ok. there has been much talk on these forums on how to go about making sharecg better. some great ideas have been sugested. there is no sign that Jake or David actually are even taking these ideas on board, or even reading them. i say this as evidenced by the sudden and undiscussed closure of fund distribution, and the lack of feedback from them on the forums.

so; what happens next? do we stay throwing around ideas while the running of sharecg, goes on in its own way, with no contact with the users? or do we at least attempt to take on some of the control and responsibility for sharecg?

my thoughts go kinda like this;

first sharecg needs an action plan. a list of percieved problems and weaknesses needs to be drawn up, and a method of fixing it as effectivly as possible needs to be developed. this is a job for jake, david, and the employed sharecg team, hopefully taking on board the ideas and recomendations that have been made here on the boards.

secondly, the needed action needs to be taken. this will need people. i have been dancing away from moderation duties as much as possible, some of us will probably have to take on some duties sorting through the mountain of assets, and taking the needed actions. i suggest all of us here that are regular users should step up to the plate, and offer their assistance on moderation duty. matrixworks, panthia, dadchamp, etc. 

i think that is what it will take to get sharecg to actually function properly. so, lets see if the powers-that-be take step 1?  the exact nature of the changes that could and should take place have been discussed in other threads. this is to see if there will be any community involvement. personally, i am sceptical. community has been given lip service when it suits, but over all, apart from the provision of a forum in which we can all have lots of fun abusing each other, there has been little focus on community at all by sharecg. thats what i think anyway

Hi Irishlostboy and others,

A few things:

1. Good idea about the action plan. We're in discussions right now about our next course of action, and we'll open up what we decide to the forums. Just so you know, I think it's appropriate now for me to mention what I personally (and not necessarily David, who I have to discuss with more before we take any course of action) like as an option:

-Create a 2-tier system. Only those on the higher tier get compensation. Those on the lower tier do not. Since the payments would be spread among a smaller group of people, we could pay much, much more.

-I feel that this group should be very exclusive, very high quality, and very committed members to our community (e.g., leave helpful comments, rate, etc.). The idea is to make it clear that if you want to get payment, you have to be very good, giving incentives to people to go for quality.

-The qualifications for entering the second tier would be (a) a high quality of work (b)  disclosure of enough personal information, somehow, to make it possible for us to get them in trouble for copyright material (c) participation in the community, and most importantly, (d) moderation duties--including deciding who else gets let in.

-Moderation will be spread among a large group of higher-tier users. They should be lenient about what gets to stay in the site, but not what higher-tier users get to keep on the site.

-Higher-tier users will get priority placement on the homepage and in each category.

-Users can only apply for the higher-tier a limited amount of times, say, once per month.

The idea, then, would be to set up a system that gives the incentives for producing high quality content, but also leave in place the ability for any user to upload anything (as long as it's legal). With two-tiers, I think we might be able to have quantity and quality.

2. About community--I look at this question differently. I don't think it necessarily means that the community has control over the website--although it might.  Nor do I think that community is the forums--if you recall, forums came later than the rest of the site.

I think the defining charecteristic of community is people leaving helpful comments on other people's work--the kind of feedback that will actually help them improve as artists. We're going to be rearranging the site, and perhaps also providing the two-tier system (with one of the qualifications as being an active community member) to make that a more prominent feature of our site.

Best,
Jake

The hard part is getting people into the forum.  :D  It took me a while to find the forum here, perhaps button or screen on the front page "look what's going on in our forum today!" kind of deal. 

Otherwise, I'm really looking foreward to seeing what you guys do come up with.   

Agreed Beatrice....

Such as, there is someone here whom has a very low opinion of Poser (and makes no bones about it), do I want that person judging that kind of content? Hell, no!

I'm with Beatrice and Kimber on this one....

Unfortunately Poser and Poser related things (such as texture creation and such) tend to get looked down on a bit by the 'true 3d' community, yet if you want views and revenue then it's a huge market to tap.

I'm not wild about the 2 tier system as a whole... but hey, it's Jakes site and his decision, so whatever....

I have noticed that views and new uploads over the last week have dropped dramaticaly, so lets hope that these new ideas are implemented soon and that they go a long way towards rebuilding 3d artists confidence in this site.

I would however say be careful of making the system too rigid, as it may scare off more than it entices (I have to admit it's scaring me a bit )

as re; the subject of poser content being scorned. i am probably one of the more vocal of your "3d elite poser snobs". but i would not choose to judge any of the poser stuff. i dont use it, thus i dont know it, so i wouldn't be interested in moderating it. there are enough experienced poser users here to ensure that the poser content gets a fair moderation. and i am sure that poser users would leave my real-time assets alone for the same reason.

although i have no love of poser, i have neither voted or commented on poser content, positivly or negativly.

the whole problem with asset creators being overly precious over their work is one that people will just have to get over. ultimately, once you put your work out to the public, you do allow others to have an oppinion on it. you cant put your work out and then say, "you cant have a negative opinion on it". decency and rational fairness is needed, by both moderators and users.

as re; the two tier system. its an interesting idea. i agree that it may promote a segragatory attitude among users. this would be a bad thing. but it has a lot of good aspects too it too.  

