Oh dear, what misleading answers! 1) The Bryce UI is actually very cleverly designed, and has a lot of tricks that Vue has not (I have written on this extensively). But you have to understand how to use it to best advantage. When you understand that, it flies along. 2) The difference in lighting is also knowledge-based. Bryce renders do look cold if you don't handle the ambient channel properly. 3) On http://phantast.actionbabecentral.com you will find procedures for getting Poser figures into Bryce with the minimum trouble and best results. You certainly can build complex scenes with multiple Poser figures in Bryce. A problem I am having with Vue is that a scene with two high-end Poser figures (V3 or M3) brings Vue to its knees. Nevertheless, the fact that Vue will read pz3 files is very useful. I just wish it would handle reflection and specularity better. (I don't see why it can't interpret the Poser values for these parameters, they are there in plain ASCII in the pz3 file). 4) The key differences, besides direct Poser import, are firstly that Vue has quite a few features that Bryce just doesn't have, like glowing materials. Secondly, terrains and skies and to some extent plants are better implemented in Vue. Thirdly, and very important for me, Vue is about ten times faster to render complex scenes, especially ones with many transparent or reflective surfaces.