It's not really to do with how "infinite" it is, but more with how easy it is to generate a whole sky full of realistic, varied, volumetric clouds. It just so happens that cloudscapes in real life are, for all intents and purposes, often "infinite". Certainly there are times when you only want one or a few clouds, but in my area at least these will be the exception to the rule. We get a lot of thick, low-level cloud here, and so naturally I'm wanting to duplicate my environment as part of my enjoyment of natural landscape rendering. Now producing this effect may be possible with ecosystems, and I'm certainly trying to go that route, but to me "clouds" are a feature, especially since E-On lists them as such. So what I mean and expect is that there be a cloud function that allows a quick and easy setup for volumetric clouds, much like the existing cloud system works, except for true volumetric clouds (such as are apparently possible using object primitives). Their current approach is akin to listing "thousands of cloud types" as a feature, but then requiring you to manually setup a 2d infinite plane and configure a texture from scratch to act as your clouds. Are you glad you don't have to do that every time you want some clouds? That there are presets for many good cloud types (albeit none truly volumetric)? Well, none of that is currently available for volumetric clouds. And considering that, in reality, all clouds are "volumetric" (have volume), that seems like a pretty big oversight. If they're going to advertise the feature but rely on some complicated, trial and error method of getting the results they advertised, they ought instead to at least give us a little automated help or simply not list "volumetric clouds". Put in a "volumetric cloud" object, just like the regular cloud plane objects they have now. Make it out of an ecosystem and an object primitive, I don't care as long as it works, but having to set it up manually means the "feature", as listed on Vue's feature list, isn't there. It doesn't seem like this would be a difficult thing to provide. Your comments re: Terragen make me feel like you think I'm just here to bash Vue. I most certainly am not! Frankly that comment makes me feel a bit unwelcome, and I don't think that's fair. If I've read into what you said though, I apologize. I've been working with landscape rendering software for over 10 years now, starting with VistaPro, then moving on to Bryce, World Builder, and now have been with Terragen for some time. I stuck with Terragen so long because of the great atmospherics, despite its other major shortcomings (which I fully recognize). So far IMO no other application has been able to best TG's realistic atmospherics, despite its limitations in terms of a single cloud layer and limited cloud types. But I wish that weren't the case! I would love to be able to work in an application with so much more flexibility and power like Vue. But I have my particular needs for a landscape renderer, and unfortunately it seems like Vue does not fully address them. I consider myself a pretty fair, even-handed person, and I think my long experience with multiple landscape renderers contributes to that. I am interested in landscape rendering as an art form and hobby in itself, not ultimately in any particular application. In fact I have been a tester for several other landscape rendering applications, including MojoWorld. The fact that one of them has fulfilled my needs recently more than others is only the fault of the developers. If I could decide what features each dev put in, believe me I would! So please don't assign a bias to me just because my current choice of programs is different than yours. If anything, my needs as an artist and hobbyist create any biases I have. And I certainly hope you wouldn't hold those kinds of preferences against anyone. I'm here because I am hoping that another program may finally be able to meet those needs, and I'm asking fair and unbiased questions trying to make a reasonable and full evaluation. If I had no real interest in Vue, I wouldn't be here. - Oshyan