AGree with Irishboy on the fact that I wouldn't want to judge his stuff because I don't use it.  Atleast not yet.....But I would be capable of testing poser things where there would be no way for me to test things for say 3dmax and such.  As would a beginner. 

If no one except those in the upper level of a tier system know who's in and who's out of the upper level....and can be honest, then I think that the only people who will get their noses out of whack are the ones abusing the site anyhow.  I think that for the most part the beginners will guess who's up there but as long as those up there are honest helpful people there won't be a problem.  But my husband says I need a reality check when it comes to humans.......

I have to agree with Beatrice aswell.

I'm a member of cgsociety.org where I, according to some of their members, had the impertinence to create my little portfolio with poser images. Talking about an elitist site with people who have their noses in the air so high they drown every time it rains (thnx for that brilliant quote Dadchamp, I love it) And they bash me down there but I couldn't care less what they say since I don't see any of them working for Disney or Pixar,...or creating the next cola commercial.

But it isn't a 'fun" and "sociable" community. It's a "get them before they get me" community, keeping strict and suspicious eyes on each other since commerce is involved and copy-rights and idea's need to be protected. Because they want to land themselves a good job in the commercial or CG-industry they have to show their work but on the other side the competition is watching...

Now, when it comes to art or images, I really don't care what people say or how they act around it. But when you have a freebie site/free file host like this I don't think that going for an highly exclusive site with an "elitist" attitude is the thing to do.

 Greetz Pommerlis.

The idea, as formed, would go along the lines of what Irishlostboy is talking about.  A plurality of artists, representing a broad swath of artists using different skills, would be forced to judge people's artwork, not just one person with their particular preferences.

That said, the work will have to be good. It will be "elitist" in the sense that, on some level, and not a superficial or corrupt one, it has to be done well. For example, I think Azhrei, a Poser user, makes quite good art. He woudl therefore get one vote from me. Perhaps another vote would be against him/her from a snob, but if we select the right people, the snob will be drowned out by other people's opinions.

-Jake 

I'll second Dadchamp.  I find that alot of the poser bashers are amature artist or artist that haven't worked in the field that long.  Most of the models created for poser, studio, or Iclone are build in max, lightwave, and Modo.  I texture most of my products in Z-brush and Deepaint. Poser is designed to allow the novice artist to have fun and express themselves.  Keep in mind most of he magor poser models are build in the higher end software packages. 

Also being able to put models together and render a scene doesn't make a good poser maker. One should be a creator of the models / textures.

Edited by Arotech on 01/14/08 12:04 PM.

Well the Poser:  good or spawn of evil discussion aside, I do believe that a group of people can fairly judge for their own speciality, BUT!  (You knew that was coming!) 

I would like some clearly defined guides for people to discuss the judging with the judges. 

Those could be simply a thread where the people wanting to know why they were rejected (or accepted) can ask the judges what's up.  With, of course, the caveat that web manners are fully in effect:  The judges don't need to be screamed at for being elitist pigs, and the candidates don't need to be looked down on for being "new" or whatever. 

yea, some people dont like poser. some people dont like cats either. as has been stated, whether or not someone has personal oppinions on a program shouldn't, and in theory, wont make an impact on moderation.

yes, poser has a lot of users for pre-viz etc. even our course coordinator uses it on occasion. poser has a bad reputation among some people. but said people cant argue with the attitide that, "the tool does not validate the artist, rather the artist trancends the tool" kinda thing. i dont use it myself. i am a low poly 3d modeller. so its no use to me. i tend not to like the mostly naked barbydoll stuff that a lot of people do, but thats their crap art, not the tool.

ok, so the poser issue is pretty much dealt with i think. lets not turn this thread into a "poor poser" thread. we all get stick from other areas of our craft. i get it from the high poly cg guys. they just dont understand the limitations of good low poly stuff, but hey, thats life.

as re; the keeping private of the upper tier members; i dont think that is a good idea. personally i would prefer as transparent an operation of sharecg as possible. i think that it should be clear who is where, but that anyone  can acheve the higher tier if they want through hard work. and of course that anyone can lose their higher tier position through abuse of their position.

on the nature of moderation. i think that for removing stuff of suspect quality, it should take 3 members to vote it out. say, a "kick" counter, that once it reaches three will be removed. i also think that all moderators should leave a comment as to why they are kicking the work, validating their position. that way no one can be accused of being too harsh, or unfair. 

i am sure it will take a while to iron out the final plan.  

