• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Poser/DAZ works and the TOS

Status
Not open for further replies.
True, but we belive the issue, and why everyone is so angry, is why is this even being considered? And it does not help that the front man has obvious chip on his shoulder for aid program. He blatently anounce it.

I think that is what has the dander flying.
 

DarkMeW

Active Member
whitedingo said:
So according to what your saying  and within your quote darkmew ,this would not be allowed and has no artistic merit its just a snap shot http://www.furaffinity.net/view/244472

Well W.D. if you had actually read my post, with out actively trying to twist it into something to get in a bunch about, you wouldn't even be asking that. Since I quite clearly laid out snap shots do not take in mind to any major extent any artistic principles, as apposed to photography with does take in mind, lighting, composition, color, etc. So since even in your description of your image you are commenting on the added thought you gave to lighting and the artistic aspects of the image, I have to assume from the tone that your response seems to be in, you think that you must defend the fact it's an adult image. Which doesn't relate to anything in my post, since saying 'application of artistic principles' does in no way say 'not porn.'

Perhaps, (like putting Not Work Safe in front of a link to an adult image in the forum that is PG-13) not automatically relating something that doesn't have any application of artistic principles and something that is for adult viewing, is something you can work on in the near future.

So the only thing you have left from what I actually said in my post is the question of original content. Which is something you'd prove, since it is always up to the artist (no matter what the content of the artwork) to justify his work in any matter that might require authentication. (frankly the image is far to dark to see if I can recognize the models used, so I'll give that part a pass.)
 

Little_Dragon

Incognito, Ergo Sum
* wanders into thread *

AethWolf said:
I know this is a horribly simplified way of saying it, but...

Why should the medium matter if the content is on topic for the site (anthropomorphic things) and the uploader either created it or has permission to upload it?

Because some members of the 3D community continue to believe it's the tools that are important, rather than the talent behind those tools ....
 
Firstly it is work safe you have to be a reg member with the adult thing turned on to view an adult image on fa .It was not the sexual content that I was bringing up but the fact that the models are stock and have not been made by me so by your rule it would not be allowed my point is why do you want to ban this,is it not worthy to be seen on this site

And on a side note if you got straight to the point in your post and stopped trying to look like a layer,your whole post could have been just the quote and I would have got it,and I'm not re reading it ,its just to long and I'm to old to care

Ps I changed the image but it still holds I did not make these models
 

ferinoch

Ah, Dammit!
I've got to say I stand with the pro poser DAZ people on here. For the most part people who use it seem to put a great deal of time and thought into setting up the scenes, and I don't see it as being that different from arranging a photo shoot, just with subjects that couldn't exist in real life. The vast knowledge required to make effective use of such programs to create an expressive and evocative scene surely is on a similar level with that required to draw or photograph something.

Classifying it as somehow not being art or lacking a level of artistic merit on par with putting pen to paper is entirely inappropriate. I think we all appreciate how difficult it is to maintain this site. Certainly at some point I think nearly everyone on my watchlist has posted a journal about there being too much junk posted. But this really goes way too far and is trying to solve something that isn't really a problem.
 

cobalt

Member
If the new AUP bans the uploading of images, because they were created in Poser, then the new AUP needs to be junked. That's a really bad call.

These images (some not safe for work):
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/236452/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/478665/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/236438/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/236386/

...would likely be banned.

I'd like to hear an explanation of how they aren't art.
 

Tensik

Member
Wolfblade said:
Can we please, please, pleasepleaseplease, PLEASE, avoid slippery-slope arguments?

