Kimber, it's not MY definition. "Plugin" is an well known and universally accepted computer term. You seem to be the one pulling definitions out of thin air. I even gave you a link to the definition to educate yourself with. I happen to think educating people who display a lack of knowledge is nothing personal and it's a good thing. If I'd wanted to make a "Jab at you" I wouldn't have been so kind as to point you to the correct definition at Wikipedia.

Here's the definition of Tube if you can't find it:

PSP Tubes ( Paint Shop Pro Tubes )

There are currently thousands of graphic sites on the web containing 'tubes' across the web. The name 'tube' comes from the file extension .tub from the Paint Shop Pro photo/graphic editing program made by Corel. Graphics with transparent backgrounds can be 'stamped' onto layers and other graphics as different sizes in different layers, using tubes. Graphics that have transparent backgrounds such as .png, .pspimage, .gif, .tiff can be exported into the tube function. Jpegs can be 'tubed' to be transparent and exported into tubes. There are now programs available that are free created just for the purpose of making 'tubes' usable in other graphic programs, such as PhotoShop. Tubes are 'mouse drawn', made from other images, made from photographs, created from 3-D program images from programs such as Poser, DazStudio, Bryce and many more. You can find them free all over the internet ( Not always royalty free ). Tubes is one of the #1 growing graphic tool across the internet. From Fantasy art, scrapbooking, candy bar wrappers, banners and web design, sig tags, logos, and many other art and craft type projects, these graphics have endless uses. For larger lists of PSP Tubes, see results on google.

As you can see it's a graphic tool, but there's absolutely no computer code involved in Tubes.

Your Wiki plug-in definition wasn't what I was refering to and you know it:

"The closest section they fit in for now would be either Textures or Materials as they're usually used as textures on a square prop inside a 3D program in place of an actual mesh of an item." -quoted from you.

I also posted, in my previous post, your quote of what I feel is a jab at my expense, notice it didn't have anything to do with your plug-in definition.

You seem to go out of your way to make people feel stupid & then make a little fun of them. It's not appreciated.

You implied that I'm the only one whom thinks plug-ins are a broader category and if you have looked in that section, obviously not, so keep the "we all know better" to yourself.

*Takes a deep breath and dives in*

This is one of the main problems of forum posting... things that would be said lightly and not meant to bring offence in rl, can very easily be misconstrued or taken the wrong way when written down.

I can see both sides of this debate and I admit to being conflicted (and pretty confused too, if the truth be told.... )

If I was posting things (which I will be later.... brushes, which I can feel is going to open a whole new can of worms) I would be more likely to post  actual tubes in the plugins section and .png's in textures...... not because I think that they necesseraly belong rightfully there, but because I think that people who use 2d graphic programmes are more likely to look in those places for them.

At the moment we are being flooded out in poser with poser renderd .png's, which desperately need their own subsection in a dedicated 2d resource area.

*wanders off to worry about brushes*

Kimber, as Spacenewt says. Take a deep breath, take a time out or whatever it is you need to calm down. The site admins have already stated that they're seriously looking into adding a 2D section for Tubes and other 2D related items.

All I'm doing is posting the facts as I know them. I'm NOT here to give you or anyone else any grief or to take grief off of you either. The fact is, Plugins is NOT the broad catagory you wish for it to be. It's a very specific catagory for software plugins and scripts. Period.

Hey SpaceNewt, I think brushes will pretty easily fall in the 2D catagory as well. Just make sure to let the admins know you'd like to see subcatagories in the 2D section like they added to the Poser section for the different types of 2D files. Poser has subcatagory checkboxes for each of the separate Poser file types like Cameras, Lights, Faces, Poses, Morphs etcetra. I see no reason why the 2D section can't be subcatagorised in a like fashion with sections for Tubes, Brushes, backgrounds and what have you. Help the admins by telling them what you'd like to see now.

Hi there again

Just out of interest....are you a part of the ShareCG admin team???? You often speak as though you are?

I think that it is a pity that there seems to be this conflict between 2D and 3D and what should go where. After all, this is ShareComputer Graphics site and, as such, materials come in various forms.

It would be so much pleasanter if there was a dedicated 2D section and if people could respect the different forms of CG. As I have said before, no format is more important than any other and often the twain do meet.  Those who are lucky enough to have expensive registered programmes such as Max, Lightwave and Maya can clearly produce stunning results in animation. They have the tools of the trade that most of us cannot afford. Poser users and animators produce material on a budget and often make a very good job of it!! The 2D work generated by Poser, Bryce, Carrara and Photoshop can also be a joy to behold.

There is no need for any kind of grief.....after all, people are sharing their stuff in good faith. Let's just enjoy the site and let admin get on with sorting out the 2D categories (as they have promised). Hope you are getting somewhere with your texturing!!! Cheers

No, I'm not part of the admin. I speak as a contributor who also happens to be a computer programmer.  That means I have a very literal mindset when it comes to language and it's uses and definitions. I'm merely trying to help the site maintain some clarity with my contributions. If I come across as rude and impersonal, I'm sorry but that's just part of my personality and I have yet to figure out how to go about changing it. I just happen to be very matter of fact about all things computer related.

 I have done some behind the scenes collaboration with David, but nothing that would make me believe I was in any way in charge. I don't think I have the personality to be a moderator. I'm too blunt. Moderators need diplomacy and tact, of which I'm often sadly lacking as has already been noticed here in the forums. I never mean it to come across personal it's just the way I word things. If you find yourself annoyed with me, take a breath. I'm probably just being socially inept in my communication skills. Nothing personal.  I'm a nerdy Geek programmer. We're not known for our social skills.

Lol.....I am not annoyed....just curious!!!!!! Most importantly, would like to see a properly organised 2D section and then we can all enjoy.....yes???

Perhaps all nerds are blunt! he he. I was just being nosey but thanks for replying!

As someone else said....on a pc reading whats said, it could be taken several different ways cause we can't hear your tone of voice Matrix....I do the same thing!  ummm.....done it elsewhere in forums within the last hour.....

 TUBES aren't textures or materials (doesn't something have to be in .mtl format to be a material?) or plugins (cause most that are posted here are in png format or psd)....lol.....

If admin is looking into us a formal section for our tubes then I am satisfied! 

Matrix....like hearing from you cause you obviously know what your talking about!