Edit: I expect a great many vendors fall somewhere between the two extremes I described. They accept the low income (perhaps with gritted teeth), but still work hard to create products with perfectly reasonable quality standards. I don't mean, with my garage sale metaphor, to imply that the products are shoddy or substandard, since they are almost always quite the opposite. The packaging isn't always perfect. But me, I don't care about that. 

Well, Penguinisto, my point is simply that it isn't really "commerce", as you're used to thinking about it. It's more on the level of a garage sale. And you don't go to a garage sale and denounce the seller because the things for sale don't come in their original packaging or don't have valid manufacturers' warranties still in place.

Some vendors make enough money for it to be their "job". Unsurprisingly, you find that they approach the activity with the level of professionalism that you demand. But others, and I expect it's overwhelmingly most, don't even come close to that level of income. For them, it's still a hobby. There's money involved, but there's also money involved in a late night poker game or a sports pool. Yet you don't expect your poker buddies to operate their table like a casino.

Simple fact is that most vendors are hobbyists selling to other hobbyists, and that's why the prices are hobby level prices. That industry professionals can come into this market and enjoy these ridiculous prices is quite a boost. But if you start making industry professional demands on people who are not earning industry professional salaries, you're just demonstrating that you've swallowed the corporate mindset so fully that you've lost your compassion.

I'd rather be broke than lose my empathy. But that's just me.

Edit: I'm with you on the misrepresentation. No one likes to be deceived, at any level of professionalism -- from kids trading pokemon cards all the way to Wall Street (though, not, apparently including Wall Street). That's just common courtesy between humans.

Remember there are two licenses in the MP here: Standard use and Extended use. 

Extended use license costs more, but you have more freedom with what ways you're allowed to use the content. 

Some vendors offer both while others only offer one or the other. 

In response to the OP:

The dissatisfaction you have with the products available and their perceived quality can only be rectified by creating your own.

When I first got Poser, it took me a week to decide that I was never going to be satisfied with what was available for it. (Poser 6, IIRC) After taking a look at the meshes, materials, textures, morphs, deformers, etc... It became overwhelmingly obvious to me that, instead of spending hours trying to kludge things together from different suppliers and artists who had differing standards of quality, I would have to create my own content. So, I learned how to do it.

I admit that it's no simple thing to learn a new skillset. But, if one is properly motivated, it is not a chore. There is absolutely no product out there that is ever going to be "exactly" what you want. Everything you buy is just going to be "good enough." Even the products that you love will eventually show some sort of deficiency or may reveal their lacking of a feature you'd like. The solution doesn't involve a judgement that insists the product is "bad." (Though, there are plenty of products being sold that aren't "good.") The solution is that you have to either modify the product, yourself, or get someone else to do it for you. It's usually faster to do it yourself, even if you have to learn something new in order to achieve that.

On Poser compatible human figures: There isn't one Poser compatible character figure that I am aware of that is "photorealistic."(Resembling the physiology and proportions of a true human being.) Poser was never meant to be a photorealistic application nor were its figures intended to be photorealistic. If one want's photorealism, one can come close to achieving that through a bit of hard work. But, without very heavy editing, true photorealism for figures isn't achievable. Even with everything short of creating your own figures and rigging, one can't achieve true photorealism. (And, let's not even get into "scale" issues.) Major Hollywood studios have a difficult job of even approaching that, so it's no surprise that mom&pops trying to sell interesting Poser/DS content can't manage it, either.

As artists strive to push the limits of Poser and DAZ3D, the work becomes more difficult. That's not due to the limitations of "3D Art." That is due to the limitations of the tools being used. I don't buy much of anything anymore. (I do buy hair, occasionally, just for something new to fiddle with. Oh, and python scripts, since I don't "Python.") The reason I don't buy much is because I choose to create what I want.

