I'm with HeWhoWatches on this matter.
The point of realism in art died with the daguerrotype. Since then artists have sought to create images that touch people in ways the camera cannot. Not necessarily better ways, but different. A Monet can, in some ways, tell you more about a scene than a photograph could while being objectively far less realistic.

But I still strive to create realistic images in Poser.

Why? Because I want control of the medium I'm working in. I want to be able to make choices based on my artistic vision, not constrained by what I can and cannot do technically. When I make an 'unrealistic' image I want it to be because it suits the concept I have in my head, not because it's all I know how to do, and I want control over the ways in which it's unrealistic.

Let's not forget to that the movement and action in those old cgi films and videos is a huge distraction. In a still image, the viewer has time to see the faults. Wooden poses, lifeless chalky skin, blank expressions, inplausible lighting etc. only serve to distract the viewer from the point your image is trying to make.

So I like images that have enough realism to overcome those petty distractions, but not so much that the image's whole concept becomes subordinate to the quest for realism.

But to achieve that balance you need the skills to control the level of realism, and that's what some people are trying to achieve here, I think.

Free stuff @ https://poser.cobrablade.net/