Excellent post, blackhearted! OK. Everyone seems to be missing a major point in this endless debate. Why is it that whenever digital art is mentioned, people automatically compare it to traditional painting, sketches, photography, or whatever? If you produce digital art YOU ARE NOT IN COMPETITION WITH OTHER MEDIA! They are all COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS. You are 'in competition' (for want of a better phrase) with other poser users. Full stop. Why try to compare yourself with Van Goch? IMO, that's where half the problems arise in the first place. This is a new medium that has no connection with other methods, so forget them. blackhearted said 'its a LOT harder posing a poser figure, and lighting a poser scene, than it is a photograph' Let's take that as a starting point. I'm a fashion photographer and a poser user, and you can take it from me that these two media have entirely different sets of problems. I don't have to texture a model, but I have to get her to react properly for the picture I'm shooting, and capture it in a split-second. I don't need to fiddle with dials to pose her, but I have to make sure I get the pose on film. I don't need to worry about making her look realistic, she already is, but if she gets sick on the shoot, I have to try and finish anyway. Different media, different problems. I humbly submit the radical idea that when poser users stop worrrying about what 'artists' think of them, they'll grow up and get on with producing images that are UNIQUE to this amazing, frustrating, liberating program! Until then, let the debate continue! mac PS Penguinisto said it all. Ansel Adams used to spend weeks and weeks in a camper in Yosemite, waiting for the perfect INSTANT to create landscapes on film. Photos that now sell for thousands of dollars. And people said it would never be 'art'? Sheesh....