This seems more customer opinion-oriented than actual vendor advice and in the scope of starting to vendor not very helpful. If you were a vendor, you would actually know that those "artistic renders" sell far more product than standard, plain shots of geometry. It's always helpful to include a few plain shots, however that's not what draws the majority of the customers in and brokerages will reject products until you provide flashier promos to make the product more appealing. Also the vendor may had made those renders as part of the promos and those promos get rejected before they are put in the store. As I said earlier, these are the kinds of suggestions that end up costing sales, when people give advice that don't have the background to do so. 

I gave standard marketing and business advice as it applies to a narrow set of examples.
I am well aware of the positive effects of sultry promo pics. I choose not to mention that because it's basically redundant advice for those selling products that could have such promo shots. Do I really need to tell vendors of revealing clothing or long hair to include a boob-shot or three to add some titillation-factor to their marketing images? My focus was intended to present basic and intelligent business and marketing principles, using a few examples of what "not to do." It was also directed at those who seem to believe that they will be able to generate appreciable income from content sales without an appreciable amount of professional effort being demonstrated in the creation of their products.

My background and experience is more than adequate to comment intelligently on this topic, regardless of the medium or market. I am sorry that my lack of a fixation on "boob shots" in my offered advice is something that you believe demonstrates a lack of adequate experience. If you will note, I did include the mention of appropriate renders and the necessity of a demonstrated skill with the rendering engine of the product being targeted by the vendor. My disagreement with the policy of "boob shot Vickies" concerns the use of poorly rendered and irrationally focused primary promo pics that offer confusing presentations of the product to the point where the potential buyer has little idea of what the product actually is. This is a fine tactic when selling perfume, life-insurance, cell-phones or other intangible products. But, it is not a good general marketing policy when selling "tangible" products.

(For the purposes of argument, we can consider geometry and other "visible" products as tangible. Scripts, for example, could be considered somewhat intangible. However, it's worth noting that the top script producers intelligently represent their products as scripts or utilities and have done so with such style and consistency that the presentation of their marketing materials act as much as to solidify the performance of their "brand" as the products, themselves.)

Edit-Add: I also must question your own credibility when you claim that, as quoted, my insistence on such things as using appropriate grammar, good geometry, providing unique items that are actually unique and other common-sense principles somehow, according to you, demonstrates a lack of experience or relevance to potential vendors in this market. With all respect, and I sincerely mean that, your suggestion that my advice is not worthy seems fairly incredible.

I would also like to add that this particular marketplace appears to be more relaxed in the sort of content offered for sale. Frankly, the increase of favoring more sexualized and suggestive products does drive away a certain segment of the market. I am not a "prude" nor am I one of "those people" who rail against sexualized Vickies.(IIRC, there was a huge stink about that, years ago.) It's common knowledge that the widest use of Poser is for personal porn. That's fine and I have no issue with that. However, perceptions are important and the more a marketplace appears to intentionally cater to such a client-base, the less professional and polished it appears to new consumers who may not be seeking such products. For producers of sexualized/suggestive content, this may be a non-issue and may even be preferred. But, for producers of other sorts of content, this could be a very concerning issue. Those latter sorts of producers demand a marketplace that suits their product and that draws their particular client-base. It's also those latter sorts of professional producers that are responsible for the most innovation and the most dramatic, paradigm-shifting*, products in the market.

*My apologies for using the phrase "paradigm-shifting." But, it couldn't be helped... :)