But, I do look to see what new products are being offered. As far as I am concerned, the only recent innovations have been Reality 3's Luxrender exporter for Poser, Weight Mapping, and Indirect Lighting. These aren't "innovative" 3D advancements. But, they are for the Poser community, so I'm glad to see them. However, many other products offered by many vendors are simply "variations on a theme." Why is that? The reason is that they are all limited to the toolsets they are meant to be used with.

Given that is the case, what is an artist to do when they are confronted with limitations in their toolset? You know the answer - Get different tools and acquire the skill to use them to obtain the goal that you seek.

There is no reason why anyone can't learn to model, texture, write scripts, develop custom materials, all that jazz... A seasoned Poser user will understand a great many things about the technical issues of 3D Art. They can explore that knowledge further by acquiring toolsets that give them greater access and capability in 3D Art. I honestly do not understand why very long-time users of Poser/DS have spent thousands of dollars on third-party content and have not once also delved into actual 3D object creation. I just don't get it. Almost every single common problem I have seen mentioned by users when someone complains about current product quality/availability or satisfaction can be solved if they just decide, for themselves, that they're going to solve it by learning a new skill.

The only reason that I like Poser is because it introduced me to creating 3D objects and it's fairly easy to use, rigging and posing-wise. As far as the content that people sell for it, I'm not impressed unless it truly does something new or really delves into a new capability presented by the base software. I have yet to see any claims of "innovation" in recent offerings actually be "true." It's just variations on a theme and, if that is all it is, I can do that, myself.

So, my advice is this: Go grab an easy to use modeller like Milkshape or Hexagon (Even if it is sometimes buggy and hates certain video cards.) Go grab a free graphics program, like GIMP, or pay for Photoshop. Grab some other freebies, like UVMapper and Morph Manager (I still use it, occasionally) and grab some tools, like MorCloth, Autogroup Manager and QuickConform, and have a field-day creating exactly the sort of things that you really want for your 3D Art. Later, when you have tired of any limitations you feel that are in Poser/DS, move on to bigger and better 3D rendering packages. But, once you learn the necessary skills in creating your own content, Poser/DS can keep you happy for quite awhile.

 The reason I have a vastly paid for runtime is because I doubt I could gain the skill to build to the quality I can buy and if I could I doubt I have the years left.  I enjoy building scenes and rendering, playing with lights and textures and I my time of life I want fun not boring.

 It has been the same with my cars for years, I can service them but I no longer like getting cold and dirty doing so.  I would rather have someone pay me to build a computer, a job I enjoy and can do in the warm.  What I make can then be spent on someone else getting cold and dirty servicing my car just a question of horses for courses. 

Likewise. I have tried modelling, and I find it extremely frustrating. The fact that all the tutorials are in video format, rather than text and images, is also a pain. I read at least 3 times the speed that most videos play, so much of the time, I'm sitting there twiddling my thumbs thinking, "Get ON with it, will ya!" Moreover, text is keyword searchable. I hate watching a 15 minute video (with some narrator blabbing on and on about all the stuff he isn't going to cover until the next video, etc) and realizing that it does not tell me what I need to know at all. With text and images, I can ascertain if the tutorial is what I'm looking for in a matter of seconds. And people tend not to be so bloody long winded when they write a tutorial. So, bleh. (Must be hell to be deaf and trying to learn CGI).

Kitbashing, on the other hand, is a whole lot of fun. So, while I don't model, I will happy tear other people's models into pieces, re-texture them, morph them, scale them, cut out polys, and reassemble them to be wholly different, and I can do all that within Poser. It's the process of ADDING polys -- using some other software -- that I haven't grasped. But after two hours trying to make a wooden beam out of a cube, I gave up and loaded a Poser primitive. Why reinvent the wheel? If someone has made a very beautiful Corinthian column, I could buy it for $5 or spend a year figuring out how to make it myself. I don't know about you, but I think that's pretty low compensation for doing something I really don't enjoy at all. :D

However, I DO agree that Poser users tend not even learn even half of what Poser can do, nevermind a modelling app. Just learning more about Poser opens whole new worlds, so that you can stretch the content you DO buy much, much further.

