I'd go for Carrara for a number of reasons, but that isn't to slight Bryce. I also spent several years with Bryce. I still miss the Bryce texture editor, the "DTE", which to me combined ease of use with a format that made it possible for me to see and understand how the texture components interacted. Carrara's editor may have already surpassed the DTE in power, but the presentation as a huge "list" makes it harder for me to grasp what complex multi-channel shaders are doing. Similar remarks on terrain and sky generation. Carrara does seem very slow dealing with terrains, either in display or render, and I've generally had to use fewer at smaller resolutions because of this. I've also not been able to get excellent clouds going with Carrara -- but then, Bryce fell short of the mark as well (it just got closer with less effort). One can also argue either way on the built-in tree generators. Bryce uses a simulated tree with textured spheres for foliage. It has the potential of rendering faster, and can look good if used carefully. Carrrara has a full-function proceedural tree generator that can animate, but if you are not careful it will send your poly count into the stratosphere. On the other side, there is no comparison between the two when you get into Carrara's modelling tools, built-in UVmapper, physics and plug-ins. "Thinking in Bryce" can actually be a good exercise for a modeller, but one would never turn to Bryce as a primary modeller. On lighting and render options...herein lies the reason I made the switch myself. I do lighting in the real world, and to simulate the radiosity and caustic effects my mind's eye expects in an image took many lights and various other tricks within Bryce (ambience, gels, negative lights, light objects, etc.) The first time I ran a GI render in Carrara -- default settings -- I was hooked. It got closer than Bryce had for me with less work, and in a render that lasted minutes, not hours or days. It all depends on what you wish to do. If you are just making imaginary landscapes, and you are willing to let others provide cars and houses and people, the real question would be "Which is better; Bryce or Vue?" I think most people would answer Vue. I still think Bryce is one of the simplest applications to pick up, and could provide a nice entry into 3d for a certain personality. It is also cheap, and gives good results within its core area (deeply textured, dramatic imaginary landscapes -- see, Vue may beat it for realism, but to my eye Vue landscapes are always washed out and rather simplified). If you mean to go further into 3d, it makes sense to start with Carrara, which not only gives you modelling options in addition to a powerful and flexible render engine, but also, mostly, uses similar terms and methods to the mainstream applications like Max et al. Learning Carrara won't put you in a weird box where all you can speak is your own language.