Unless I am missing it, which I could be, it's late; poser is not currently banned in the AUP. There was talk of whether or not it should be. We're hearing some people who feel it doesn't belong, and obviously there are others who feel it does. This discussion will be MUCH more productive if people could please

A: remember we are hearing pros and cons for a POTENTIAL decision, not something we have actually enacted yet, and even regarding the rules we HAVE enacted, there is still always potential for change. Kindly refrain from villifying the site for something that hasn't even happened.

and

B: Please, if you do disagree with something we have actually done, and feel the need to criticize for that, try to keep it civil. And if at all possible, keep the criticism limited to what we HAVE done as opposed to remarks along the lines of "well, if you did that then you might as well ban this, and then you should just ban that, and then you've banned all artwork and don't let anybody post anything at all, way to go you jerks."

One of the BIGGEST difficulties with trying to improve this site is that ANY change is met with resistance from someone. It is VERY difficult to try and obtain user opinion and input BEFORE a change when even mentioning a MAYBE change in the future gets people angry and upset at us as if we had already enacted the change and every single slippery-slope potential change people believe will stem from it.

We want to make this place better. We need the help of you, the users. If people are going to insist that we are the bad guys no matter what, and anything we do short of making this site a completely open free imagehost (not gonna happen) gets us animosity and villification, it makes it INCREDIBLY difficult to be up front and honest with everyone with ideas we have for the future. We want to get peoples' opinions on changes we might want to make. But you all have to understand that when EVERY "hey we're thinking about...." gets angry holy hell rained down on us, it makes it less appealing to announce potential changes.

I believe Poser would fall under the realm of "character generator" given the ultimate nature of the application, and thus falls in line with a violation according to the AUP.

He then says it's the first time it has been brought up, but that's a load as we had this discussion before in regard to Poser vs. SL and he made it clear that he thought DAZ and Poser users were a joke. Regardless, it's unfair for you to point fingers at people over a slippery slope when it was the administration who stated it to begin with for what many have pointed out is rather obviously a case of prejudice over one set of tool users, that by its implications could ultimately affect many people here by limiting how art is generated in MANY programs and by future quality controls in general based on schooling or staff opinion on the medium used, and his words have insulted many people who put hundreds of hours into their art here.

This is one of those times where you back off and let people say their piece, Wolfblade.
 

lothaekor

New Member
Is poser a generator program? Not entirely. It's true that a lot of people will purchase/download content for the program because they don't have the skills to make it themselves. However, the means to create new meshes for clothing, or entire models are there for those advanced enough in the use of 3D applications. (Little_Dragon has created entirely new models, and has rigged other 3d models for use in Poser)

Even if these people use entirely purchased content, they are still able to use texture maps to customize the models/content. Mapping complex patterns on a 2d texture map is not exactly trivial.

I have seen some pieces that show a good handle on composition and some good customization of characters and textures. Of course I have also seen the people who use generic poser characters, default textures and poses and don't even bother to put in a background.

The south park and pokemon card generators are just that, generators, because they have a set library of shapes and such to work with. Poser is hardly a generator in the same sense; you have the potential to customize the models and textures in the completion of a piece. Its primary purpose is to create artwork, thus it should be considered as a valid art tool.

Though I would hardly argue against preventing people from posting 50 different camera angles of the same model on the standard grey background.
 

Little_Dragon

Incognito, Ergo Sum
lothaekor said:
Though I would hardly argue against preventing people from posting 50 different camera angles of the same model on the standard grey background.

Guilty ... though at least I posted them as a single animated GIF, rather than flooding the gallery.
 

Kasarn

Member
As a guy with a camera, I don't really see the difference between still life or studio photography and Poser/DAZ3D. As far as I can see (never having used the programs), both are the arranging of preexisting things, adding lighting, composing the final shot and creating an image (or multiple images). Both can create crapfloods and both can create art.

The annoying part is that there's more crap and stuff that is just plain ordinary than there is good stuff and it's easy to get frustrated by it all.
 

Cheska

New Member
Ok, how is any of this a remotely valid point?

If you must "Learn" to draw with Pencil and Paper, You can be called an artist when your skills pay off to some extent.
So, a person using Poser/Daz has instant insight into how to use these programs? Does it upload this knowledge into your brain? No.
Dragooneer even said he went to school... but he doesn't think its art.

