What would you change about Content Paradise?



  • @redphantom One would hope that software programmers aren't doing double duty as webmasters!



  • @Glitterati3D said in What would you change about Content Paradise?:

    @redphantom One would hope that software programmers aren't doing double duty as webmasters!

    That thought makes me want to cringe. ~frown~



  • Exactly, so why would a change in team effect the store as Tony claims.



  • @Miss-B said in What would you change about Content Paradise?:

    @Glitterati3D said in What would you change about Content Paradise?:

    @redphantom One would hope that software programmers aren't doing double duty as webmasters!

    That thought makes me want to cringe. ~frown~

    ROFLMAO. Me too!



  • @redphantom said in What would you change about Content Paradise?:

    Exactly, so why would a change in team effect the store as Tony claims.

    It wouldn't. That was my point.



  • Just kill the download limitations and I'd be happy. I buy stuff when there is a special and may not use it until years later. DAZ and Renderosity have been a blessing in this field since I can search through all my old orders. Sometimes I'll suddenly need something today and a search of my previous orders reveals I have that exact item waiting for me.

    Not a fan of getting rid of older content at all. In fact, I want the opposite, I somehow want all the long gone products to come back. One reason Genesis isn't doing as well as it could is that a lot of products for it are just rehashed versions of stuff that already came out before but for different figures.

    Hmm... I know SmithMicro axed its entire Poser team to bring in a cheaper international team... but with how long it's taking them just to learn the basics and bring them up to speed so they can begin work on the next Poser... I'm wondering how much of a money saver this really worked out to be for SmithMicro.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    1. Remove the fee for download
    2. Larger thumbnails / larger + more promo images


  • One other thing I would change that is on the vendors.......

    Put in better descriptions of your products. Remember, a lot of the shoppers at CP are newbies and your morph list doesn't mean a thing to them.

    Here's a great product on that first "human" screen: http://contentparadise.com/productDetails.aspx?id=28049

    I wasn't sure until I read the file list if it was the clothes, the figure or the clothes and the figure. And, it will not be clear at all to a new Poser user what a great package that is because they can't decipher the list of CR2 and obj files yet.

    I'm guilty of the same thing and will make a concerted effort to change that.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @Glitterati3D - how about if SM had a more comprehensive set of guidelines for content creators? Both as PDF files & videos; some hard rules but mostly advice & recommendations. I'm thinking of something along the lines of the submission guidelines that Hivewire have available.

    While SM don't don't quality testing (& I am fine with that) it may make things clearer & easier for new content creators in particular.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @caisson

    Control is good.
    Quality control is optional, as it is my deepest opinion that a product reflects the quality of the content creator.

    Site Guidelines? Not so much. In fact; not at all because most sites use "obsolete" requirements from the Poser7 period.

    Example :
    Some sites (among other things) still "require" that the obj file go in a "Geometries folder", and that textures go in a "Texture folder".

    And then you get those "alphabetical" (ahum) strings, because every vendor wants his/her product to be on top of the line. pffft, yeah, OK, why not :-)

    SM dropped those "requirements" a few versions ago: They are "obsolete.

    All files required for an item (for example) Roxie-Hooted-Winter-Jacket, should go in a Roxie-Hooted-Winter-Jacket folder.

    When you work on multiple PC's as I often do, you copy "one" folder over and you have it all instead of searching and searching, "where did this particular content creator put all the stuff"........., search, dig and copy one file by one file?
    Hey, we are 2017.... I don't need content to explode into God only knows what folders and subfolders everywhere in the universe.

    A content item has ONE folder and ONE folder only.

    Tja, so sorry but I have a very modern (2017) and strong opinion here.



  • @caisson I think that is necessary as well, but QA is still necessary. I'm sorry, but the current catalog at CP, with few exceptions, is the classic example of WHY it is necessary.



