Trad does raise a good point: the benefit of the WOW books is that you get a cookbook-style..." Actually he doesn't make this point at all. You do. Trad said only that the Kitchens book was essentially a reference text and that what we really need is a book with tutorials and techniques. When I browse through my copy I see extensive discussion of both technique and tutorial that covers far more than the product manual. That is the sole point of my disagreement and I said so only to prevent others from gaining a false impression of RWB. As you suggest, the WOW series is certainly far more inviting and visually attractive. I agree with you that this is less intimidating for many. However, a reader's capacity to understand the material s/he is reading was not the point of this discussion. (And no Trad, I am not suggesting you could not understand it.) There is a place for the WOW series and they have their own value. When completed you will have learned a few more things about the program and be able to mimic or ideally, adapt, techniques used by others. But there will still be a lot about the program in question that remains unexplained. By contrast, when you finally finish and understand RBW you pretty well know Bryce inside out. Unlike a reference manual, Kitchens explains both the how and the why of each operation. Ultimately, this makes it far more valuable than a collection of recipes. There is truth in the proverb "Give me a fish and I eat today. Teach me to fish and I eat all my tomorrows." I do not worship Kitchens but I do respect her effort. Perhaps some day someone will do better. But, barring coverage of Bryce versions beyond 4, RWB presents a very, very large goal to exceed. As a side note, the one thing that always disturbs me about such discussions is that we focus so much upon the program in question. We're always looking for the next book that will magically transform us into gurus of program X. Programs are nothing but tools and our goal should not be simply mastery of them. Our true goal is the work we produce through their use. Why do we not discuss non-computer related books that teach the educated use of colour or composition? Why do we not discuss books that explore society's visual conventions and ways to use them to give our imagery more impact and thus be a more effective means of communication? Maybe then there would not be such an overwhelming image dominance of half naked, absurdly big-breasted women vaguely waving swords at nothing in particular. Not that I object to naked women, but I have the nagging suspicion that there may just be a little more to life and art than that.