I don't want to start a flood of "New Galleries" - But there are a lot of people doing 3D modelling and a computer > 3D Gallery would seem like a logical next step. There is a computer > landscape gallery which suits all the terragen..etc... models; would love to see a gallery devoted to 3D modelling...any ideas???

Good idea.

Thanks Sam - I hope there's enough support to get this gallery up and running!!

i like it...i never know where to put my 3d renders cause most of em aren't landscapes.

One thing you will have to do is define what constitutes 3D. Caedes pointed out to me that nearly anything could be said to be 3D, so you may need to develop some guidelines/rules.

Thanks Sam for your comments - I will have a think and try to formulate some ideas. SamGerdt - if you have any ideas too - it would be great to see them here. My initial thought was images that were primarily * A rendered image (from a 3D modelling package i.e. Maya, Bryce, Moray, others etc..) where the scene has been modelled, textures applied, and then the scene is rendered. This would distinguish it from fractals, terragen (which has a catagory already), and images NOT created using a 3D package. Is this making sense? Any ideas???

Sounds fine to me. But we will have to wait and see what the man upstairs thinks. :-)

Nice thought, although you would have to distinguish somehow between computer-landscape & computer-3D.

yeah...the biggest thing now is that the computer category is too broad. wallpapers like my "blue tower" and "golden pyramid" don't really have a category of their own. Another thought is this. my "ancient giza" doesn't belong in landscapes or a 3d category. it was made w/ bryce but it still should be in a computer > buildings category or something of the like.

This sounds tricky! Well - I suppose if you have used Terragen it goes into computer > landscape. Then if you model a landscape in a 3d modeller, you have the decision as to computer > landscape =or= computer > 3D Modelled - I'd choose landscape as the category exists. SamGerdt - Having looked at your "blue tower" and "golden pyramid" I would put these into 3D Modelled - Though I appreciate your idea for a building category. Perhaps we should be considering 2 new categories?? 3D Modelled and Building. I suppose we have to look at overall demand for each of them. Perhaps seeing how 3D Modelled goes first then take it from there.

No, 3D building is just too confusing

For starters then - (To try to bring it to its' simplest definition) *An image created in a 3D Modelling package - where the finished image is a render.(with or without some touching up). Computer > Landscapes has its own category so Terragen images go there. Images created or generated outside of 3D Modelled images would fit well in the computer category. (This is harder than I thought!)

I just don't see what is so special about making an image in a "3D program" that warrants its own gallery. Shouldn't we be organizing images based on their content and not on the way they were made?

Well, as a devoted 3D modeller (I'll try not to take offence), I see 10 categories in photography. Couldn't you say that Photography is "how" you make an image? I see the importance, professionalism, devotion and talent that the Photographers put into this site. This is the "way" they make an image! (and how - I couldn't take a photo to save my life!). It was an idea for a category as Computer is general, and I felt it received a valid response.

The way I see it, the galleries are there to make navigation easier. So if someone likes the 3D style, they can go to the 3D gallery to find what they want...

Sam - that's a good, simple way to put it. An aside as I was thinking about this today - 3d Modellers use a 'virtual' camera - they are 'modelling' the scene from scratch - just as a photographer has a camera - we have our program. Just a thought. Anyway - sounds like it *aint* gonna happen...

I think its a good idea. Although I mainly take photos, I seems like a fair point to seperate all the computer images

I think a 3D gallery would be good, as I have already said. However, it is important not to have too may categories for ease of navigation - you could split things up to the nth degree.

If we do a 3D gallery and I belive we should, it will rapidly become one of the largest galleries, especially after we reassigne all the current 3D images...thousands of them. should be divided at least into Abstracts, Characters, scenes and fx at a minimum. I'd bet if we counted all the 3D images in all the galleries now they would almost equal all the others.

Thanks for all your support guys! There's a groundswell of supporters here! I agree with Captain that it should be well considered so as to not have too many catagories. Also - Jono thanks for your support as a photographer - I don't think the benefits lie soley with the 3D people here. If people want 3d (REALLY like it - looking for it) then why not have a gallery for it - clearly there's a demand. As to rules - well you can submit your work to any gallery you see fit - but it makes sense to place it in one that best describes its' nature AND the one you WANT it to go in. Like for example photography > landscape; otherwise - why isn't there just a gallery called 'photography'? Well, it's clear the divisions not only help and guide the general viewer navigating the site - but it clearly is of great importance to the artist involved. Thank-you DigitalFX - I think you have validated the numbers! Well (*taking breath*) we could have a vote on it.... VOTE 1 3D Gallery.

HEY!!! News FLasH !! Just saw new posting on discussion Board!!! YEAHHHH!!!

Agree with Mythica.