I'm an enthusiast and probably to the point that its unhealthy and I figure out new things and things I've missed, ALL the time. :)

"Kitbashing, on the other hand, is a whole lot of fun. So, while I don't model, I will happy tear other people's models into pieces, re-texture them, morph them, scale them, cut out polys, and reassemble them to be wholly different, and I can do all that within Poser."

I agree and that is another reason for buying content.  Some fourteen years ago when I started with Poser I quickly discovered there was a lot to learn in Poser and today I still feel I have only scratched the surface.  While I do use Paint Shop Pro to build some images and some post work and Silo to adapt other people models I can go a month or more without opening either program.  Poser on the other hand I use practically daily and I am always trying new things.  I will never use Poser to its full potential but it seems learning one complex program as best you can seems better than spreading time over a lot of other programs.

I now feel at home in the material room rather then totally lost and overwhelmed, very few of my renders are completed with out some material work, even if it is using a purchased texture on another vendors item.  I also understand a lot better how lights change the way materials look when rendered. One character I use I have built over the years has materials that would have appeared magic to me when I first started and had to be adapted when SSS came along.   A lot of the items are heavily based on materials that BB has created and shared.  The more I play with Poser the better I get and I am having fun on the way and I would rather spend the time I have free somewhere along the Poser learning curve than at the start of a curve with another program.

In general reply to hornet3D, moriador, and Netherworks,. (Sorry, the forum doesn't seem to have a way to make multi-quoting easy...)

There's a difference between pursuing "Poser" 3D Art and general 3D art. I'm not saying Poser art isn't that, but there's a different mindset between Poser enthusiasts and general 3D artists.

Imagine that you love to collect and to arrange paper dolls. You have a professional supplier for paper doll products, so you're generally happy. But, after awhile, you run out of interesting paper doll gear. You like to pose and arrange your paper dolls and take photos of them, adjusting the lights and camera settings as necessary. (Think "Cottingly Fairies." Google if necessary.)

After awhile, you start wondering if you can make your own paper doll accessories or even whole doll figures. So, you buy some scissors, an exacto-knife or three, some good quality paper and then sit down to watch some tutorials or go through a tutorial pdf on "How tos." Maybe you couldn't afford these materials or maybe you found that you didn't have the skills or the time or patience to learn all the details you think you'd need to know in order to create your own paper dolls and accessories. So, you stop trying and try to find satisfaction in "what you have" instead of "what you want."

There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, it's a mainstay of human commerce. :) Everyone practices this need vs cost dynamic. I buy a car because I can't build one and I'm darn sure that, if I could, no State would be foolish enough to license it!

But, if I'm not satisfied with the cars or paper dolls that are available, what do I do? I have found that I can't create them and am not satisfied with what it is available. There are three options available to me: I pay someone else to create them, which will cost a heck of a lot of money. I lobby for creators to produce what I believe I want (which many are doing here) or I learn to find satisfaction with what I have by trying new things, within the capability of tools and skillsets that I currently possess.

An option that is not logical is to assume that "what I have" is somehow worthless to me or "broken" simply because I have reached the full capacity of its capabilities. Instead, I have to be proactive and I need to pursue those things that attracted me to the medium in the first place. Thinking "outside of the box" in order to continue to pursue what I like, but taking it to fresh areas, would be a good choice.

I don't render a lot. I find it more fun to construct objects and figures, texture them, mess with materials, get some idea of how they render and then move on. I might get one good render up, just to brag to myself about my work. :) But, after that, it's generally forgotten and I move on to something else. (One of these days I'm going to get around to resurrecting an old hard-drive and flood my old projects out as freebies. One day..)

