From reading this forum, I get the feeling that the bulk of Poser users are hobbyists. I'll occasionally read about somebody doing commercial work, but people mostly seem to be using Poser for their own artistic expression. Poser provides a nice shortcut to realize fairly well rendered images without having to have great drawing skills. The best images will still be created by people who have inherent drawing abilities because drawing is more a mental talent/skill than one of hand dexterity. A good artist can create a better drawing with their less used hand (left for righties and right for lefties) than most people can. That's because drawing is about getting a mental vision onto a medium. There must be two different parts of the brain involved in the process because the mental vision doesn't translate as readily to a final product as copying from something seen with the eyes. The latter is much easier to do.

I think many are using it solely for personal expression but there are a lot of folks using it commercially too, if only sporadically. Some are using it commercially by supporting other Poser users by creating new props, characters, poses, textures, etc. using Poser for testing.

I use it for both hobby and commercial work. I can't draw worth a hoot but I can put together an image now and then with Poser and other apps for a book cover, CD jacket or label, advertisement, logo, product labels, web graphic or other design and get paid for it. A Poser render sold for a book cover paid for Vue4 and some more Poser goodies I could not otherwise afford. A Vue4 render sold for a book cover paid for a whole lot of Poser goodies. I try to make my software pay for itself when I can.

Did you intend to be insulting, or was that just a by-product? Perhaps you were typing with your off hand?

Maybe its just your broad generalization that smacks of an insult. Someone with artistic talents might compose a better render than someone without, but the actual finished product is the result of a great deal of knowledge and practice and usually complemented by many different skills. A talented Poser user could very easily produce a better render than someone who can draw.

By your same reasoning, someone who can draw would be a better photographer than someone who can't. And one could extend the analogy, I'm sure. Problem is: that dog just won't hunt. Its an empty premise, because we are comparing apples and oranges.

No, he said "better image" not "better render". As I understand it, he rates a good drawing higher than a good render in terms of artistic merit. I can see that such an argument is defensible, but I don't really agree. Producing a good render is also a matter of realising a vision; it's just not done in the same tactile way. Reverting to the question, I have seen published adverts evidently done in Poser (and often not very well). There are plenty other commercial applications as well. If there were no commercial users, you wouldn't get people stamping "not for commercial use" over their freestuff contributions. Or would you?

I was actually giving gagnonrich the benefit of the doubt, and really hoping that the argument was not going to be natural media vs Poser. I don't think that dog hunts either. Its as old as digital art and as empty as a bag of air.

There is a third category, in my mind. There are hobbyists, like me, without artistic ability but may have technical ability and just want to have fun. There are artists, who may or may not sell their works but have a higher level of expertise both in art and in the technical use of the program. There are those who sell their wares commercially, some of whom are artists and some are very good technicians, and a few are both. Poser is used to interesting effect in all the categories. It's just a tool. It is the mind and hand using the tool that makes the difference. It's not an either/or situation to me.

there's been sightings of Poser in "proper" movies too, The One starring Jet Li heavily used poser to choreograph the fight scenes.

Poser is also used in other work...such as medicine and law to create demonstrations and recreations. I wouldn't consider the results artistic, but they are professional.

It was also used in the beginning credits of "Cats & Dogs" I was watching the special features of "X2" the other day. They were using Poser figures to create animatics for the fight scenes. Pretty cool. Used on David Letterman show The list goes on. Peace, Joe www.3-AXIS.com

Lots of animatics are being done with Poser, from what I can tell. I recently picked up the "Moulin Rouge" DVD, and the "making of" feature also showed Poser previz. Poser is also being used for a lot of purposes that do not fall in the topics of what we discuss here: The CL website has a feature on forensic animation, and on MacExpo in London I talked to archeologists, sculpters, scientists etc that use Poser for all kinds of things. Also, keep in mind that many professional users don't hang out much in web communities.

