Different types of media all have their own aesthetic and when we can simulate these different media within, roughly, a single workflow, then the question is not what technique does this image require but what aesthetic? I guess I use all this stuff not because I'm any sort of artist but because I'm an odd sort of pragmatist when it comes to some things.

Outside of the Poser and perhaps the CG community as a whole, I do think that the natural media aesthetic is preferred - searching through forums about such diverse things from tarot cards (many commercial packs have used Poser) to book covers, again and again, folk recognise Poser renders and don't generally seem so keen on them. So from a commercial perspective, I do think that this kind of postwork/shader is something worth pursuing. When a friend asked me to come up with some book covers for him, he was very certain that he didn't want a 3D or photorealistic image. He wanted something both a little modern but with a nod to the pulps of the past. So, I sat down with Postworkshop and played until I came up with a style that he liked. (not that he pays me - but he is a good friend)

It is worth noting another advantage Poser/Studio users have with using this kind of Postwork over those using photographs. It's not enough to come up with an amazing node set up for Postworkshop (or Filterforge which I think also uses them), because what you get out still depends heavily on what you put in. PSW does allow you a little brush work to help but still, your render matters. And that means, above else, lighting. You need to get the right lighting and colours (which can all be managed a little further in post) and then you'll get the postwork you want. For my last image and most of the book covers for Milton have really needed bright flat lighting for the PSW style to do its thing the way I want.