I just re-read my post - yes, it looks like I focused on the word "criticism". Didn't mean for that to be the case, as I really do believe in the word "critique" which encompasses BOTH sides - not just saying "what's wrong" with something. Yes, I believe every artist (if you're going to leave comments) deserves FIRST to hear what they did right. It's successful for a REASON, and this is why, and I try to make it go beyond, "Dude, you ROCK!" THEN make a constructive statement as to how an element might be made better. A comment on one of my last images pointed out that the city in my background might be a little too big - basically I've got nothing to give it a sense of real-world scale - THANK YOU BGHART!! There was something I couldn't figure out that made it "off" and now I know how I can fix it - I REALLY appreciated that. Most people have the primary goal of getting better at what they do, but some people DO get bent out of shape if someone suggests that something they did might have room for improvement. I think that's the general notion in this thread, so the goal should be to be tactful when leaving a response or comment, and be mindful of what and how you say something might hurt their feelings. Again, "Helpful" (this was noting the very first sentence in this thread which was the basis of my original response)politely means "Don't just say it sucks". -Lew ;-)

Welcome! Former Bryce user as well - you're gonna love Vue! -Lew ;-)

Sorry to confuse your further, but pretty much any 3D animation app $200 or more will allow you to do all you mentioned above - you can even do it with Bryce for $100 but it's hard to get realistic results without taking a year to render a full animation sequence. Since you've used 3DS Max, if you still have access to it, go for it! Hope that helps a little- -Lew ;-)

Hard to give advice without sounding like a commercial for the product. I'm a photographer too (product) - started w/Bryce (fun, simple, a little restricting), I'm now on Vue5Inf (love it for simple but good quality results!), I've used 3DS Max6 (friend has it and lets me play - love it, though complicated and $3,400), I bought XSI Foundation ($500, and there's $2k and $7k versions - again, love it but complicated - and some things stripped from the $7k version - YA THINK?), Poser6 (only limited use so far, but I like it a lot), Strata 3D CX (to go with product photography - none of my clients have figured it out yet that some elements are from that and not photographed), and I finally bought Cinema4D (many magazine reviews suggested it was great and didn't have as high a learning curve) and haven't had time to really get into it but I like it so far. Haven't used Lightwave (around $900 now and bundled with Vue5Inf)or Maya (2 versions - $2k, and $7k)- but we've all seen AWESOME results in the right hands - and both have more of a learning curve. As with ANY 3D app, if you don't know it well, it's going to look amatuerish. With just about any of them you can get great results after getting to know them and practice. Hope that helps- -Lew ;-)

It seems many of the RR artists didn't attend any "formal" art classes - and therefore haven't gone through the formal presentaion process where your artwork is in front of the class for CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. This is a 2-part system: 1 - The artist learns that just about anything can be a WIP, and use help or sugestions without taking it (too) personally. They can take the suggestions and look at their art objectively seeing what is being pointed out. 2 - This makes the person doing the criticizing accountable for what they say and how they say it - they're right there IN PERSON in front of the artist they're criticizing. You figure out how to be tactful (because theirs is going up next, and there can be definite retribution!) I've probably got over 200 images on my hard drive that you'll never see because I think they're crap - just me figuring out the software(s) I've got (there's even one in my gallery I'm seriously thinking of deleting). If someone displays an image with a figure's butt merging past their skirt, they should have known this beforehand and corrected it - or if they can't figure out how THEY SHOULD MENTION THIS IN THE DESCRIPTION. Otherwise they should EXPECT someone to point it out - this isn't gonna be a surprise. But there ARE Trollers who are not tactful at all, and sometimes even try to disguise it as "people hate me for just being honest". "TROLLERS WILL BE JOYFULLY MANGLED!!" is another slogan I now put up for bid! Yeah, "Helpful" politely means "Don't just say it sucks". -Lew ;-)

I appreciate the posts, folks - starting to feel like I was the kid who never wrote a thank-you card for gifts. I already say something like "thanks for viewing and enjoy" so I think I'll just change it to something like "thanks for viewing and comments" and leave it at that. -Lew ;-)

Ah - a Windows colution - but unfortunately it's no cheap thrill! www.okino.com

Hadn't heard of it, but sadly it won't work for me (looks great, though) - all XP workstations here, and it's a Mac only app.

Dvisuals: yes - twoo, vewy twoo.