Rofl! Barbie dolls don't bother me so much as seeing them standing in the snow facing monsters with nothing but scraps of cloth and a designer sword to protect them! Is real armor and warm clothing for these ladies too much to ask for? Or are these artists really saying they wish these poor gals to die a grisly death by monster or hypothermia? Hm... put in those terms... maybe it's option b?

In any event, I'm all for the two-tier system. As long as there are clear guidelines for what is to be conisdered 2nd-tier work and what isn't, and how one can qualify for it, I really don't see anything wrong with it, myself. As long as I can continue to use ShareCG to upload my work as a 1st tier user, I'm pretty happy with the idea.

Lol! You can blame the plethora of "Barbie-doll" barely clothed, if clothed at all with a sword images on Boris Vallejo and Julie Bell for inspiring such things (and yes I'm guilty of creating such as well).

Anywhoo....I like the two-tiered system idea.  Obviously as stated already, it is really going to take a lot of thught as to how it gets implemented and managed.

First, the uploader is going to have to decide wether they think it is good enough for Second Tier and should IMO have to provide not only a description of the item, but a written justification upon upload as to why they think it is worth getting paid for.  This way whoever is "judging" the item has a better idea of what they are looking at before ever opening the file.

Some items that could be included in the uploader's justification:

- Amount of time spent creating the item

- Amount of time spent on testing the item prior to upload.  This would include testing time spent by others (outside beta testers), if any.

- What features does the item have that makes it stand out from other similar items?

Now granted this would mostly apply to models, plug-ins, software and software content.  Images and animations naturally would be judged by simply viewing them, but then you run into the potential for biased judging as an image may be wonderful, just not to the taste of the person(s) judging it, at which point you'll either have worthy pieces getting rejected becasue of bias, or you'll get crappy pieces accepted because of the fear of being labeled as biased.

I just hope it doesn't become a popularity contest...

I very seldom post in forums... I do lurk alot. But unless I really have something to say, I just read, to keep up to date. What I would be concerned about is if someone get's well know here 'in the community', they're a show in to the high-tier, but someone who's quit, and busy creating content has a problem being recognized.

JMHO ~ DraagonStorm

I can understand the concern that draagonstorm has because I'm concerned about the same thing.

I can understand the need for judging & testing the content made for whatever 3D software or 2D software, that I get. But judging art? There's no such thing, art is a matter of personal taste and my experience in these "judging" systems usually start as an ideal and with the intention of being honest and fair but ends in what "elistist" means to me. It's not what you know but who you know. So I'm kind of anxious about the 'judging" art thingy.

Even though I think there needs to be some form of rules if this two-tier system is going to be implemented and we can't avoid that judging part I think. It takes a bit of a leap of faith and maybe Jake and Dave will succeed in where others fail and "judging each others work" doesn't turn into a kind of "Eurovision for modellers contest" online.....

Now, I've thought about this and I'm willing to give it a shot. And hey, if they become to snotty I think ILB or Dadchamp will yell loud enough.... 

Greetz Pommerlis.

i have a backround in fine art, and the amount i heard that "art cannot be judged" was in direct proportion to the amount said persons work should have been burned. lol

but we are not talking fine art here. we are talking CG. and more importantly, the creation of assets for practical application. such things have areas where they can be judged quite fairly. if a mesh has bad topology, it has bad topology. there is nothing very interpretive there. if a texture is bad, its bad. what makes it bad, is nothing to do with art, but to do with the fact that it cannot be used for what it is intended to be used for. 

i think the main thing that need dealing with first is spam posts. the people uploading 30 different variations of the same thing. 

as re; popularity contest, we just need more venomous people like me around here. i hate everyone equilly. ha. seriously though. this is why i suggested that it takes 3 votes on a piece of work by moderators to remove it. at any point i think it should be possible to have the judgment of any moderator called into question on the forum by any user. i cant see there being any favouritism on peoples work, merely because they are not forum hounds. all the best work on sharecg is done by people who have not participated in the forum, and thats just fine. their work does all the talking they need it to. if anything becomes vaguely "eurovision", i will commit hari kiri live on these boards in protest. some things should not be!!

I've not been here at sharecg very long, but have been aware of the recent problems, such as has been stated in earlier posts in this thread. It was quite a while before I decided to put my freebies here and actually, I'm glad I did. This is a great concept and even tho rev sharing is on hold for now, I still like how things are set up here.

That being said, I like the ideas put forth so far. I wasn't aware there was a forum here, til I happened to see the small button in the top menu bar. I agree that it would be beneficial to have it a bit more prominent to urge the users here to come and get info, share, etc.

So far, this two-tier system sounds fair, if implemented the way it's been discussed. I hope that these changes can be applied pretty soon, because this site is really starting to grow on me! LOL!