3D art, to me, is comparable to art direction in a film (which I consider very much art). In most films, a lot of "models" are bought, rather than created for budget and time constraints. If you are filming a library scene for instance, do you really need to create every book in the set by hand? Not really, but the vision of the library's look is the art. The art director of the film, though responsible for the look of that film, is usually rarely the one who actually creates the things that he uses. He either has other artists or products that are bought. Much thought and feeling goes into pictures that are created, whether there is use of other models, or not. I've seen some pictures where you'll see a certain model or prop and go okay, not bad, while another picture using that same prop will blow you away. That to me is the art, not where ya got the elements from.

The fault I have in the argument above is the analogy that making one's own brushes is the same as using other artist's models. It's not. What it is similar to is using Poser or Photoshop rather than a canvas. Most artists wouldn't make their own paints or write something like Poser/Photoshop/Etc. However, when you are using another person's models, you are using their artwork in your own work. Again, there is nothing wrong with that, but it's clearly not the same as the analogy everyone seems to make.

Just my 2 cents...Art is art...enjoy...