Quote - If you are using plug-ins or any other type of "Effects" its not 100% from scratch and on the same level we poser users do.

??? Are you serious here? Using a plugin to say make a surface glassy, or to bend something in a way that PS can't natively do, etc. is NOT the same. What I am doing by using plugins would be akin to rendering lighting on a poser figure, or adjusting the hue of a downloaded jacket for a poser figure. The plugin is not the feature or focus of the artwork. It is used subtly to help express the art w/o distracting from it. Having said that, once in a while a filter can be the artwork, but that is rare (think Warhol's Campbells Tomato soup cans in a grid with a different color scheme or curve applied to each as an example) Throwing a figure and some clothes onto a scene could be compared to say, starting with a photo that someone else took, and running a filter or two on it and presenting that as art. As I believe I stated earlier, that is NOT art, and that is NOT what I'm doing. There is a big difference here, and it is false to equate using a a filter or plugin with using pre-created figures and clothes. It can be similar for someone that has only used PS for a week, but they aren't submitting abd posting here, and if they are, I bet they are getting very few votes. The point here is that if there is a basic level of pure amateurism and uncreative artwork done in photoshop and presented here, it would be dismissed in 2secs. Present the same level of "artistry" (or lack thereof) and skill in a Poser creation, and it could actually win!!!> Quote - Plug in Effects are made by someone else besides you,so are the Effects but you are using what the program gives you or buying Effects or plug-ins. What we poser users do and you do are use the program to make our art.

A plugin, in most cases, is very different in effect than using something recreated in poser. You are comparing apples to watermelons here. Using a lot of the plugins & filters in Photoshop (at least skillfully) is more like a painter using different size and types of brushes to get diferent textures. Again someone using poser who downloads someone elses figure would equate to someone using someone else's photograph in PS. The problem here is that a lot of the poser arts work that I have seen in the past, doesn't do much more than that. Download a figure, throw some downloaded clothes, set up some lighting (or maybe not) and hit the render button. Viola, instant art! NOT! BUt it can still win. Someone else downloads a photo of bill gates and uses a filter to swirl the picture and then presents that as art will get no votes, ignored, or flamed. We are saying that there is a bit of a double-standard here, and a bit of the "It's made in poser, so it MUST be art" attitude (not in everyone, just a few).> Quote - what you photoshop users make isn't art,or pencil artist will say that photography isn't Art. Each use their medium to produce Art.

I think that most real artists, regardless of skill, would actually recognize the artistic merit of each of the genres, and check their 'superior attitude' at the door. Of course this is not always the case, but it is a lot of the time, and you can't really generalize by saying that x type of artists will say that b type of artist is crap. > Quote - I would say that IMO our medium is very close to photography,Photoshop IMO is like digital manipulation.Each capable of producing museum quality Art

I totally disagree here, not necessarily in a bad way... a LOT of what I would see from poser "artists" is more akin to department store display window stuff. The really nice poser stuff I see here I would liken more to actually painting than photography. If I create something very artistic in photoshop and enter it into a contest and I get beaten by some really artistic poser stuff (and I have), all props go to the poser artist. There are some that produce simply incredible, amazing stuff. But if I lose to someone that has created something with less skill and creativity than a window display designer, it does irk me. Photoshop can be digital manipulation (if you think about it, it's all digital manipulation), but it can be so much more than that too. Next time you go to the book store look at some of the Photoshop Artistry books, or some of Bert Monroy's books. Simply calling it digital manipulation is oversimplifying it and not doing it any justice.