But, let's take a passion for assembly and rendering "outside of the box" in order to explore where it can go. Sure, there are limitations, but if I've reached them in one area, I can't agonize over what I am not willing or an unable to affect, can I? I can, however, affect how I choose to pursue a solution with "what I have", though, right?

Composite shots are an interesting thing. Much like the "Cottingly Fairies", composite shots take 3D objects and, with a bit of kludging, camera tracking, whatevers, place them in a real-world setting. It takes nothing extra, except some suitable pics, to start doing this. Further, there are a lot of things one can do, from heaping on a lot of post-work to doing one's best to create a composite shot completely within Poser/DS, with no postwork. That is incredibly difficult to do and it's a worthy ambition for a dedicated Poser user.

Anaglyphs are another pursuit that can be realized just with the tools a Poser user already uses. Well, you'll have to go buy some paper 3D glasses to fully appreciate it, but it's "doable." And, it could prove to be a lot of fun creating actual "Three Dimensional Art" using 3D.

Stereoscopic images are another true "3D" art solution. It's an older format than colored/polarized glasses, but it's arguably easier to render. There's even a free script, somewhere around here, that sets the camera angles for you. But, even that's not too hard to do, by hand. After that, all you need is a bit of practice focusing or, if you're brave, get a good quality print of each image and build yourself a viewing box thingie.

Animation. Poser has a lot of capability in that area. If you're like me, you never once touched much of anything to do with Poser animation. But, then again, I moved outside of Poser fairly rapidly. Some people have saturated their experience of Poser without ever moving into animation and I think that's a shame. They obviously like the program, but don't use half of its capabilities. So, what's stopping someone who loves Poser, but hasn't explored animation? Only themselves.

The point is this - If you are unhappy with your experience and you feel that you have reached the limits of "what you have", have you truly examined everything that "what you have" offers? If you can't or won't expand your experience set in order to delve deeper into the genre that you appreciate so much, then you've got to push onward in exploring what you can do instead of worrying what you can't do.

I think that Poser and DS have a lot to offer their fanbase, yet. Are there issues? Yes, there most certainly are. The biggest issue is that Poser and DS are primarily designed for Poser and DS fans, not for general "3D Art" that pushes the tech boundaries that the industry has reached, today. That means that they've painted themselves into a niche corner and you, the longstanding user-base, are going to eventually get bored if they don't do something "new." In some ways, both are attempting to combat this issue, primarily through targeting game development. It's a smart move and they'll both attract some attention from some game developers who are just starting out and want some easily created content. But, it will never reach the deeper depths of "game development content" because it's just not designed for that. Instead, it will hold a small portion of the market or a very unique group that doesn't want to go any further than necessary in order to scratch their itch.

Go out there and scratch your itch with "what you have." If you want more than that, there are plenty of avenues you can pursue. But, if you do not wish to pursue those avenues, you simply have to "Make Do." There isn't any other logical option available.

Note: Truly stepping past Poser/DS into "3D" art and constructing one's own content can be intimidating. But, that intimidation will be short-lived, the more experience you have. For myself, and it's only anecdotal, I find "Photoshop" more intimidating that just about any 3D package I've ever tried to use. (With the exception of Blender. I still have nightmares...) I find it incredibly difficult to craft a decent texture. At least, not one up to my standards. But, I can model anything, so I "make do" with kludging textures together in Photoshop or by "cheating" using nothing but procedurals. I "make do" and my dissatisfaction with textures has nothing to do with the quality of any program nor any other solutions that are available to me. I am content with that. When I am no longer content, I will push myself to learn how to create good textures. Maybe I'll even create a "great one" or two? I don't look forward to the day when I must start Photoshop tutorials... But, come it will.

Morkonan, I agree with your basic premise absolutely. If you can't find what you need because no one else is making it, you really do only have two choices. :) And complaining that on one will make what you want isn't really a realistic avenue for satisfaction. True, very very true.

But what we each enjoy is very different.

