*"But if all figures are derived from a single mesh, support gets much easier." *

Sounds familiar, Unimesh, Genesis … My personal great idea was always a set of ecto/meso/endomorph bodies and exchangeable heads, but alas the world is not ready for such genius - that's OK, you don't have to illustrate the error of my concept. I don’t know if the protean mesh would catch on in the higher end where they can and do produce distinct versions of even the same character for different uses. For the low to mid range though I think you’re probably correct and DAZ must agree.

*"But if we, as Poser users, want to ... hmm.. show "The World" that Poser is more than a tool for adolescent fantasies... boobs and booties... well.. it means... for one thing.. actually trying your hand with a boob-less figure."  *

Possibly, though artists have done pretty well respect-wise over the centuries with everything from sylphs, to nymphs to, hags, to nursing Madonnas. I don't know that changing the gender mix would have much effect. Any critique based on the abundance of sexy female imagery wouild be replaced by something else. Poser = Pr0n is just an attack that doesn't require much intellect to deploy.

IMO, most of the people voicing those attitudes are uften CGI wannabes who are ignorant or insecure enough to invest ego and identity in their tools. A real professional or wise hobbyist for that matter is going to evaluate a tool based on what it can do and how well it is implemented – not on what others are using it for. You find the closed–minded snobbery in every field and it is certainly present in the Poser universe as well.

I think that technical and artistic acceptance/respect may be different things. Less emphasis on the pin-up or NVIATWAS genres might help in regard to the latter but … more imagination, more depth, more complex images, rich environments, less of the emphasis on portrait/single figure imagery etc. might have a bigger effect. That may apply to a lot of non-cinematic CG art, produced increasingly by those raised on the high contrast, bright, hyper-reality saturated look of TV and film, and more exposed to commercial, product-centric as opposed to fine art. That’s strictly my personal, decidedly untrained, geriatric laymen’s view.

The technical respect issue, is being addressed with each new version of Poser. If SM isn’t aiming at the low hanging fruit of indie and lower budget CGI, they’re doing a good imitation of it. If Blender can play there, there’s no reason why Poser can’t as well. The key is to keep the less technically demanding users on board as well. The CGSociety bashers will continue as long as it’s cool. Let a few of their idols start saying it’s OK and their tune would change. The barrier to that is likely the fact that Poser is a content-centric application. There’s a pro market there for late night infomercials, self-serve checkout videos, accident recreation etc. Those are probably the jobs some people take while waiting to get discovered by ILM. The ‘You didn’t model and rig it yourself in Maya’ critique probably just reflects the reality that the big boys do roll that way – and some of their acolytes can’t see anything else as legitimate. I doubt that Pixar is ever going to use Poser/DS or their figures, at least not for anything that gets onscreen. OTOH, the more versatile and useful they become, the more opportunity exists in markets that are still developing or haven’t even appeared yet. It just takes time.

 

 

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