The list of Commercial projects poser has been used on is endless, off the top of my head, a huge Aids awareness campaign in Africa....The Atlanta braves were made into poser figures and put on 65 foot boards...loads and loads of book covers..a guy uses them to illustrate guides on sports (made for parents who don't understand the rules ;o).....theatre planning.....etc etc......Steve

I think I fall into one of dialyn's categories - the technical/artistic one. When I first found poser (poser 2 free with a mag), I just used to play in it. I didn't use it for a long time but then I bought P4 with the idea of being more creative. Again, I played around, but didn't do much. I'm a fashion photographer, so I suppose I don't feel any desparate need to be artistic in poser. But, as I slowly learned more, I became fascinated by the technical side. (I was always into html and css). I know we all take poser hacks like MAT files for granted, but have you ever stopped to think that Poser is one of the few softwares in existence that is actually hackable? It's absolutely unique from that point of view. So now, I mainly use poser to test the models I build. The only renders I ever do are test renders. For me, Poser has now become the final stage in a building process. But even that's (mildly) creative, since I'm now getting into designing and building original furniture and other objects. I was always interested in design anyway, so poser gives me an outlet for that. It's a versatile program, so everyone will use it in their own way. mac

I want to clarify something, and mac is giving me the chance. I consider the people who create the fabulous textures and models for Poser to be artists in and of themselves. They use their technical expertise to create something that the rest of us can than use in our own graphics. Artisans in the past have create fine furniture and pottery and the like...useful art. Architects certainly create buildings that can enhance a skyline. Art takes many form...and practical art is one of its best applications. I would never consider the question of art in Poser without including those who create what we use. The thing is, the question hasn't a simple answer. And I think that's part of the attraction of Poser. It can appeal to both those at the very beginning of exploring the 3d world to those who are very sophisticated in it. That's makes it pretty cool, I think. I'd put other software, such as Vue, in the same category.

You don`t have to be able to draw to use poser. The main art thing that you really should learn if you can is composition. I know basic composition but not the more technical stuff. If you can make a good picture with poser then that is what matters.

xantor, Using poser is pretty much like using a camera in one sense. A photographer can have the greatest model in the world, but that's NOT what makes a picture good. It's down to composition, lighting, angle, background, getting a reaction or facial expression, etc, plus a few technical choices, like film and things. In Poser, you have all the same elements. It's up to you to dress the model, pose her, light her, etc, etc. Composition and POV count just as much in poser as they do behind a camera. I don't see that drawing has much to do with it. I can't draw to save my life, but I CAN take a picture that's moderately good (modesty forbids me from saying more). LOL. mac

Attached Link: My little gallery

Actually, I asked the first question because I'm curious who the primary users are for Poser. I've occasionally seen Poser used in commercial works, but that's more the exception than the rule. It's still relatively rare to see Poser artwork outside of a Poser gallery. It also says something about the marketplace for commercial content if the primary Poser user is a hobbyist (which is what I am at the moment). Affordable content should sell more than high priced content because there doesn't seem to be a large group of users profiting from using the program. I've got no argument against calling Poser content builders artists. I was sort of leaving them out of the query because, outside of price, they shouldn't care too much whether they're dealing with hobbyists or commercial artists. Another indication that the Poser community is more a hobby venture than a commercial one is that the content being provided leans very heavily in the fantasy arena. As far as artwork goes, it doesn't matter to me how it's created, digital or otherwise. The end product is all that counts. Given two individuals with equal technical proficiency with Poser, the one with more artistic skills will probably produce the better image. If the Hildebrandt Brothers were familiar with Poser, they'd be putting out some unbelievable Poser art that probably wouldn't be very distinguishable from their paintings. Even if we had access to the same models they did, they'd still put something out better than what we could ever imagine. There's no substitute for having decades of experience as an artist. The more a person draws (there's no distinction between digital and natural media), the better they are going to get. It's like any other skill. The more a person practices drawing, the more they break down the barriers in the mind to translating what's in the imagination to a final product. It's a matter of having a good "eye". The interesting thing about Poser is that it allows anybody to produce a good render, but not necessarily a good drawing. Just open up Poser, pop in Victoria, render her with her default pose, and you've produced a better human drawing than what 95% of the people in the world can do with natural media. That's not a particularly interesting drawing, but it's still a very cool capability to have. That's where the photography analogy is useful. Anybody can take a photograph. There's not a lot of skill required to push a button to take a photo and even the more arcane photographic skills can be learned (exposure, lighting, etc.). There are still people who take great photos and people who take uninteresting photos. There is the same disparity in Poser. We've all seen good Poser artwork and bad Poser artwork. The good stuff has figures in natural flowing poses and the bad stuff has stiff, awkwardly posed figures. The best approaches the quality of a painting or photograph and the worst looks like bad computer art. Much as I'd like to point out some concrete examples from the gallery, it's not fair to the people that did the drawings. They're doing the best they can and, given a number of years additional experience, will probably be producing some really incredible stuff. I'm still learning Poser. I'm trying to get over the frustration over the amount of effort to lay out a drawing versus the speed of getting a render. I can produce a good sketch in minutes that lays out all the dynamics of a drawing, but it takes me hours with Poser. On the other hand, it takes minutes for the Poser layout to be fully rendered and much longer for me to try to do the same thing with paints. I've only done two fully rendered images (in the gallery here) and can finally start seeing that I can do something with the program that I find pleasing. Poser is a more iterative form of drawing than using natural media. There is much more control in producing a natural media drawing than with Poser. Poser has to be pushed to get the same results. When I'm drawing, I can put every body part and finger in place with a few quickly drawn lines. I have to turn dozens and dozens of dials in Poser to do the same thing. What I've done with Poser to date mostly just starts showing me where I can go and I've got to crawl before I can get better.