I LOVE setting up scenes and rendering. That's why I have Poser and not a modelling app. Photography is one of my primary hobbies as well and its' where I started, so 2D image manipulation is second nature to me, and I could use Photoshop in my sleep. (I even helped a friend use GIMP -- though I didn't have a copy at the time -- because just by assuming that the functions would be similarly named, I could guide him through how to do most of the basic things). 

So for me, the 2d image output is the ultimate goal I strive for, and the 3d assets are just a way to get to that goal.

You're the complete opposite. So what you find enjoyable is precisely what I find horrifying and vice versa. LOL.

Again, I agree completely that it's silly to limit yourself once you reach a wall.

But having discovered recently the things that just POSER itself can do to manipulate content I already own -- I've moved that wall a lot further away for now. :)

Edit: I also think you've make a very interesting observation about the seemingly self-limiting nature of this particular market niche. But that's worthy of a thread all to itself. :)

There's a 4th option - make it yourself.  That's not "oh pfft! Go make it yourself!".  That is instead saying, you can learn and delight in creating new models if you have the temperament, creativity and drive to do so.  In a way, Poser and DS and the like are shells or players that require you to stick something in them.  There are certainly things to explore that are beyond the program if you are feeling limited.

You could play with material nodes and create/discover all kinds new things.  Or play with different render engines via 3rd parties.

You could could up with little python tools and snippets that make Poser more interesting and they're certainly some creative fun in doing that.

Another thing to muse over:  If I render the models I have made and rigged, I do think it's an artistic endeavor and certainly has some additional depth to it.  Though I also have no problem with what folks might consider compositional art.  Load things, compose, pose, etc. click Render and for some it's still thrilling and fun.  And clearly people all render to different degrees, some are very talented and have grasp of placement, evoking emotion (isn't that art?), telling a story with a single image, setting up lighting and using it effectively and so on.

@Netherworks, that was Morkonan's original suggestion.

But some people -- and I'm one of them -- really just don't like using the mouse to manipulate objects with any real precision. In Poser, I prefer to work with the number pad. I have yet to hear of a modelling app that allows you to place polys and edgeloops, etc, by using the number pad. (Even if one did, it would be hopelessly slow). As a result, all I'm ever, ever going to do with a modelling app is swear loudly at it -- because for me, a mouse is not a precision tool. And trying to use it as one is like trying to sculpt with a bath sized bar of soap. While I do use a stylus for 2d work, I find them very poor tools for making menu selections. And I'll be damned if I'm going to memorize 739 different shortcuts.

I tried modelling. I absolutely hated it. So I am not gonna make my own stuff. If that puts me in the category of people whose renders lack your "additional depth", oh well. Good thing I don't need to consider myself "an artist" to get enjoyment out of Poser. :D

I do think it's odd that the Poser forum, of all places, seems to be made up primarily of people who model and don't care to render. LOL You'd think they'd be more comfortable in, I dunno, a modelling forum? ;)

 I have fun with CGI & I have fun playing with all the App's.

I swear that's the point of Art & life. 

If another is not happy with my Art.

I don't care ,Why would I care. 

If there not happy with my Art, then they can go make there own Art. 

or set a round and do nothing more then complain.

It doesn't matter to me. but there not spoiling my fun.

Maybe what we like doing is also linked, in some part, to our background.  I too came to 3D art from photography, a hobby that has stayed with me for over 40 years and I can still follow with the limitations old age places on my body.  This means that my interest is in the 2D image, in fact 3D is only really an extension to photography in many ways.  My other interest is Sc-Fi and again this interest goes way back.  3D allows me to 'photograph' my visions of the future or to try an portray an emotion without the hiring of a model.  To this degree the hobbies complement each other.

