Question The sense of some creators releasing looks without attaching their advertised clothes

[Lione]

Actually why do some creators do that ?

Is there any logical reason you display looks with cloths, then to list their dependencies for the displayed look
and then release the scene without attached cloths to the model?
Means you will even lose the colorization settings / texture effects etc so your look will never again look like the advertised screenshot?

So what you see loading the model is a nude model instead the advertised clothed model even if you copy all dependencies over because the creator removed all clothes then saved the model and then releaeses it.

Why should i be in the mood to re-attach the displayed clothings my own alltime
if i want to experience the look just loading it in VAM and to re colorize the clothings to match the Screenshots ?

Am i the creator here ?

 

[MacGruber]

• That way you don't need to buy those potentially paid clothes.
• If you want to use the Look in a scene, you don't produce unnecessary dependencies.
• The proper way to release content like this to have two VAR packages. The first one just contains your own assets without any dependency. The second one contains a demo scene which then can use all kinds of stuff.

 

[Lione]

But if i do not buy them and not add them the model will anyways being nude then loading it?

I really like the proper way you mentioned much but with like 30 Patreons i subbed no one ever follows that

Actually i hate it so much opening a look and it misses the attached / advertised clothings.
I want to enjoy content and not recreate content.

If i want to create content i can create my own things later yes.

This behavior of some creators is a huge downer instead of immersion for me.

I am only enjoying replicas and will ever since i see no sense in displaying imagination in a picture offering it for money and then destroying it in
handing you a sheet of paper and a pen instead of the Art.

 

[Jiraiya]

I have to agree, it's frustrating as hell to see an amazing screenshot then load up a model and all the clothes are missing and the backdrop is just a photo behind them....
Half the time the model is just so plain and boring at that point I don't even ever use the look again. If you are using other peoples paid assets, or even other peoples free assets on your paid look DON'T!!! It's just annoying.
If all you created was the naked look, then have the photo representing it be the naked look. "Look at all these other peoples work" is not showing off yours.

 

[TToby]

If I were a mean person, I would say: "sometimes those preview pictures are the most creative part of some payed looks". But fortunately I am not that mean.

 

[Joe6Pack]

I'm having a problem understanding this thead. It seems like a content provider provides a FREE look but doesn't include clothes he wants to sell and the fact the clothes aren't in the scene (that people want for free?) make the scene look different?

Help me understand the issue here, it FEELS like beggars shouldn't be choosers or am I missing something?

 

[Lione]

This thread is about creators releasing a pay model displayed with wearing great clothing and not even offering the look having that clothing attached to the body ( not even added to the model file technical ) and not adding the dependencies file either. Its not about they are not able to attach a pay clothing.

If you download that Model Look then you end in a blank nude model with no clothing attached at all and you have to attach/assign clothing on your own, including its "your" work then to re-colorize the clothing to match a advertised look, if you even are able to do that.

Usually worklow would be:
You can save that look including the pay clothing and add a dependencies file, which is normal
and that file includes the sources of the "attached clothings" if paid or free.

This goes way deeper in "what you see is not what you get"

Spoiler: If you are interested click

Examples:

Nina by A1X

Instead of this Look as advertised ( Look at that unbelievable shadow and lightning, pose, hair and clothing idea here)

you get that

No clothing attached to model Look File and nothing as screenshot advertised of what looked so good above.

2nd Example:

Hanna by R3D

Look at the Pose, lightning effects.
Here the advertised screenshots displays a amazing body lightning which focuses on beauty blue spots on the hair and back body including soft shadows and sexy clothing followed by the glass floor.

While If you sign the Creators Patreon and download this Look ( all advertised Looks ) you get that

Same as the above. Its missing all and everything and you will not even receive a normal sxy pose, just a t-pose.

They display glory VAM Looks ART and hand you a sheet of paper and a pencil for supporting them in signing / subscribing their Patreons.

For me its the question mark here circling over my head of why showing a perfect look, which would be a blast to enjoy this in VAM in VR and instead that offering this mess.

Both didn't listen to my complaints and pleases to remaster the present look catalouge.
A1X now though releases looks since 2 weeks which match at least one screenshot as advertised and also incl shown lightning and clothings attached on the models. Sure a good step of course.
My request to A1X to re-release Nina and sure if it would be me, his back catalouge "remastered as advertised" has not been listened.

And its just two of even more examples how some pay content creators work.

 

[TToby]

Sorry @Lione, I know this isn't exactly what you try to say, but for me this seems like the result of you feeling betrayed by some product pictures which are promising stuff you won't get. And I think this is an absolutely legitimate feeling! We all know examples for shiny product pictures advertising pure gold and the truth is a piece of shit. Everybody tries to sell his stuff as good as possible and wants to show it in the perfect light. But some few of them are going to far. This inevitably will result in unhappy customers and is never a good idea if you want to stay on the market. My suggestion to sellers: keep your shiny advertising picture with all the bells and whistles, but supply your customers with one/some additional picture/s showing the pure truth without artful lighting, without clothing that is not included and in a neutral pose/expression. There are many examples for this in the DAZ-store, for instance. If your stuff is good, you have nothing to loose.

 

[Jiraiya]

The issue also comes to a lot of the time the show assets that are not theirs. If the look is amazing because of the outfit it's wearing, the way it's dressed then that is pretty much what you want to get when you "buy" it.
Getting a naked T-Pose body that looks almost like a default is a bit of a shock to the system compared to what you thought you might get. Even if they say clearly "clothes not included" they know they are selling the look based on somebody else's work. "Look how amazing it looks in this photo" because it does, when dressed in somebody elses work.
If it doesn't look amazing without those clothes, then they are what the customer wanted not the 6 moved morph sliders.
As mentioned, there is nothing wrong with showing your work in it's best light, but by god you HAVE to show an actual picture of what will be supplied and make it clear that is what is supplied. Preferably the primary picture so it's not missed, slipped in at the bottom of a page of other pics.
When posing and lighting the scene for the screenshot, why not at least include the pose and lighting setup! Unless they are also other peoples work, in which case what the hell is it you are doing that is worth money.
</rant>

 

[Joe6Pack]

@Lione Dude! I now TOTALLY get your point and agree with you 100%.

@TToby is also correct that Daz will show great looking characters in great looking clothes to promote a sale; HOWEVER, on the Daz site, they SPECIFICALLY say what is and what is NOT included.

Hopefully there is is a way to get content creators to follow Daz's example since it answers the question what is actually included with the purchase.