I don't think a comparison should be drawn between poser and drawing. The two are like chalk and cheese. It reminds me of the 'photography is a poor cousin of painting' discussions from a hundred years ago. Every medium has it's own technical and creative requirements. To go back to the photography analogy ; painting and drawing may require a certain skill which a lot of people don't have, but they also give you the freedom to start with a blank canvas and put anything you want on it. Photography requires a different set of skills, and the challenge is to take what you see in front of you and make it something fresh and new. Poser makes it easy to set up certain scenes or figures but. for example, it's lighting is a major handicap. I could go on and on with comparisons, but in the end, you just have to choose a medium and be creative with it. And that usually means breaking the rules, pushing the boundaries and generally being original. No matter what your tool of choice is, the same things apply. mac

I would say for most of us it is a hobby. However, if anyone happens to go and see the "Aussie Floyd" (Pink Floyd Tribute Band) my colleague told me that they run a video in the background during "The Wall" which was redone entirely in Poser and 3DMax. (I can't say for sure, I didn't see it, but he swears blind that some of it was Poser.) So yeah, it is being used commercially as well, though not as much. The worst example I saw recently was the cover of an Iron Maiden album. (O-M-G) I can draw a little bit. I can draw you a horse in 5 minutes flat. It won't be anatomically correct (I'm lazy :P) but you will clearly recognize it as a horse and you will likely not notice that there are things wrong with it at first glance. That's the extent of my drawing skill. My shading sucks. My talent to do people is around nil, possibly lower lol. (I can do smilies! And stick people.) There are good and bad points to Poser. Yes it can take forever to get it even half way right and you could probably draw it faster. But when you combine the two... I urge you to look at Toxicangel's Gallery. It is awesome and shows precisely what you can achieve when you have a talent for both drawing/painting (I lump them in together although they really are different animals) and posing. Put my own next to that and you will see that I am seriously lacking the drawing/painting part of the equation. (I'm not completely hopeless, but I'll never approach anything like Toxicangels artwork) However... My lacking ability has nothing whatsoever to do with talent. I believe anyone can learn to draw and paint - and do it well. Maybe not to the degree that true talent can learn it, but everyone can learn it nonetheless. What my non-ability comes down to is patience. I simply don't have the patience to sit there for hours and hours and fix and paint and... you get the idea. I could learn to do this all very well, but I only render for my own enjoyment and as long as I am reasonably happy with the end result... I don't see the point of actually going out and learning all the different techniques and stuff. (Tho I don't doubt for a minute that I would really have fun learning.) I'm just a lazy person. :) Posing is the same way. It takes patience and skill. Anyone can learn it, but it takes time and effort and a lot of practice. There is one thing however which no one in the world can teach you: "The Eye". If you don't have "The Eye" to see what makes a good image, then you will have problems. Be that as a painter, a renderer, or a photographer. I remember my first time in New York. I had decended upon my boyfriend who was filming the NY Fashion week. He and his crew shared an apartment with a couple "Snappers" (His term, not mine lol) One afternoon I came back from a visit to the Statue of Liberty and downloaded my photographs onto the laptop. One of the snappers (Photo Journalists) stood behind me, watching. At one image he said "Nice shot, that was lucky". The image was on of the sun directly behind the Statue's head, giving her a halo of sorts. I told him that it wasn't luck that got me that picture. It was seeing where the sun was headed and waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting - and praying the boat stayed on course the whole time - and then taking the shot when it was just right. He nodded. The next one was of a reflection in a skyscraper at the port. (The big mirror one, if anyone knows the one I'm talking about, half round facade) Again, this was something I noticed happening, and I waited, waited, waited until it was just right - and took the shot. Planning, paying attention and "The Eye" got me those images. Nothing else. Sadly the digital cameras were nothing like they are now and the resolution of those images is sadly lacking :( But.... you can learn to draw. You can learn to pose. You can even learn to light things. You can't learn the eye. If you can't see the image you want before you start... then you will have a very hard time to create it. If you don't recognize the opportunity... then you won't get the shot. Painted, rendered, or photographed. Sorry if I went of topic, and those are my personal views, obviously. They are not meant to offend anyone, just in case :) Silke

