"What the best images show is that Bryce is capable of far more than most beginners expect. New Brycers produce the sort of picture they do because thats what they think its capabilities are. Then they see the stuff put out by rochr, woodhurst, alvinayala etc. Its an eye opener, isnt it?" Just out of curiosity, though, I sometimes wonder how much of an image is the capability of the application used, and how much isn't. Not that it MATTERS in the final piece, but as a 3D artist myself who likes to know my tools to the fullest extent, I'm often curious about how much of the BEST Bryce images are actually done in Bryce, and how much of it are Photoshop post. In the case of Rochr, I've seen him post wires and flat-shaded Bryce renders of his stuff on CGTalk before, so I know he does all of the scene construction and ambience/atmosphere in Bryce, then suppliments some color correction and details in 2D (which is not uncommon even with people using the so-called "big name" 3D apps). However, postwork (2D) to suppliment certain elements of Bryce renders seems to be used far more abundantly than in those other apps (won't mention their names (cough3dsmaxcoughMayacough). LOL. Is this primarily due to some functionality limitations of the application, or more specifically render speed (or lack thereof) in the current version of Bryce? I'm simply trying to evaluate where I'll best be able to incorporate Bryce in my workflow as opposed to just using one of my other apps. Obviously, quick terrain generation and vast outdoor environments are where it shines the most (and is the primary reason for purchasing it), but beyond that I don't see where I'll be using it more than some of the other programs in my toolbox.

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.