If we decide to debate "What is Art?", then we have already begun a journey down a sloap. Make this simple, post a poll... The Moderators cannot decide on their own what is art and what is not... heck, a Poll is a bad idea, because it is the "Person" not that Masses that decides for himself.

At the risk of annoying someone, I do not think Scat picture are art.
This is my opinion and is a Truth for "Me" and me alone, BillWoodchuck might live for each and every Scat pic he can find.
What do I say to this? Go Bill, Go! Because he has a right to his choice, and I have a moral obligation to allow him his choice, even when I do not agree with it.
This can be turnd around and used against me as well, Do I support everyones choice? No.. and again, I will not hinder them, nor will I encourage them either. But I will not declare what is art, and what is not.
 

Wolfblade

Member
Tensik said:
He then says it's the first time it has been brought up, but that's a load as we had this discussion before in regard to Poser vs. SL and he made it clear that he thought DAZ and Poser users were a joke. Regardless, it's unfair for you to point fingers at people over a slippery slope when it was the administration who stated it to begin with for what many have pointed out is rather obviously a case of prejudice over one set of tool users, that by its implications could ultimately affect many people here by limiting how art is generated in MANY programs and by future quality controls in general based on schooling or staff opinion on the medium used, and his words have insulted many people who put hundreds of hours into their art here.

This is one of those times where you back off and let people say their piece, Wolfblade.

No, with respect, it is one of those times I once again face-palm at Dragoneer having said something unfortunately hasty without pausing to fully think about it, and someone else taking it firmly to heart and not accepting that sometimes you shouldn't hold someone to a statement for all eternity.

Yes, I am as clueless as you as to why he said it hasn't come up before because it has. Repeatedly. Sometimes he says things and then "oops"es later.

My points still ABSOLUTELY remain:

He stated HIS opinion, in a discussion MEANT for people to offer their opinions >before< a decision has been made either way. His personal opinion does not immediately translate to policy, as has been firmly evidenced by him adjusting things against his own personal preference in order to meet the apparent demands and wants of the community in general MANY times.

The site has made mistakes in the past. We get it. People have been told things will happen that end up not happening because they weren't workable in the end, and probably should never have been promised. Oops. The Administration is attempting to pick up the many-times dropped proverbial ball, but it makes it harder to do so if people refuse to let go of mistakes of the past, and insist on predicting no chance of avoiding mistakes in the future.

So no, it is not time for me to back off. And I am not in any way keeping people from saying their piece. I am merely asking that non-constructive doom prophecies, reminders of the mistakes and poorly-worded public statements of the past (of which there are no shortage), and slippery-slope arguments of how we will inevitably do A, which leads to B, which leads to C, which leads to FA admins eating babies, have no constructive purpose, and can be left outside of this discussion to make room for genuine exchange of thoughts and opinions on this specific decision. Not other unrelated bad decisions, or ethereal potential future bad decisions.

Feel free to continue the discussion at hand rather than argue semantics with me.

Back to the topic: I personally feel that Poser does indeed take more effort than simple character generators, but the ultimate decision should depend on what is being done with the tool, not simply what the tool happens to be. If someone is just posing a pre-rendered in-package model, with no personally created elements, then it IS just being used as a more elaborate character generator. If they are using the tool to actually create, then there should be no bias against the creation just because of the tool used to create it.
 

Wolfblade

Member
Kasarn said:
As a guy with a camera, I don't really see the difference between still life or studio photography and Poser/DAZ3D. As far as I can see (never having used the programs), both are the arranging of preexisting things, adding lighting, composing the final shot and creating an image (or multiple images). Both can create crapfloods and both can create art.

The annoying part is that there's more crap and stuff that is just plain ordinary than there is good stuff and it's easy to get frustrated by it all.

This is the key problem for us here.