Well gagnonrich,almost all of the Poser images you see are the result of 3d party content,....Vicky,Michael,photographic textures,props,etc.,etc. Except for a small amount of postwork,people use Poser as a stand alone program to create their images. As you can see from the ad for the original Poser,the program was developed as an AID for computer artist. Reading your post makes me believe you have a strong interest in natural media,,,so why not follow that?(!). Use Poser just as a start to your digital drawing,and build on that. While Photoshop is the best for composits,corrections,layer blends,etc..I think you should explore what Corels Painter(and a Wacom tablet) has to offer someone who works in natural media. Try Posers sketch renderits really, really a great feature, that few people ever use.take it into PS or Painter, and work it over with the pencil and eraser tools..paint over that (well you get the idea). Happy renderinguh..drawing,SWAMP

Everybodys always looking for an arguement. Back to the original question: The Courier-Journal of Louisville, Ky has someone who uses Poser once or twice a week or so for illustrations in their Features or Lifestyles section (That Section of the paper that has comics, advice, recipes, entertainment etc). Straight Poser 4 figures, clothes, hair and lights. And no fancy textures.

I'm an Poser addict evolving from a hobbyist to a 'paid artist' - 'pretend artist getting paid' is more like it. I agree a lot with Dialyn and Maclean. But I was initially attracted to Poser because I am mentally lazy and Poser is very easy to learn - very easy to make awesome renders without really knowing any technical aspect of how the software causes the final image to be generated. Having hundreds of fantastic artist-vendors making drop dead gorgeous props and textures makes Poser even more addictive. I don't know if it fits the orthodox idea of 'art' but 'Posing' is a great means of self expression. BTW - there's a string of movie theatres here in Midwest america called Kerasote and their promo clip uses a Vicki 'statue of liberty' look-a-like. I've also seen Poser used in a TV cop show to simulate how a victim fell from a balcony.

I guess I'm a bit confused by some of the responses I'm getting. I'm not disparaging people who provide Poser content or people who use Poser to create art. The best content providers are gifted artists in their own right. I don't have time to learn how to create 3D objects, so I'm relying totally on content I've purchased or downloaded from various Poser communities. I'm very grateful that they're out there. Without the talent of the 3D artists, we'd all be limited in what we could do with Poser. I view Poser art as being drawings. That may not be the right classification, but it's the way I approach it. The toolset and skills are different from traditional media, but the end result is an artistic work. I've been fooling around with Poser since version 1 and have tried all versions with the exception of 3. Poser 1 and 2 were mostly artistic aids. There were no expressions for the models and, by today's standards, they were primitive. Poser 4 & 5 upped the ante and added enough functionality to Poser models, with morphs and improved figures, supplemented by even more improved models from DAZ and others, that true drawings could be created with Poser models. I'm not an artist by trade, but have some artistic skills. I can do a decent pencil drawing, but haven't been as happy with more fully rendered images using paint or other media. It seemed as if every time I painted an image, I lost a lot of the initial spontaneity of the pencil sketch. I've looked to Poser as a means to create more fully rendered images, but it's taken a long time to get to a point where I was happy with anything I've done. Posing takes a tremendous amount of time to get right. On the other hand, once the poses are done, the render takes a much shorter amount of time. It balances out. I can produce a better finished product with Poser than I can with other media. It takes time to get used to the change in work flow. I'm trading the speed of laying out a drawing on paper to a slower method of posing Poser figures, but I'm getting back a more polished end product in less time. That's not a complaint as much as an acknowledgement that it's a different medium with different requirements. In the end, the best art is going to result from the vision of the artist. The tools are only the means to get what is in the artist's head. That inner vision, or the "Eye" or whatever anybody wants to call it, is what differentiates one artist from another (be it Poser, painting, photography, sculpting stone or sculpting 3D meshes). Give two people, with the same mastery of an artistic technique and the same tools and the end result of their efforts will be very different products and one will be consistently better than the other because tools and techniques are only part of the equation to creating an artistic piece. Having a good eye is necessary to create the best works of art. Practice improves that inner vision. A person can look at a drawing they did a year ago and see how to make it better. ToxicAngel's stuff is amazing, though I'm getting a little jaded by Poser pinups, though the pinups are very well done. Other Poser artists that impress me are: Flak ("Siege" will not your eyes out--it's so incredible--it might be the most detailed Bryce/Poser image ever) http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=Flak Yamoto ("Kyoto the Dream" is brilliant) http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=Yamato Bubba (though his Bryce renders are more impressive than his figure work) http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=Bubba Fatale (a bit more pinup stuff than I like, but done with an attitude, look at "Remains of the Day") http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=Fatale

