I almost deleted my last post because after rethinking it, thought it was a little 'mean spirited' and that's not something I like to have associated with me. However, its not really inflammatory except it does seem a bit snide in regards to the inferences of A's objects. I retract and apologize for that but still maintain that if we are going to take this to the 'source', then that means not using preset materials (SOMEone made them--not us), nor Poser, nor much of anything, etc. Just because it 'came with the program' does not mean that somone else didn't create it. Better dig into the Deep Material lab G. I'm a professional full time textile artist and this reminds me of the argument for 'natural' dyes as opposed to synthetic--even I perpetuated that for years and taught 'natural' dyeing (but of course it used chemical 'assists'-LOL). However, I outgrew that nonsensical idea with a bit of critical and logical thinking and now use what works for the object I have in mind. This seems in the same vein--it IS snobbery and false 'elitism'. Now--finis with this thread for me. There are lots more important things to do in Bryce than argue about what's 'pure'--reminds me of some of the same arguments I've seen for ONLY using Bryce and not doing any post work AT ALL. Silly!!--at least IMO. I'm always impressed with someone being able to create a wonderful image w/o post work, but I just don't think we should feel its somehow 'cheating'. Diane B