Rereading the OP’s original post (BTW did (s)he ever reappear?), I’m not sure whether it means distinctive, as in not like V4, anatomically accurate, or both. In any case, I’ll accept their 97% improper figure, why not. A better question might be to what percentage of Poser users does it matter? How many people have that finely tuned, (I can spot Vickie in a 4x4 thumbnail after ten iterations of a Picasso cubist PhotoShop filter) V-Dar – or care? Apparently, only 3%, minus those who hit on ‘proper’ by accident. Whatever, the CGSociety folks will be happy to tell us why its all crap anyway, no need to eat our own young.

I’m not sure that the average neolithic woman looked like those stone fertility goddesses, unless there was a Mickey D’s around back then. I doubt that Egyptian ladies looked exactly as they were depicted – or walked that way either. If the dudes in the Kama Sutra and those Japanese erotic woodcuts really had whangs that big, then I’ve been cheated. The ‘Hobbit’ bones they found on that island notwithstanding, there probably never were any faeries, leprechauns or pointy eared hobgoblins – OK, faeries are real but not the others. Whether for religious symbolism, political propaganda, erotic thrills or flights of fancy, people have always been fond of taking expressive liberties with the image of almighty’s sacred product. Forget the image, we’ve been tattooing, scarifying, shaving, powdering, lipo-sucking and implanting ourselves in reality to achieve a look that nature never intended – ever since Og said, “Woman, red stuff on mouth look like monkey’s cooter, give me idea.’

Reality? People have reality in their faces every day. Plain, common, average, proper – look in the mirror. The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable. Your cousin getting busted for drunk and disorderly again is a pain – Lindsay Lohan doing the perp walk in designer shades is entertainment. Please, nobody tell Denzel that you can’t roll an MD-80 and live to pick up your Oscar. Realism has its place. They have car shows where your otherwise perfectly restored 69 Mustang may lose because the serial number on the carb is from the 1970 lot. If you don’t want to buy a model tank because the bolts aren’t right, don’t – but oh wait, there were reports that on the Russian front some units made field modifications, it’s right here in the Wehrmacht compiled action reports – let me get the exact volume and page number.

Realism is relative, depending on the person and the context. There’s a different standard for counterfeit hundreds than there is for Monopoly money. Most people would probably consider the bolt deficient tank highly realistic, but most people aren’t accuracy obsessed military buffs. DAZ isn’t pulling some gigantic con if they call their models ‘realistic.’ They are realistic enough for the never skinned a cadaver, don’t freaking know or care how many head heights make up leg bone user. You can make a ‘realistic’ figure and launch a campaign to enlighten people on how they’ve been deceived by the Prince of Darkness, but Salvation awaits. All they have to do is repent, take up the real cross and pay a small fee. I’ll wait for the IPO.

Zygote will probably be delighted to sell you an accurate human figure. There was an ‘accurate’ 3D scanned figure, Dina, who would have been dismissed as too obvious to play the butch cellblock boss in a lesbian prison flick – and yet, somehow she wasn’t too popular. If you want really real acne scarred, small boobies, nanometer scale specular reflectance, body mass within .001 per cent of the UNESCO norm realism, go for it. Tis a noble quest, and no doubt a lot harder than what the fantasy besotted masses cling to. De gustibus non est disputandum (In matters of taste, there can be no disputes). Of course H. L., as always, said it best.

“We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.”
— H L Mencken

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken