This is a great feature.  Gradually TS is 'getting there' :)

I'd have to agree 100% with Bitmap.  I'm fed up of seeing subD models that claim the poly count of the base mesh, but show renders of the highest subdivision.  They can't have it both ways.  Make it clear to publishers that the poly count meta field should show the count of the renders.

Cheers,

Matt

Matt,the polycount in the metadata for SubD models has to be declared for the base mesh with which you are working not the SubD count.The subdivision iterations and the resulting polycount is a variable that originate from the actual base mesh.
Thats the problem here,the mixing of two categories while they seemingly have similar polycounts,but represent different geometries.
The female example from Komba3d is correctly presented in my opinion.BTW this is the best female model here on TS,congrats to the author.

Hi Komba,

Yes, I agree TS could give better guidlines for the polycount meta field - all the more important now that customers can search-by polycount.  TS need to keep it simple, but at the moment the way subD models are treated is just too simplistic.  Maybe remove the meta field for subD models, and leave it up to the artist to explain in the text (as you already do.)

As it stands at the moment your model will suffer from the new search option.  A buyer looking for an 'ultra detailed' character will search with a filter of a large amount of polys - your model will not show up in their search.  A buyer looking for a low poly game model will find your model, but they will quickly see that it's not a games model.  I think it's in your interests to get it changed.

Longer term TS need to address the issue of how this search option works with subD models.

Fantastic model though ;)

Cheers,

Matt