wellll....long weekend and I need to wind down but thought I'd throw my 2 cents in.. first off...no offense to Silke...with whom I actually agree quite a lot, but the thing that struck me was that it was mentioned that "The Eye" cannot be taught...not just by her, but as a common theme in this thread. In my experience as an art director ...I "teach" the eye all the time. I see artists come on board all the time (we're talking commmercial advertising here...). They start out with everything out of balance to a trained artist's eye. For example...everything is the same size, same font, all centered and the lead photo is stuck in the middle. BUT...they DID manage to get it all on the page...so they are happy! Then I come along as art director and say..."OMG...no nonononono!" And then begin to educate them on say... Depth: Use more than one weight of font...use (gasp) TWO fonts! Balance: Use colors for balance...use left offset by right... use heavy on one side and nothing on the other to create a "statement" , use ANYTHING but "all-the-words-are-on-the-page-so-I'm-done-ain't-that-amazing!"...etc....do SOMETHING! New artists are like scared bunnies...afraid they will do what someone else thinks is wrong, just happy to have it all there, and when they DO get it all there, they think its done. Now take those same artists 3 years down the line, when they have had me or someone else drilling into them balance, depth, etc....pushing them to dig within themselves for their own creative ideas. They have LEARNED "The Eye", by trial of fire. If they don't get it...they lose their job pretty quick! So..."the Eye" CAN be taught, perhaps not to some people's thinking as a "traditional" artist aka Monet, Dali, and the like...but it CAN be taught. (I know because once I nail them on it enough times, they don't bring kindergarten layouts to me anymore!...lol) That process...constructive criticism... hopefully will bring out in them the desire to continue to push themselves. At which point they become "true artists", whichever medium they choose (advertising, painting, whathave you.). They then have a "drive" to create...conceptualize...and most of all TRUST..their eye. And THEY will be the ones to now teach the next generation of newbies, much like the community here. Yes, people are "born" with natural talent....and some are better than others...but it can be taught. The second thing that struck me as I read the posts was that somehow it seemed to become a discussion of "hobby art" isn't "real art"..aka the title of this thread. Not that this is a "new" arguement, which I won't try to re-argue here. What struck me was that I thought that all these people here in the community coming together to make pictures for each other and share them and learn and be delighted, annoyed, amazed, or moved in some way by what EVERYONE puts out for each other to see...is the very DEFINITION of art in the first place! So whether its for commercial or personal..it's still art. Whether its computer generated or hand done..its still art, as others have said. For the record...I DO get paid for some of my Poser art. Did I get addicted to it? Yes. Do I do it to please myself AND others AND get paid once in a while..YES! Would I give it up because I didn't get paid for it? No way. That to me...makes me (and a lot of others) a "true artist". I do it because I can't NOT do it....no matter what anyone else thinks.. ::hops off soap box and hopes they don't throw tomatoes since this is the holiday dress and all:: zai..

hhhmmm...and back on topic... I got paid for my very first poser render which was for a set of tarot cards...I thought the woman was nuts...but she paid me...! So...I guess I did get INTO it for commercial reasons...and stayed to enjoy the art...::sheesh zai..shut up aleady::

