It seems to me that you are selectively avoiding things that have already been said. In the end it's the same shape, but the cost is a factor to some. If you can model and object in Bryce and save $900 on Rhino, that is something to consider. In my prior post; Of course, if you have nothing else at your disposal then you make due with what you have at hand. Not everyone at Renderocity (or in the Bryce forum for that matter) is a professional graphics artist. In fact, I would hazard to guess that the larger portion of those on the forum are hobbiests who don't even plan to become professionals. What are you suggesting? That because youre not a professional that you should do all your modeling in Bryce? If that is in fact what youre suggesting, I think thats nonsense! but when someone asks the question "why don't you model that in Bryce?", the appropriate answers are (1) I'm a pro and don't have the time and have access to something else that allows me to do it faster, or (2) Because I don't know how to do it in Bryce and do know how to do it in the other program ... not (I submit) (3) because it's a pain in the rear to do it in Bryce, or (4) it can't be done in Bryce. Again you avoided from my prior post; No one here has suggested you stop using Bryce as a modeler. Neither is anyone suggesting that it's impossible to model complicated objects using Bryce. Youll forgive me if I disagree again with youwe can agree to disagree, cant we? In the first place, dont presume to dictate what is an appropriate response to the question. I can provide my own answers to question without any interjection from the sideline. The appropriate answer should be the simple and honest truth. Im not working for Bryce so I can express myself openly without fear of retribution. But I must first say that Bryce is my program of choice to work from. It is my home based studio platform launcher so to speak. Again I say, and I would have to answer; Bryce was not intended to be a full-featured modeler, with that in mind, they incorporated 3rd party imports. So yes, in that respect Bryce is a pain in the butt to use. Its slow and cumbersome to use as far as modeling goes. Yes, Bryce can be used for modeling all sorts of things, yes, it can even import grayscale heightmaps. But, given a choice as a modeler, Bryce would have to be my last choice as a pliable modeler. Bryce does best that what Bryce was designed to do and that was as a terrain generator. It has nothing, whatsoever to do with whether youre a professional graphic artist or not. That would be my answer to all users alike. I see all sorts of stuff posted as "Bryce" that has very little else of Bryce other than Bryce used to render it. No Bryce modelling, no Bryce terrains, sometimes not even a Bryce sky .... but it's posted in the Bryce section as a Bryce image. Now some people will credit the fact that nothing but the render was done in Bryce ... but then I still find myself wondering why they would post it in that category. Does the render alone qualify it as such? A good while back we had a thread posted here concerning those same questions richymaveety, I cant find it at the moment, but the general consensus, as I recall was that yes, the sheer reason that Bryce is your render engine of choice constitutes sufficient reason for posting in the Bryce forum. And the reason for that seemed to be that most everyone realized that importing was a built-in feature of Bryce. It was also suggested that not all artists are built equally. Some could and know how to model and others decided they just werent any good at it and preferred to import either from 3rd party software or from other modelers those items did needed to complete their artistic visions. That all art forms barrow from other art forms. To say that photography cannot be considered an art form because all the elements are already put in place for the artist, and all he has to do is capture it onto an imaging element is wrong. And the same thing holds true with Bryce. At least, that is how I remember the outcome of that thread, Im sure Ill be corrected otherwise. Bryce is only one part of the tool kit. Most of us have other software packages we use as tools, they include some combination of but not limited to; Poser, Photoshop, PhotoPaint, Paintshop, Painter, CorelPaint, Amorphium, Xfrog, Zbrush, Canoma, TrueSpace, Carrera, Amapi, 3Dwing, Dogwaffle, Cinema4D, Rhino, 3D Studio Max, Lightwave, Maya to name a few and Im sure I missed a bunch but you get the picture. Bryce, unfortunately, is simply not the end all of render software packages, everything rolled up in one. I think most of us here have come to accept that simple truth. But all of this shouldnt stop you from modeling in Bryce until your hearts content. Not by any means whatsoever. In fact, we would applaud you and cheer you on for pushing the Bryce envelope to its extreme if that is what you choose to do. We are constantly amazed at the quality of work that Bryce can produce. In doing so you would have but again shown that which has been shown many times over, that Bryce is nothing short of a tremendous little package that can output at top shelf, showcase level and we know it! Thats why were here!