Talk:FrameForge 3D Studio

Untitled
Okay - the first major objection to the article is that it is more of an advertising flyer than an encyclopedic entry. The article should focus on the background of the program and what makes the program significant. The ability to virtually put actors and cameras in a three-dimensional scale set and manipulate them to infinite detail for previsualization purposes. For a solid example on an article on software, take a look at Microsoft Word. In addition, all information needs to be citable from respectable published sources. So any information on Ken's background and the program's background needs to come from a published source. Hope that helps a bit. All the best LACameraman 09:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Version 3
There has been a major update, version 3.0, now called FrameForge Previz Studio. press release I'm not editing the article due to a conflict of interest: I'm one of the programmers of this product. --JWWalker (talk) 02:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hallo, this is a fantastic educational tool. It now does stereo 3D, which is becoming a big search item. It's the fastet way to visualize and thus to learn stereography. Maybe it could get an upgrade? Best, Simon Sieverts Munich Germany —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.135.103.50 (talk) 10:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Focus on significant facts
It would be great if a topic expert could trim the extensive sections "Overview" and "Other features". Such descriptions should focus on major significant features, not on every single function and button - Wikipedia articles are not supposed to serve as product leaflets. Also, these sections need independent sources where these features have been mentioned in some detail (ideally independent reviews). GermanJoe (talk) 21:15, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Request edit on 24 July 2020
Note from a Working Professional: This is Not a conflict of interest. I have No connection to software or company that owns it. This article about Frame Forge is a blatant advertisement. All of the reviews are positive. All of the reviews are outdated. There needs to be current, negative or critical reviews in order to remain neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.141.158.94 (talk • contribs) 09:38, July 24, 2020 (UTC)
 * I removed a lot describing what the product does. Does anyone know were the policy on "Reviews" list is? Thanks &thinsp;Darth&thinsp; Flappy   '&laquo;Talk&raquo;'  20:28, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You are free to either remove the review list (can be removed as WP:ELNO, we never really include lists like these), or you can help us summarize better what reviews say. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:04, 25 July 2020 (UTC)