Very well said zai. To the original question: 1. Poser, if one were to count the total number of renders made and how many of them are meant for comercial use (i.e. they atually make you MONEY) I would say it's 99.5% non-commercial. But if there are let's say 200 000 people out there in total using Poser, that still makes for quite a few using it comercially. By commercial I DON'T mean some renders for your own website - I mean someone actually pays you for the render, whatever form it is published in. I've made an infinite number of renders in the last 6 years. And made money out of 3. Two in print and one on a cd-rom. I never expeced to make a cent out of any of it, ever - so I'm very pleased! 2. There is absolutely NO connection between the medium used and the ability to create something demonstrating artistic ability. If you have that ability, you can use it with any medium : a paintbrush, a camera, mud, software, hair, flowers, a block of marble, video - anything. Different mediums suit different people. So anyone who has a 'thing' about Poser being too simple is missing the whole point. Being able to render something that looks 'fine' in Poser is NO indication that one possesses artistic ability. The way an image 'expresses something' is what demonstrates that. And the way it is put together - composition in other words. It has nothing at all to do with one's knowledge of the inner workings of the render engine or the modeling app you master (if any). I can't model or make textures. So what? Those that can - fine. That's their medium,. Mine is another entirely. :] Fish

Do not say "professional" here. Because "professional" 3D software costs tens of thousands of dollars. We do NOT want Poser to be "professional" if it means that!!!!!

zai, I have to agree totally with you. The EYE can be taught. In fact, pretty much anything under the sun can be taught.... up to a certain point. Anyone can learn to be a photographer of sorts. But what distinguishes a good photographer from a mediocre one isn't the EYE - it's something else which is almost indefinable. I think it's the ability to think 'outside the frame'. Just occasionally, I'll be shooting and suddenly see something or think of something that's way off base. And when I do it, it's always brilliant. It's a gut feeling I get that says "Hey! Look at it this way. Isn't that great?" So, yes... the EYE can be taught, but to make a photograph (or a layout) really stand out from the crowd, it needs that flash of inspiration that sets it apart. The better the artist, the more frequently those 'flashes' come. To offer you all a bit of hope, I was watching a discussion the other night about human intelligence. Pretty fascinating stuff. The thinking used to be that not everyone was born with the same amount of intelligence. Some people were more intelligent than others and that was that. Nowadays, scientists have a much deeper understanding of the human brain and know that it's one of the most flexible organs in the body. They now reckon that anyone at all can develop their brain and increase their intelligence way beyond what they're born with. The current thinking can be summed up like this. "Not everyone is born equal in intelligence... but they can BECOME equal" I think the same applies to a lot of the arts. You may not be born with natural artistic abilities, but you can educate yourself and develop what abilities you do have to make yourself a far better artist. Finister said (about poser) 'very easy to make awesome renders without really knowing any technical aspect' That's really my point. Everything is relative. When you first use poser, you go "Wow! I'm so cool!". Then, once you start comparing what you've done with other people in the community, you say "Er.. maybe I'm not so cool after all" But by using the program, watching how others do things, learning and practising, you improve. And THAT is what it's all about. Improving, and developing your abilities. The Meaning of Poser Life - The End (LOL) mac

erm...why do I suddenly feel like one of those fish in the tank in the Monty Python movie...::chuckle:: thanks guys...thought I might get my hand slapped for going so totally off topic...but I feel downright welcome now..lol I think you have a good point there mac about the flashes..you nailed it about the flashes coming more often when you do things more often. One other thing that came to me about this discussion is that when using Poser..ofthem what I start out with is NOT what I end up with. Because it gives you the ability to move around the entire little "world" you create instead of just drawing out a flat plane...you can then take a look at several snap shots of that world and see which one suits you best, or possibly changes the entire feeling of the finished piece. That sort of makes Poser a "journey", more than a medium. Not exactly something you can do with traditional drawing or painting without having to start completely over I suppose. But the same would apply to photography in a sense. I think the 3d aspect of both Poser and photography gives the "artist" more of an interactive tool with which to complete the total effect, sometimes with surprising and totally different results. Anyone else's thoughts? oh..PS...once she saw the first one, she had me do about 5 more...some of which involved actually modifying existing traditional paintings done by another artist because they didn't exactly fit the need she had. The other artists ended up loving what I did too..which I was leary about. Which I guess nails the point I made about Poser being more flexible than traditional media. The artist couldn't change it without redoing the whole thing...I changed it in a matter of an hour or 2, with a combo of photoshop and poser. Yet all 3 fused together to make the final image.

