ok, let me, once again, clarify a couple of things.

the point isn't about making money.  the point is about getting feedback from a group of people who don't have the eyes of a poser artist, and who are often used to a certain quality of work.  the point is about participating in a much larger world of computer graphics than a few poser sites.  i haven't been asking could someone get a job doing poser work, since i've already seen people say they've done so, i've seen sites of poser artists list their commercial work, and i've seen professional poser work in the comic shop (john van fleet and a poster for brian haberlin's neobeauties).  as far as i can tell, the fact of the matter is a lot of the people paying for illustrations are mostly people in marketing who have an eye for gloss and slick and an interest in fast, good, and cheap.   and no interest at all in the process as long as it doesn't involve trouble or cost for them.

other communities, that's different.  on the one hand, it means that people who aren't accustomed to (and therefore at least partially blind to) vicky's myriad joint problems can look at your work, or that people who don't have only the daz' meshes as their notion of 3d children can critique your images of kids.  i can't tell you how many times i've seen something land here and have people just lavish it with praise, me think "nice, but a bit risque," then have my boyfriend see it over my shoulder and go, "oh, my god!  what the hell is she wearing!  who put her in that?!"  in terms of appearance and what an image says to people, the norm here is not necessarily the norm for your average citizen. 

sometimes, it's good to have an outside opinion to get some perspective. and it can be great to hear from people whose expectations are higher than those within the poser community.

on the other hand, it's not helpful if  they're seeing only what they expect to see, and not what's there. lots of people care about process to greater and lesser degrees, with biases in different places.  understanding where those biases are is key, in my experience, to interpretting the feedback you get.  if people say, "stiff and lifeless," but they actually mean, "i can tell that's a daz figure," then you know you don't need to work on your posing abilities but your morphing or your painting abilities.  if people say, "you should learn to model your own stuff, that's not unique enough, " but what they actually mean is, "i spent a month making a figure almost identical to that one, and years learning how to,  and you should have to work just as hard," then you know to ignore them unless you actually have to work with them.

so most people's reactions here have been helpful.  i have to say, i still see a bias, but a waning one.  even what people have posted here tells me that.  people don't feel it's "fair" to judge something just on results.  and while there's a concern about short cuts to effective or realistic depictions of humans, no one seems to be concerned with short cuts to skin shaders, types of  lighting, fluid dynamics, particle systems, draped cloth or any of the myriad aspects of 3d that have become more automated.  for instance, poser is a "toy" because it doesn't have global illumination, instead of other apps being a "cheat" because you don't have to script your own.  so, imho, i see an interesting slant.  you can take short cuts on most things and not say anything about it, except for figure modeling. and then, you can take short cuts, but you better say what they are.

if Rorr Konn was right about me asking "why," i could philosphize on the need to see every human as incredibly unique and impossible to codify, while it's fine to autogenerate countless species of plant life.  but why hasn't ever been my question.  what and how much has been, and i've gotten some answers on that.

personally, like i said, i find the whole bit about judging "process" a slippery slope.  it's like saying i should care whether someone made their special effects in cg or with actual models.  or used green screen or actually built the scene.  or decided to make paints from scratch or bought them.  unless i'm actually trying to duplicate the process, i don't personally see the point in trying to figure out if something is toon shaded maya or hand drawn or a mixture of the two.  i don't see a reason to say computer coloring is fine in comics, but 3d is a cheat that should be avoided.    judging process always seems to me to be even more subjective than judging results (it always seems like the comparison point is one's own process), and it appears to me to hold one back to the process one knows instead of opening one to the processes one doesn't know.  it especially seems to hold effort in a higher esteem than efficacy, which i just personally need to avoid.

but that's just me.  most people feel differently.  knowing the extent to how they feel differently is important in interpretting their feedback.

as for caring what anyone else thinks, if i didn't care at all about that then i wouldn't publish my work online or anywhere else.   the only reason, in my opinion, to publish artwork rather than keep it to one's self is to create a reaction in someone else.  the whole act of publishing, releasing it to the public, is simply sharing artistic expression with other people.  if it makes 0 difference whether anyone else sees it or not, why share it? that isn't to say i hang on every person's word, or need to please everyone.  or even that the reaction i (or anyone else) want(s) is as simple as praise. 

mostly, as far as i can see, publishing art is about communication.  there's a difference between saying what you believe in, and not caring if you're either unintelligible or saying something other than what you mean.  or even just having someone tell you how you could communicate more clearly.    i've seen and even experienced the beauty of having an editor.  same ideas, just much more clearly expressed.  i don't just want to do what i like, i want to do what i like and grow within it.  learning doesn't happen in a vacuum, and neither does growth.  i don't want to look back 5 years from now and see myself at exactly the same place artistically.  now that's just me.  i'm certainly not trying to tell anyone else how to live their lives.  but it has nothing to do with liking my creations, nothing to do with pleasing others, and nothing to do with following or forging my own path. 

a good teacher can help you acheive the goals you set for yourself.  a good community can do the same thing.  some communities are good for some people, and not for others.  i wanted simply to begin to get a handle on how good non-poser communities were at helping poser artists grow, and if the bias i kept witnessing both in forums and in site rules kept most non-poser communities from being helpful.   i'm seeing a "no," but with the added codicil of, "better make it damn good work, not median for that site."