Nobody wants to get rid of the stuff that is genuine effort and creativity.

Everybody (practically) is tired of seeing the pointless, no-effort, made-sheerly-out-of-boredom crap that the site gets flooded with.

There is no way to put in writing that is succinct and easy to understand, a definition separating the one from the other.

People do not want anyone, not even a group of people; several are art-minded or actually schooled on the subject; to use their own judgment to decide, even if they have to come to a consensus on each and every questionable image.

So the choice is to either allow everything, even the overwhelming flood of crap that is not "beginner" or "amateur" art, but is just people bored or submitting because they have nothing else to submit; or; lose certain small portions of genuine attempts at creative output so as to be rid of the bored, pointless, not-even-trying-to-be-art crap that just takes up more and more space, and continues to confuse people as to what the purpose of a Furry Art community is.

Cheska said:
Ok, how is any of this a remotely valid point?

If you must "Learn" to draw with Pencil and Paper, You can be called an artist when your skills pay off to some extent.
So, a person using Poser/Daz has instant insight into how to use these programs? Does it upload this knowledge into your brain? No.
Dragooneer even said he went to school... but he doesn't think its art.

If we decide to debate "What is Art?", then we have already begun a journey down a sloap. Make this simple, post a poll... The Moderators cannot decide on their own what is art and what is not... heck, a Poll is a bad idea, because it is the "Person" not that Masses that decides for himself.

At the risk of annoying someone, I do not think Scat picture are art.
This is my opinion and is a Truth for "Me" and me alone, BillWoodchuck might live for each and every Scat pic he can find.
What do I say to this? Go Bill, Go! Because he has a right to his choice, and I have a moral obligation to allow him his choice, even when I do not agree with it.
This can be turnd around and used against me as well, Do I support everyones choice? No.. and again, I will not hinder them, nor will I encourage them either. But I will not declare what is art, and what is not.

Thank you for understanding something FAR too many people need to get through their heads.

As for the rest of your post, another very good and valid point. Any time discussion of limiting this, or that, or whatever comes up, people bring up the "who are you to define Art?" argument and it is just a derailment tactic more often than not.

We are not trying to tell people what is art and what is not. If the entire world believes a photo of a human turd with a cartoon face drawn on it is Not Art, but one single person feels that it is, then it is Art.

EVERYTHING has Artistic value to SOMEBODY.

So we aren't trying to define art. If anything, we are merely trying to decide what forms of art we want this site's resources and expenses to be devoted to hosting. Letting people post anything and everything they please isn't a very appealing option to any of the community EXCEPT the people who just want to be free to use this place as a generic imagedump. That is not what this place is here to be.
 

Damaratus

Care to join me in my lab?
Alright folks, I did some talking with Dragoneer last night; it is already clear as to how he feels about Poser/DAZ stuff, but he has also realized that this is his bias and does not want that bias to affect things in this particular discussion. So I am going to take it over, and hopefully by the end of what I post things will be a little more sensible, especially since the thread has kept relatively drama free and a plethora of good points have been made.

As of this current point, there are not that many folks on the site who are actively pushing out Poser/DAZ images. It isn't something that is causing an amazing strain on the site, nor is it something that is legally dangerous in terms of posting (though 3-D images of underage children are legality issues and will be removed if on the site). After reading through this thread again, and giving the issue some thought, I think I have come to a reasonable conclusion I'll summarize the various points to this, so give me a little bit of time.

It appears that those people who take Poser/DAZ seriously put quite a bit of time and effort into the images that they eventually create. Adjustments in figures, lighting, and the fact that you can code some material in the program. There is most certainly artistic consideration put into the creation of these images.

Naturally the counter-point to this is the fact that quite often the figures that are utilized are pre-generated, which is already a problem with other generator programs. There are a great number of other software programs out there that provide pre-generated characters, mostly games, but still (Second Life, Oblivion, The Sims, just to name a few).

