Renderotica

Safe for work is explained in the CGbytes Community Posting Guidelines. I've added that to the Blog post so that people can find it easily. The images in the Gallery are to have no nudity. If there is some nudity but covered, so that nothing shows, then that may be allowed.

The product that you indicated is using a mannequin figure. No genitalia or nipples, just smooth white textures. (Like a Barbie Doll for children) We are actually working on a new vendor resource that they will be allowed to use that makes the Genesis characters appear even more like actual mannequins with ball joints and seams. Clothing stores put bikinis and bras on Mannequins that can be seen by underage children, so we want to be able to present the products that our vendors make in a similar fashion and still stay within the rules of the credit card processors. The goal is to keep the store open so Vendors can sell their products.

Originally Posted by: wurger

Safe for work would be something you could post in the Daz gallery.

Unless you work for a church I guess.

I guess that makes the "Daz powers that be" preachers? ;)

So, just for the record..  THIS is safe on on the CGBytes store:

https://www.cgbytes.com/store/sku/69555_Twining-Poses-for-Snake-and-V9

.. I have confirmation. Notice the product image?

So about that: THIS will get you banned on the Daz store.

Just saying...and for the record: I am not judging, in fact... quite the contrary, if you ask me this opens up so many more options to share "plain erotics" without the nagging "justifiation".

Yah: "someone" I know shared a render much milder than this and she got banned and hated Daz ever since. 

From looking over some of the gallery there, and reading the community guidelines, my thought process is something like this:

Clothes can be revealing as long as they don't actually reveal anything. That means swimsuits, even thongs, are normally ok. Even something like this from Daz would probably be all right.

Perilous situations would be all right (after all, even cartoons have those) as long as there's no blood or gore. The snake pose pack example you gave is a great show of this. There's peril, but nothing 'awful' happens.

Seductive is fine, sexual is not. I can totally see Janet Jackson's famous Rolling Stone cover being allowed. Light titillation (forgive the pun) is acceptable.

When I think of SFW pictures I think of things that won't get you fired immediately. For instance, people might judge you if they see you reading the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition, but not much more than that. However, if you're browsing a Playboy you'll get hauled into HR right then and there. Look to the works of Boris Vallejo and Julie Bell. Sexy? Yes. Revealing attire? Most definitely. Dangerous situations? Of course! All probably allowed on CGBites. Compare that with Gary Roberts and... well you get the picture (another pun). I feel that the community guidelines are the hard rules while my statements above invoke the spirit behind them.

@RangerRabbit, please correct me if I'm mistaken for any of these assumptions!