  • @vilters Problem is Tony, not everybody has your desires for how to set up a library. I absolutely HATE everything being in the same folder. Whenever I package something up I put it in the appropriate folder and make sure I have file paths to the file listed in the Read Me. If people don't like that they can put it whereever they like in their own library.



  • Tony, I've converted the morphing fantasy dress to practically every female in my runtime. The valiant set also has been converted to many of my guys and some of my gals. Should they all be dumped into the same runtime so I can have the textures with them? No that won't work. Wardrobe wizard uses the same name. I'll overwrite them. So should I duplicate the materials? 14 times? That would be a big waste of space. I've also noticed p11 isn't always so great in finding geometries stored in character folder. Every one of us sets up their runtime differently. Having a requirement to use the traditional structure allows for consistency and allows us to find things to put them where we want.

    And why the heck are you copying your runtime to use it on a different computer? Get yourself an external drive and just move that. It's much faster.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @vilters Tony, believe it or not, most of the Poser users hate everything in one folder. They organized their Poser runtime a few years ago and just update it with new content. They know this runtime and where to find everything easy and would like to keep this way. I talk here from my own experience. I had my old Poser runtime very well organized. Used it since Poser version 5 till my last PC die 2 months ago and I clean the runtime from old crap
    and made it new. Here a screen from a small part. I guess I am not alone0_1500618773298_runtime.PNG with this.



  • If a geometry i used by one .cr2 only, it is nonsense to place it in a separate 'geometries' folder. If for example a character content in the library were a .zpc (ZippedPoserCharacter) file, nobody would be caring about separate folders for textures or geometry.
    Poser has chosen to keep the files separately accessible under known types. That is no problem, but no argument either to insist that what is essentially a PoserFigureGeometryDefinition file, made for the sole purpose of supporting a figure file, MUST go into a geometries folder.
    Separate folders could come in when support files (geometry, textures) are to be shared between items. That is a different issue. With the exception maybe of the base characters there is very little re-use of info.
    Then, to reference that, it may be just as easy if the reference can be made to the geometry of the base figure library item (essentially 'this is a character for Maisie, so use her geometry and stuff') than to a bunch of files that is referenced by the(Maisie) library item.



  • @F_Verbaas said in What would you change about Content Paradise?:

    If a geometry i used by one .cr2 only, it is nonsense to place it in a separate 'geometries' folder. If for example a character content in the library were a .zpc (ZippedPoserCharacter) file, nobody would be caring about separate folders for textures or geometry.
    Poser has chosen to keep the files separately accessible under known types. That is no problem, but no argument either to insist that what is essentially a PoserFigureGeometryDefinition file, made for the sole purpose of supporting a figure file, MUST go into a geometries folder.
    Separate folders could come in when support files (geometry, textures) are to be shared between items. That is a different issue. With the exception maybe of the base characters there is very little re-use of info.
    Then, to reference that, it may be just as easy if the reference can be made to the geometry of the base figure library item (essentially 'this is a character for Maisie, so use her geometry and stuff') than to a bunch of files that is referenced by the(Maisie) library item.

    Until Poser is able to save a properly welded and symmetrical OBJ file with no extra floating vertices, the last place I'd want to save the good OBJ file is in the character folder. Tucking it away into the Geometries folder saves it from possibly being overwritten after rigging.



  • @Deecey
    I take it you had that happen.
    It sounds like a file management issue potentially causing trouble during content development, which should be addressed irrespective of the floating vertices and un-symmetric meshes. App should not over-write unless specifically ordered to do so. Versioning is the name of the game.
    (BTW: I never understood why one has to save two sides of a mesh and be concerned about symmetry. One side should be enough to make a full symmetric mesh).

    I keep to my point about all relevant figure and geometry data for an item in one place for the final product. For the end user the figure is one item and having bits and pieces all over the place is a major nuisance and runtimes bloating with obsolete stuff.
    And, of course, there are much more content users than content developers. (hopefully)



  • @F_Verbaas

    No not a file management issue.

