I prefer being called a "dilettante" instead of a hobbyist. Means basically the same but sounds way classier. :) KateTheDabbler

"dilettante" ??? Isn't that what happens to the pupil in the eye when ... Oh, ............... nevermind. ;=]

"well professionnal does not always mean better skills.. remember the latest iron maiden record's cover :) well it is a blatant counter example of such a rule :)" Not quite. The artist threw a rough together to show the band. They decided to use that version, rather than the artist's finished one. I believe he has since disowned the imgage.

"What I said was fictional is the concept that professional animators alone are so vast in number that they are the majority upon which the company survives." I dont know of any prolevel 3D application companies that claim to recieve thier revenues soley from professional animators even at the mid level. All of them promote thier apps as overall 3D/CG modeling /rendering/animation applications making their target audience people who merely create static 3D models,people who create Cg effects such as volcanic explosions space battles etc. ,and for those so inclined, people who want to model to rig and animate characters both humanoid and non humanoid. And I agree that in the context of the modern 3D/CG industry poser is not a "professional" app and largely a tool for "Hobbyists"

Don't make me whip out the dead horse people.

::pets dead horse:: Bingo Sam..

::pets dead horse:: Bingo Sam..

It's true that both hobbyist and professional can be "artists". It's true that "hobbyist" and "professional" are not mutually exclusive... I'm both. It's true that there is not a definitive and mandated difference in skill level... Very often and in many fields of human endeavor, it's the "hobbyist," who does what s/he does out of love, who is more capable or knowledgeable than the "professional" who does it because s/he has to. It's also, unfortunately, true that any word, accurate and wholly apt or not, can be used to hurt, or used in an intentionally hurtful way. I'd suggest it's very often done in defense of one's ego... Just as you can rarely find anyone more vociferous in, say, the Mac/PC debate than someone who's just spent a few thousand dollars on one or the other... Once a boy's spent a few thousand dollars an a single piece of software, it wouldn't surprise me if he named everyone who used anything else - particularly someone who got better results from a few hundred dollars worth of software and add ons - a hack. When they see work like Cath's (and so many others here) their little ego's have just got to be trembling... :-) I dunno... I sure like "poser dilettante" a lot. Wait... How about "Dilettante Poseur"?? That sounds awfully impressive, despite proper dictionery definitions :-) I just wanna someday be one of the Others with Cath, et al... I guess that means I better shut up and get back to practising my hobbyism, huh?

sam therapy: i did not know that.. i left the thread long ago... well then if they choosed the raw un finished version as a final one, i can understand the artist disowned the piece of junk.. I wouldn't have my name associated to it whenever i could produce much better things, it would be dangerous for my public face as a pro :) (means the one that get a leaving out of his skills/ability :)

ouuups, forgot: i would like to see the final intended picture ! to compare it with the raw render we were shown (and that sadefully will waste my audio shelves !)

In my version of Webster, here's the definition of "hobby", under which falls "hobbyist": "A subject or activity pursued for pleasure rather than for payment." At the moment, I fall under that category. It is true that "hobbyist" can be used perjuratively. It is always amazing how some people can get overly hung up on how art is created rather than what the final result is. Poser is a tool. 3dsMax is a tool. Maya is a tool. A pencil is a tool. A good artist can, with practice training, excel at any of these tools. A bad artist, with no real vision or understanding of composition, will still produce crap. The bad artist may create glossily rendered crap with a high end graphics program, but it's still junk.

So true, gagnonrich. But you can be technically perfect and still not be an artist. An artist, to me, has a spark of originality, imagination, creativity that the technicians may or may not have. Are the graphics in the galleries here art? How many are truly original? How many are copies of someone else's originality? A hobbyist can be an artist. And a professional can be a technician without being an artist....people pay for a lack of originality all the time. It's hard to define art but when you see something that is truly art, you can't forget it. How much of the galleries is unforgetable? Each of us probably have different definitions of what is art to us and what is not. Art is personal. For me, it should also be original...not just an imitation of what someone else has done but something extra, something unique to the person who created it, something that makes me look more than once. I don't do art. I practice techniques. I'll know it when I do something that is artistic, if ever I do. But I'm not ashambed to be a hobbyist till then. But that's just me.