Hmm. A few points I'll comment on. I can't do diddly squat with my left hand, other than the MOST basic things. I certainly can't draw with it! I can, however draw quite well with my right hand. I went to art school. I've got a whole portfolio (a real one, with a zipper and a handle ;-) full of evidence of my ability to draw. I can draw people, animals, objects, pretty much anything I can see. I can also draw things out of my own head, using no model at all. So the assertion that right handed artists draw well with their left hands... I dunno where that comes from, but it's not true to any extent of which I'm aware, and I've known a lot of artsts. ;-) As for what I use Poser for, yeah, it's mostly for my own entertainment and enjoyment, but I also do commercial work with it. Many commercial artists make art for their own personal enjoyment. If you like to make art, you'll do it for pay and for free, and just to play. ;-) bonni

So the assertion that right handed artists draw well with their left hands... Not great, but you can probably draw a more realistic human head, even if it's squiggly from using a hand not accustomed to drawing, than somebody can with their good hand. Instead of something that looks like a refined smiley face, you'll have a head with a ridge for the eyebrow and details that come from a lifetime of drawing experience. It's not going to be a masterpiece because your left hand isn't trained, but your eye for art is trained. If an artist lost the good hand in an accident, the other would eventually be able to create works equal to the other. That's because you draw with your brain. Your hand, mouse, camera, or whatever you create with, is just the means to share something that is already in your mind or something that you have the unique vision to discover. Most of my computer art is done by my left hand even though I'm a rightie. That's because I was starting to develop carpal tunnel in my right hand. It took a few weeks to develop some facility in my left hand, but now it's a fairly natural process to use it with a mouse. At work, I use my right hand and, at home, use my left. I still can't draw great with my left hand or write with it, but that's only because I haven't forced myself to develop some facility for those activities. I remember seeing a news special about an artist that lost his arms in a car accident and now draws with his foot. When I was thinking of the artistic "Eye", I was mostly thinking of an artist's inner creativity. I tend to think that creativity is something that can be nurtured more than it can be trained. Technique can be taught. Training can improve an artist because it shortens the trial by experimentation by showing them what more experienced artists have learned. The best artists would seem to have something that cannot be trained. > "Not everyone is born equal in intelligence... but they can BECOME equal" This is just my thought, but I don't think everyone has the same potential, but the potential most people have to do something is more often limited by themselves than by what they are capable of doing. The top artists, athletes, and mathematicians probably have some genetic advantage that all the practice in the world will not let others achieve. Having said that, I believe that anybody can achieve far more than they can imagine in any field that they desire if they work at it. The greatest limitation is giving up. A child, that only draws when forced to in a school art class, will never be as good as one that draws every day at home. It's not that the latter child is necessarily gifted as much as has probably been encouraged to draw and has learned to enjoy it. The first child can readily be a better artist, but has either decided to not try or has found something else that is more fun to do. The more somebody does something, the better they get at it because that practice is making new connections in the brain and reinforcing those that already exist. Somebody who doesn't practice those activities doesn't have the learning advantage that the practicing person gains. A great movie, about genetics vs. determination, is "Gattaca".

Not great, but you can probably draw a more realistic human head, even if it's squiggly from using a hand not accustomed to drawing, than somebody can with their good hand. < LOL! No, honestly, I can barely make a squiggly smiley face with my left hand. I'm really, REALLY right-handed. :-D bonni

That's interesting because here's something I quickly drew with my left hand. I signed it lefthanded to show that there's not a lot of facility with that hand. I've found that I've got to make short quick strokes to make anything look reasonable. An effort to sign my name cursively was completely illegible. From a lefthand control standpoint, I've probably got no more dexterity than a 3-year old, but I've got an adult's eye for what I'm trying to draw. The thing that's funny about the sketch is that it has a sort of children's book simplicity to it. That's not what I intended. It's still almost something worth exploring more if I had the time.

::returning to old topics like the ghost of Xmas past...:: I can't draw a stright line without a computer....but I can make a full page color ad sit up and do tricks like nobody's business...lol Rich..interesting idea there...reminds me of when you have to draw a baby on a piece of paper on top of your head at a baby shower and then the best "baby" wins...I never did get the point of that game though..I mostly drew potatos..