I think that there is an inherent creative artistic desire in most humans. Unfortunately, it usually gets stifled as we grow older. That’s one reason why the dearth of art in schools is dismaying. The same is true for the drift away from unstructured play to canned ‘entertainment.’ Poser probably appeals to different people for different reasons. Some, like me, never could draw a decent looking stick figure. I used to take transparency sheets and trace magazine pinup photos. Then I would tape them to the TV screen and laboriously copy the outline using the mouse on my Atari ST and try to fill them with something vaguely resembling flesh out of the 16 colors (of 512) palette. After that, Poser was like Larry Weinberg read my mind.

As to how many people are drawn to Poser because of the advanced features, I don’t know. If you read some of the laments about how so many gallery images lack this or that, perhaps not many. If you go by the threads seeking to eke the nth degree of photonic purity out of Firefly, then its all there is. The reality doubtless lies somewhere in between. People today certainly have a greater exposure to high end CG effects in the media. I rather doubt that the average punter comes in knowing what SSS, weight mapping etc. are though. As to how many people actually use all the features they paid for vs. how many ‘never ventured into the X room,’ you can look at the gallery or look at the forum posts and glean whatever result you want. There will always be a group who complain that others, by not using or producing content for a certain enhancement are somehow ‘holding Poser back.’ just as there will always be a postwork vs. no postwork debate and a do it all in Poser or use multiple programs debate yada yada. It [Poser] means different things to different people.

There’s definitely an appeal to Poser’s do it all capabilities. I’m not sure how many may have been hold outs over using multiple programs because, again, I’m not sure that many people, who don’t read industry publications even knew that multiple programs were used to do that neat stuff. Indeed, my (probably ignorant) impression is that until semi-recently the multiple application paradigm was mostly the domain of Hollywood and a lot of folks pretty much used Max or Lightwave etc. to do most everything. That was of course before the advent of specialist applications like Zbrush, RealFlow separate render engines etc. Its wonderful that Poser can meet a range of needs, but IMO it’s, strength still lies in being a relatively inexpensive, easy to use human figure posing application, that any stick figure impaired person can pick up and produce something that scratches their creative itch. People can deride that as ‘point and click’ or the ‘make art button,’ but it is still (again IMO) the essential factor for a lot of people. It also drives much of the content market. Of course, interesting discussions like this are a bonus.

I agree that something of the artist is inherent in any work. Perhaps much of the difficulty in defining art lies in the duality of perspective – that of the artist vs. that of the creator. It is much easier to discern the rationale for utilitarian things. The designer put X number of bolts on the tank ÷), to hold that sucker together. The driver can only decide that’s not proper tank design at his own peril. The artist’s intent is always open to question and some prefer not to reveal it precisely because they want the viewer to derive their own meaning. In any case, both are right and neither is wrong. Art IMO, allows the maximum of individual expression. That doesn’t settle the question entirely. Tightening bolts on an assembly line can be an expression of craftsmanship and pride. With all due respect to those, if forced, I would assign a higher degree of ‘art’ to the tank designer - and even his or her expression is constrained by the physical imperatives of materials and function. Painting, modeling, music writing may have some constraints, but in the main, you are limited only by your imagination and skill. The grass can be blue and the sky green, and armor can be impractical. Choosing to follow a certain technique or discipline is certainly an expression of individuality and thus within the bounds of art.

The whole art/not art debate is feckless but humans are bound to name and classify things. I think the very fact that we bother shows what a fundamental value we place on it. To the degree that art touches or inspires us, it probably validates our personal view of life, the world and our existence. Perhaps that which fails to reach us can safely be dismissed as not art, sparing the necessity of questioning our fundamental nature. It is no accident that Rorschach used ink blots as a personality test ÷)

“… there was something more spontaneous with the limitations of early Poser …”

Ah, the freeing nature of constraints. It may be that those who prefer the constraints of photorealism feel their own sense of freedom. As to creative pressure, if it is from a higher standard that you now embrace then it is good. If it is to meet some ‘you need to use X or your work is crap,’ line, then you might as well start looking for bolts to tighten IMO ÷)

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