm sorry to say that it also looks well below AM's normal standards of quality.

  • jmucchiellojmucchiello Posts: 603

    So what's the difference between PBRSkin PRO in https://www.daz3d.com/breast-utilities-2-for-genesis-9--pbrskin-pro

    And PBRSkin Plus in https://www.daz3d.com/pbr-skin-plus which I already own?

  • mdingmding Posts: 1,644

    Gordig said:

    maikdecker said:

    Wow, $ 60.- (base price) for a couple felt huts and bones? Anything hidden in that product that isn't visible in the promo pics, 'cause if not that price seems a bit steep even for DAZland

    I'm sorry to say that it also looks well below AM's normal standards of quality.

    Maybe the landscape is not an hdri but a giant mesh, but it is not listed as such in the description. Or it could be an error?

Sign In or Register to comment.