My mother once told me that while working at the DMV, there was a woman whose entire job was to go through personalized license plate requests and see if there was anything "dirty, or morally reprehensible" about them. HER ENTIRE JOB WAS A FILTER - and within a month of telling me this story, I looked in my rearview mirrow and chuckled at a license plate that was 3M-TA3. No matter how many filters, SOMETHING will make it through the cracks. -Lew ;-)

Yeah, it seems the "no, ours is better" argument/grudge between software manufacturers causes more headaches for those studios using multiple apps because of each one's particular strengths. I use XSI (Foundation) and C4D for modelling, and bring it/them into Vue5Inf for layout and render because it's just simpler and I'm comfortable with the lighting tools (though I may start doing all my renders in C4D soon). Many studios have some version of production pipeline that goes something like (just an example) model and texture in app#1 (because it's fantastic for that), then import into app#2 for rigging (better/quicker tools for that), then finally bring into app#3 for animation and render (because this one has the best mocap tools around, and the best rendering plug-ins around!). And under normal circumstances the 3 apps don't play nice with each other. Yeah, it'd be nice if they sat down, realizing this, and came up with a standardized coding they could all share for both models and UV coordinates. -Lew

I like to use Terragen, but it's very limited which is why I always come back to Vue. Can't add trees or rocks, or objects - you apparently will with TG2, but I don't know how it'll be implimented. For now I have to do all objects in PS - which come to find out drives many in the TG community crazy. It seems that many specifically want the TG "look" of the render and feel it is marred by postwork. Their (TG that is) goal was to figure out how to make the qualities of light for an outdoor environment as realistic as possible. However - I disagree with the quality of TG clouds when you try to make them thick (3D vertical thickness). That's when it tends to be "very unforgiving" - an excellent description from someone in one of the TG threads. My main problem with Vue is that ALL their materials start with an opacity of %40 - this drives me nuts! In the real world NOTHING has an opacity of %40 - so it makes straight renders look "cartoonish" and unrealistic. When making an ecosystem with plants (and rocks, frankly) I'm unable to lower the opacity and have to make more adjustments in PS - BTW, if anybody knows how to bypass this I'd LOVE to hear it!

Yeah, dunno exactly how its going to be output, so not sure of the advice. Archdruid's right - I ran a Lambda (48" wide) and a Fuji Frontier (10" wide minilab) and when making an 8x10, I could barely tell the difference between files that were 1200x1500 (8x10@150ppi)or 2400x3000 (8x10@300ppi). Those kinds of printers fill in some blanks, smooth out stepping, etc. You go below that, though, and things start to look a little too "smoothed out". Kind of the same thing with inkjet printers (though they won't "smooth" things out) - you can get away with 150ppi at the size you'll be printing, and unless you look really close you won't be able to tell the difference. Printing for catalogs, they're gonna want his res images - I turn in CDs of 3000x4500ppi CMYK TIFs, and they just resize them as needed (apparently, they can go as low as 212dpi output, making them 14'x21' print capability so they can do a double page spread). So, again, contact whomever will be doing the printing, see if they need any special color profiles (some have their own custom profiles), find out their size requirements, and find out their format preferences (PDF, TIF, BMP, etc., as well as RGB or CMYK). Good luck and happy Photoshopping- -Lew ;-)

Contact your printer to get their list of size and resolution requirements. I just altered a photo for my first image to be used on a billboard, and come to find out it only needed to be 9ppi!! Yep, if you scan a 4x6 as a 4x6 at 300ppi, you can make an 11'x16' billboard! And when you ask them what size they need, if they tell you "it should be 300ppi" (drives me nuts when they do this, and you'd be amazed at how often they do this!) make sure they understand that is the 3rd part of a 3 part equation. Respond with, "How many inches by how many inches, at 300ppi?" Good luck and happy Photoshopping- -Lew ;-)

Just read a really cool article in Layers Magazine where (it never occurred to me!) they made a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer, desaturated with that, then changed the H/S layer mode to Luminosity. This keeps the bright and dark colors, well, bright and dark repsectively, instead of turning everything into a generic gray mush. Side note - try changing all kinds of adjustment layer modes - just create a Levels layer (making no changes - just create and click OK), and change it to Overlay or Soft Light - go nuts! Have fun Photoshopping- -Lew ;-)