    Let's say I create a blouse named "Blouse.obj". It's welded, perfectly symmetrical, no floating vertices, etc. I put the OBJ in the Characters folder. Then I import that object and rig it.

    Then I save the rigged CR2 to the library, and I save it as Blouse.

    The FIRST time a Poser CR2 is saved to the library, it doesn't know where you imported the OBJ file from. So when Poser writes the CR2 file it will save a like-named OBJ file in the Character folder. So bummer, it will OVERWRITE the Blouse.OBJ file that is already in there. Now, the CR2 references a Blouse.OBJ that was split apart at group seams inside Poser, but then rewelded on export. The vertex order of the new OBJ is also different than the old one.

    Anyway, once a CR2 is saved with the location of the OBJ it uses it from that point on (I believe). The problem only rears its ugly head the first time you save the CR2 to the library, and save it using the same name and location as the OBJ file that is in the Characters folder.

    There are two ways around this ... the first method is to store your "good" copy of the OBJ elsewhere for safekeeping (which one should do anyway). Copy that over the one that Poser saved with the CR2. Then you have your OBJ file, properly welded and symmetrical. The other option is to locate the OBJ file in the Geometries folder permanently, and after Poser saves the CR2 you edit the path to point to the good OBJ in the Geometries folder and delete the one that Poser saved.

    This is a long-standing issue that somewhat relates to the problem Vilters keeps referring to. However, it's not a trivial fix (if it was easy it would have been fixed long ago). It will probably take some real deep diving into the code to fix these geometry issues. This goes back to the days before Poser allowed importing full body morphs and such (remember the days where we had to create morphs body part by body part? UGH!) Copying an OBJ with a good one, or editing a path to your preferred OBJ is an easy fix. Fixing the other issues (loss of symmetry and changing vertex order) isn't so simple.

    The two problems can probably be addressed independently as bugs. It would be nice if Poser would prompt you to select the location of the OBJ file you want to use, and if an OBJ of the same name already exists there it won't write a new one. That sure would be nice.

    To get back to the original topic at hand, there's an additional complication to where a content creator's files are located. Poser started out with the specific locations for geometry, library files and textures. I can't remember when things started opening up to allowing other locaitons, maybe Poser 7 or 8-ish? But there is a MASS of content both furnished with Poser and developed by third party developers that use the old paths out of habit. To change now would only add to confusion for both old and new users. A new user can buy old content and wonder why the file locations are "weird". An old user can buy new content and wonder why the file locations are "weird." Chaos ensues. 8-)



  • @Deecey
    Thank you for the description. From what you say I would call it a Poser file management issue, but what is in a name?

    As I understand it, it is good practice to choose a name for the .obj different from the name you want to give to the .cr2, so something like: SymmetricWeldedBlouseGeometryWithoutFloatingVertices.obj or just Blouse_geom.obj.
    However: overwriting without asking is a mortal sin for any app, Poser not excluded.

    Sure old habits are hard to kill. They can only be made extinct. That is where the .zpc format I mentioned comes in. It would in fact make a sort of object oriented system with properties being derived from base classes (= base figures and base textures).



  • @F_Verbaas said in What would you change about Content Paradise?:

    As I understand it, it is good practice to choose a name for the .obj different from the name you want to give to the .cr2, so something like: SymmetricWeldedBlouseGeometryWithoutFloatingVertices.obj or just Blouse_geom.obj.
    However: overwriting without asking is a mortal sin for any app, Poser not excluded.

    True that. But even given that you name the CR2 differently, you'd still end up with a CR2 that references the unwelded, asymmetrical OBJ that Poser saves to the library. You'd still have to edit the path in the CR2, or copy your good OBJ over the one that Poser saved. (Oh yeah ... I forgot to mention that the original OBJ should also be grouped as well, and when you add the rigging you uncheck the "Add Groups" option to retain your original grouping.)