Quote - Could we see UVtemplates on these "Flat projected' Cylinders please? a grid tells us nothing about how they are mapped.

Here are the maps of the cylinders, as requested.  The number corresponds with their number in the above illustrations.

As you can see, it appears the maps make little difference even if they are very similar.  As noted in the original posts, no maps were altered from their "basic" projection format.  Of course, few would be suitable for image texturing with maps like that.  They'd have to be tweaked.  But, that's not the point of the experiment right now.  Producing a nice, clean UVMap in each projection style WILL be my next focus.  Given the results so far, I don't have a lot of hope that will result in clean renders without artifacts.  Could it?  Sure.  But, gravity "could" turn off tomorrow.  What I really want to know is "Why" there appears to be differences across projection types and these artifacts can be reliably reproduced on demand simply by choosing a projection type!  As BagginsBill noted, this really "shouldn't be" the case.  )ie: The "It's impossible." quote.)  Yet.... here we are.  There are the above renders.  Here are the maps.  I'm packing up the objects now.

However, one experiment doesn't mean anything unless it can't be falsified yet can be reproduced.  So, reproduce the results!  THAT is what I really would like to see.

In the last render I created my own cylinder in order to isolate the problem and demonstrate that it was not some weird artifact inherent in some portion of code in the original object file.  I reproduced the very same results using my own cylinder.  That SHOULD mean that anyone can reproduce these results.  I used Hexagon and Poser 7.  However, the original model was created in a program other than Hexagon so, we know that this crosses software boundaries in at least this instance.

So, create your own cylinder.  Apply a different type of projection to several copies of it.  Just use the default projection, don't re-arrange the verts for now, and then render them in Poser and see what happens.  If you get similar results or even the same results, that's enough to verify that the effects can be reproduced.  The next step would be "Falsification" of the experimental results or the interpretations/conclusions.  We should, with the knowledge base here, be able to accomplish Falsification if it is possible.  We most certainly should be able to easily accomplish Verification of the observed effects.  Try it and see.