What sets Poser/DAZ apart from these other programs? Is it complexity? Is it more than that? Despite trying to argue the slippery slope, this is not the case. This is trying to place a dividing line between artistic and non-artistic usage of pre-rendered 3-dimensional characters (based in part upon the software that is used).

Poser/DAZ appears to be much like giving someone a set of naked action figures and asking them to create a scene with them. Give them facial expressions, clothing, a location and some kind of action as well. I have seen that Poser/DAZ images can be animated, and even lip-synced to music. This too sets it apart from simpler programs.

Based on the images presented, and the information within this thread, for now Poser/DAZ images will stay on the site.

That said; keep in mind, and this is for all mediums, every artist should strive to post their best work, but this is especially important for things like Poser/DAZ images and photography since there are already strongly differing opinions on the site in terms of their legitimacy. I have seen both incredible use of Poser/DAZ as well as very poor use. One way comes across as artistic, and the other usually as spam and leaves a rather unpleasant taste in the mouths of those people who end up seeing it.

Poser/DAZ gives you the ability to be artistic, basically the dough to mold into something with a lot of tools to help you do so. It's up to you, those who are striving to make sure that this is recognized as an art form, to keep up your standards, and also help those who are not there yet to reach higher standards (once again, this concept is not strictly reserved for Poser/DAZ). If you see someone wantonly posting Poser/DAZ images that have little or no real work done on them (and as people who have put the time and effort into such things, I'm sure you can tell), send in a report or even pop a note over to them. Is there someone flooding the site with many angles of the same Poser/DAZ image (which is already against the AUP)? Help them figure out how to put things into an animation so that all the angles are covered in one convenient post.

Right now Poser/DAZ it is seen as art (on this site), so make sure that you don't lose that support by being lax on what you see being posted.

Same goes for most every medium. As long as the filters do not exist, and even after they are in place, try and maintain a level of quality in the pieces you post to this site, it makes people want to see more, and it also helps to give convincing arguments if ever it comes into question.

As a side note to Zeis: You are one of the few people on the site who really takes the time to consider the images that you take on Second Life. There may be some ground to work with you on that, though currently the rules in place are what will be, but your situation is most certainly one to take into consideration; moreso when greater functionality on the site is achieved.
 

yak

Site Developer
Administrator
This is very frustrating, honestly, to read pages and pages of forum threads where people overreact to a few un-cautiously placed words that weren't given the proper thinking-over at the time of them being posted.

I see this thread is going in circles over the same flawed argument people either don't know about, or simply don't want to understand, with it being:

Dragoneer/Preyfar does not single-handedly, exclusively and undeniably makes the rules on FA, neither runs this place all by himself nor is in charge of everything that happens and what's to come.

Stop looking at him in that role, please, because it is not so..

Rules are made by the staff and not by a single person. Preyfar's, Wolfblade's, Damaratus', my own, etc. opinion on them are equal and neither of them override each other.
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
Ranard Lightningfall said:
True, but we belive the issue, and why everyone is so angry, is why is this even being considered? And it does not help that the front man has obvious chip on his shoulder for aid program. He blatently anounce it.
Yes, this is true... I did announce it, and I've always felt that way. Why a "chip? I'm a 3D artist/animator. I build my 3D models from the ground up, bone the mesh, map the UV, create and design my textures. I'm degreed in the digital animation field and have done so professionally for a career in various applications and shows. Thus, to me, comparing what somebody does in Poser -vs- what I can do...

However, that is on a personal level. I do not want that to interfere with how I view things on this site, nor how the rules should be crafted. If we were judging based on my personal preferences, there'd be a lot of things disallowed on this site. But this site is not founded on my personal tastes, nor will it ever be.

There are many things that can be debated as to whether Poser is art, and that's what this thread is for. I'll vote for whatever is best for the site, not my interested. There's a few hundred thousand submissions on FA, and there's a lot of them I don't like or disagree with. It's not my place to side against them out of personal like/dislike.

