Quote - It's sort of like the persona of stars asking for 25.00 for autograph expenses.

If it took the star a couple of weeks of grinding work to make that autograph, maybe the comparison would hold.

I think you might be taking things a little too personally.

If I spent hours and hours creating a product that I'm kind enough to give away for free, I might well want some compensation should someone use my product to make money.

I think the problem is that dividing the usage rights into two broad categories (personal v commercial use) leaves people like you in the cold.

If the marketing department of a multinational corporation decides to save itself some money and uses a "free" model in one of their ad campaigns, I don't think any of us would fault the creator for wanting to be paid.

But when a very small business, or an artist who might conceivably at some point be asked if they want to sell (or license) a render or a print of a render -- even though it's actually unlikely that they will make much, if any, money from their usage of a model, has to limit themselves to commercial license, it can be annoying. I get that.

But, really, someone took a whole lot of hours out of their life to make a model. It's never arrogant to ask for money.  Some vendors do seem to have an overly optimistic idea of the current market value of their products, but I don't think it's arrogant for them to ask for a fair price. Given the time it takes to make models, IMO, fair price would be more like what is typical on Turbosquid. That you can even get a decent model of a car for commercial use for $25 is, when you really think about it, quite astounding.

 

---

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.