As to criticism well even if it is justified it can be done with dignity and not thinking the seller is an idiot or just on the make is a good starting point.  I remember working in a camera shop where a customer brought back a zoom lens where the zoom ring was far from smooth.  The customer was abusive from the start both about me as a sales person and the equipment we sold.  After he had calmed down I took the lens from him and tried it, he was right.  I did not have another lens of the same type in stock but offered the customer and upgrade free of charge.  Some what surprised the customer accepted and I even threw in a lens cleaning kit because of the trouble the faulty lens had caused the customer, something I would have done anyway.  He was full of praise when he left but how much better it would have been if he had started politely and only resorted to anger if the situation really warranted it.  Not only would it have been better for me and the other customers in the shop but it would have had less effect on the complaining customer's blood pressure as well.

Maybe what we like doing is also linked, in some part, to our background.  I too came to 3D art from photography, a hobby that has stayed with me for over 40 years and I can still follow with the limitations old age places on my body.  This means that my interest is in the 2D image, in fact 3D is only really an extension to photography in many ways.  My other interest is Sc-Fi and again this interest goes way back.  3D allows me to 'photograph' my visions of the future or to try an portray an emotion without the hiring of a model.  To this degree the hobbies complement each other.

As to criticism well even if it is justified it can be done with dignity and not thinking the seller is an idiot or just on the make is a good starting point.  I remember working in a camera shop where a customer brought back a zoom lens where the zoom ring was far from smooth.  The customer was abusive from the start both about me as a sales person and the equipment we sold.  After he had calmed down I took the lens from him and tried it, he was right.  I did not have another lens of the same type in stock but offered the customer and upgrade free of charge.  Some what surprised the customer accepted and I even threw in a lens cleaning kit because of the trouble the faulty lens had caused the customer, something I would have done anyway.  He was full of praise when he left but how much better it would have been if he had started politely and only resorted to anger if the situation really warranted it.  Not only would it have been better for me and the other customers in the shop but it would have had less effect on the complaining customer's blood pressure as well.

Yes. Yes. Yes. It's as well to remember this as the customer. During the 3 months I worked for AT&T as a customer service rep (horrible job!), I learned that even brand new reps had up to $600 per day in discretionary "funds" that they could use to reduce someone's phone bill or to eliminate false charges -- without having to resort to asking for a manager.

The people who were nice and polite got the benefit of this. During training we would listen in on a seasoned partner's calls. One I will never forget was from a lady who was having trouble paying her bill. I forget why exactly she was troubled -- but it's a very common occurrence. And she was wondering if it was possible for her to pay for half the bill and still keep using her phone. She was truly lovely on the phone, and as a result, the rep came back and said, "Ma'am, you don't have to worry about that bill. It's taken care of." He just wiped over $500 completely clean. Because he could, and because it was customers like her who made the job bearable. Her response was "Praise Jesus! I can't believe you did this!" followed by a lot of gracious expressions of gratitude. 

[He logged it as a customer who signed up for the wrong "plan" and mistakenly used too many minutes, which was one of the allowable reasons to forgive legitimate charges.]

The jerks -- if they didn't experience a sudden unexplained disconnection from the rep centre -- were the ones who ended up being transferred repeatedly.  And their jerky behavior was noted on their account.

It's been pretty much the same way in every customer service job I've had. Whenever you have a legitimate problem that needs to be solved, if you're nicer than the usual customer (which isn't hard, believe me), the clerk will often try their best to give you way more than you asked for. And if you're a DB -- well, unless hornet3d serves you, you'll get the minimum that will make you leave without breaking things.

 I have just tried to install Reality and keep getting this.

 [2014-12-19 08:41:54 Error: 14] Static loading of filter 'blackmanharris' failed.

[2014-12-19 08:41:54 Severe error: 14] Unable to create scene due to missing plug-ins

Any clues to what is wrong??

Thanks

Duncan  

I think you posted this to the wrong thread, Duncan.  ;)

There is an Official Reality Forum over at RDNA..

http://forum.runtimedna.com/forumdisplay.php?302-The-Official-Reality-for-Poser-Forum