My personal interests are not the site's. I do my best not to mix personal and professional opinion when and wherever possible (and trust me, given my job I have to do that often).
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
redfoxnudetoons said:
Hell. This is crap. I'm a professional Graphic Designer. And I for one have to say that POSER is one of the better 3D programs out there. Having a degree in something does not make anyone an absolute master of that subject.

After all, you have a degree, Dragoneer. Only a ---DEGREE---. Not even a ---DOCTRINE---. until you do, you cannot judge a 3D modeling program. I know of some ---PROFESSORS--- that agree that Poser and DAZ both are great tools for the artist that doesn't have the time or money to 1)buy $5000+ software bundles, and 2)have the 500+ man hours to create a ---GOOD--- 3D model from scratch.
The debate is not whether or not Poser is a good or bad application -- I've had to "create" and design in it with previous jobs. But having used Poser in previous jobs, I know from personal experience that you can not, in fact, create with it, only modify and tweak.

When I was designing blood vessels and cells, everything I had to do via creation was handled in MAX and exported out to Poser (it's highly backwards, I know... don't ask, my company was weird). I'm not saying Poser can't be used for good, but you can't create with it from the ground up.

Now, before you go slamming my qualifications, I'm not here to trounce the application, but pose a simple question. As others in this thread have pointed out, and done so rather elaborately, there are many pros and cons towards Poser. I think the best one is that, while Poser uses pre-generaed material, there is somewhat more that goes into it than merely having it apply as a "generator".

While it is a generator of sorts, it's different than the kind our intent was of limiting by the AUP -- character generators (ala Warcraft) and meme makers (ala the "Pokemon Trainer Cards").

That's why I suggested to make this thread in the first place, because Poser is a different beast and can not be lumped in together with the standard "generators". I may have a bias against Poser, but I do not have one as an admin.
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
yak said:
Dragoneer/Preyfar does not single-handedly, exclusively and undeniably makes the rules on FA, neither runs this place all by himself nor is in charge of everything that happens and what's to come.

Stop looking at him in that role, please, because it is not so..

Rules are made by the staff and not by a single person. Preyfar's, Wolfblade's, Damaratus', my own, etc. opinion on them are equal and neither of them override each other.
Indeed and well stated.
 

ShujinTribble

New Member
Wolfblade said:
Back to the topic: I personally feel that Poser does indeed take more effort than simple character generators, but the ultimate decision should depend on what is being done with the tool, not simply what the tool happens to be. If someone is just posing a pre-rendered in-package model, with no personally created elements, then it IS just being used as a more elaborate character generator. If they are using the tool to actually create, then there should be no bias against the creation just because of the tool used to create it.

To quote Marty Feldman, "On the NOSEY!!"
 

ebonyleopard

New Member
I don't think it should be banned , this 3D poser work. I'll say this, I'm a skilled illustrator, but I could never come close to doing what those that use these 3D programs do. It truly is an artform onto itself, just different medium to produce the at. The fact, from what I understand, is that you just can't get the program and pop out anthro characters, you actually have to constuct and build them and those who do it have trained themselves to do it very well.

I say leave it be, though I'm not sure how much weight the comments of anyone here could sway the decision making process of the head guys of FA, considering how the last rule change issue went.
 

ebonyleopard

New Member
Preyfar said:
Ranard Lightningfall said:
True, but we belive the issue, and why everyone is so angry, is why is this even being considered? And it does not help that the front man has obvious chip on his shoulder for aid program. He blatently anounce it.
Yes, this is true... I did announce it, and I've always felt that way. Why a "chip? I'm a 3D artist/animator. I build my 3D models from the ground up, bone the mesh, map the UV, create and design my textures. I'm degreed in the digital animation field and have done so professionally for a career in various applications and shows. Thus, to me, comparing what somebody does in Poser -vs- what I can do...

However, that is on a personal level. I do not want that to interfere with how I view things on this site, nor how the rules should be crafted. If we were judging based on my personal preferences, there'd be a lot of things disallowed on this site. But this site is not founded on my personal tastes, nor will it ever be.

There are many things that can be debated as to whether Poser is art, and that's what this thread is for. I'll vote for whatever is best for the site, not my interested. There's a few hundred thousand submissions on FA, and there's a lot of them I don't like or disagree with. It's not my place to side against them out of personal like/dislike.

My personal interests are not the site's. I do my best not to mix personal and professional opinion when and wherever possible (and trust me, given my job I have to do that often).


I'm sure your feeling towards Poser artist is probably the same traditional real medium painters feel about digital 'painters'.

I look at it like this, from what I've seen of people using poser, poser is mearly the too to which they use to create original looking characters that can not just be made from already existing files on poser. I mean, I can't imagine you can get an anthro looking fox head on the poser program. And I'm an artsit of traditional medium but I know I can't do what poser artist do with their work. There's a lot of skill, practice, and know how in what some of these artist do do with that program.

I can see if they were just taking an already existing model from that program and plopping it into their galleries, that I'd say could be prohibited, but if they are talking the time to use those models to build something totally new, then I say it should be allowed.
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
ebonyleopard said:
I say leave it be, though I'm not sure how much weight the comments of anyone here could sway the decision making process of the head guys of FA, considering how the last rule change issue went.
After reading the comments in this thread, I'm in agreement with Damaratus and see no reason they should go. They may still fall under the spam rule (aka, if somebody posts 10 images of the same pose, just from different angles, they excess may be considered spam).
 

bryceowen

New Member
DarkMeW said:
Use of 3D software that relies on pre-existing or altered content (no matter to what extent) violates the 'By You' created content of the AUP. The artist must show not only original concept in creation of 3D models, they must express the application of artistic principles and fore thought to each generated image uploaded. Snap shot type images of even original 3D model concepts are not allowed.

I'm confused by this...  What I read here states, and correct me if I'm wrong:
"Use of 3D software that relies on pre-existing or altered content (no matter to what extent) violates the 'By You' created content of the AUP."
Even if you made your own model in X program and imported it into Y program because Y program allows easier scene setups is not allowed because it wasn't created by you(?).  That's what I'm reading here.  "No matter to what extent."  I created it in program X and it had to be exported to program Y because program Y doesn't allow me to create things (ergo 'pre-existing').

"Snap shot type images of even original 3D model concepts are not allowed."
And THIS...  Well this just kinda kills ALL 3D artwork.  Poser, MAX, Maya...  Even original 3D models aren't allowed.  Unless I don't understand 'snap shot' the same way as someone in the 3D scene.
 

Damaratus

Care to join me in my lab?
bryceowen said:
I'm confused by this... What I read here states, and correct me if I'm wrong:
"Use of 3D software that relies on pre-existing or altered content (no matter to what extent) violates the 'By You' created content of the AUP."
Even if you made your own model in X program and imported it into Y program because Y program allows easier scene setups is not allowed because it wasn't created by you(?). That's what I'm reading here. "No matter to what extent." I created it in program X and it had to be exported to program Y because program Y doesn't allow me to create things (ergo 'pre-existing').

"Snap shot type images of even original 3D model concepts are not allowed."
And THIS... Well this just kinda kills ALL 3D artwork. Poser, MAX, Maya... Even original 3D models aren't allowed. Unless I don't understand 'snap shot' the same way as someone in the 3D scene.


I think that you're misinterpreting this. What this is involving is using a pre-generated character, one not actually made by your own hands ("pre-existing"). That's where the argument has been sitting. Since it's something that someone else made (i.e. exists within the program already).

If you made your own 3-D model and exported it to another program, then you'd still be well within the realm of the Terms of Service "By You" section.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top