Thanks for setting me straight.  That's good info.

Also "I have proficient in drafting" should be "I am proficient in drafting."

I don't think there is such a thing as the ultimate modeler, as everyone has their own particular needs that have to be addressed. For me, I can't say enough good things about Rhino. It has a few limitations, but there really isn't much that can be modeled with Rhino's NURBS. As for polygon modeling, I've been dabbling in Wings, and it pretty good. A lot different than Rhino. When I have some time I'll read a few tutorials to get a better understanding of it. Rhino has a CAD feel, Wings a sculptural one. As for a jack of all trades I'd look at Lightwave, Cinema 4D or 3DSMAX. MAX is the only one I have experience with and I like it, but it is expensive. I'd like to purchase it some day. Hopefully someone can convince me that Lightware or Cinema is just as good.

Having heard nothing but good things about Wings, I definately am going to try it out. A Wings forum here would go quite well. I suggest giving the Imagine forum the axe, and adding the Wings forum. I used to own Imagine, but it has been outclassed for sometime.

I believe it is the difference between "Art" and "Illustration." I would characterize most of what appears in the gallery as Illustration, an attempt to an imagined thing, place, person etc. in a realistic way. My definition of Art (meaning the visual arts) would be that which tries to convey a story, stimulate thinking or bring about an emotional responce. I think of computer generated images in much the same way as airbrush illustrations, a medium that is most useful for rendering ideas in a realistic way. Looking at illustrations one is generally looking for technical skill, or images that are hyper-real. Being computer users, in my opionion, makes us most likely to be illustrators and we look through the galleries with that intent. "Art" on the other hand typically doesn't bennifit from a quick glance. It's "message" may require a careful study, not likely to show up in a thumbnail. This is why I tend to look for high quality illustrations here and Renderosity. If I'm looking at Art then I'm more likely on a website devoted to a particular artist whose work I enjoy. -Rhettro

Yep, Spike's right. Its not the rendering engine, it's how it is used. Renderman and Final Render are awesome rendering engines, but it takes an artful user to set them up right. Take for example the coffee cup beside me. It is your typical white ceramic mug with a little coffee at the bottom. What would it take to render it correctly? Well, it's somewhat shiny so I would need an environment to reflect on it. I notice a slight shade of tan on the inside of the cup. This is from the light reflecting on the coffee at the bottom back onto the inside of it. I'm sitting under flourescent lighting, let's say 3 fixtures. It causes a very soft, slight shadow on my desk. How is the computer going to know about all these things if I don't instruct it? I find the two things that make a rendered image look cartoony is over saturated colors (i.e. not gray), and hard dark shadows. The Pros definately worry about this, that is why the hire lighting and art directors to oversee their work. -Rhettro

My work comes more from an architectural/industrial design background, so it should come as no surprise that I am a long time AutoCAD user. I've been a big fan of 3D design on the computer for a long time. My first start in 3D was Turbo Silver on the Amiga. That latter evolved into Imagine on the PC. Imagine was a fine program for it's time (1993), but would be considered archaic by today's standards. The follow is a list of 3d programs that I have used professionally in chronological order. Turbo silver Imagine AutoCAD 3DSMAX and Rhino 2.0 I played with the demos for Truespace, Amapi, Cinema 4D and FormZ. Of all these programs the one I'm most enthusiastic about is Rhino. Coming from AutoCAD, Rhino was extremely easy to pick up. I really like working in NURBS. I can make the exact geometry, not an approximation of it. This precision allow for predictable results while trimming holes or doing Booleans etc. The commands work the way they should and the tutorials that come with the demo are easy to understand and really show the strength of Rhinos modeling abilities. Adding a fillet between the intersection of two curvilinear surfaces is one thing that Rhino can do easily. Ive been browsing through the application boards here at Renderosity on a regular basis for the last year and a half and the Rhino group seems to consistently generate high caliber work, followed closely by the Lightscape, and Cinema 4D group. This would lead me to believe that people are finding it easier to create complex 3d models in Rhino than any other program. Also Rhinos import/export functions are top notch. I dont have any problems getting geometry into or out from Rhino. I guess that is enough to say about PROS of Rhino, how about some of the CONS. Well, first off Rhino is a NURBS modeler, some applications, like game character design, may be better suited to a polygon modeler like Wings3d. Rhino is primarily a modeling program and as such it is intended as a companion to another software package, i.e. for rendering and/or animation. Rhino has the mirror command, but lacks a true symmetry feature. This would be useful for tracing cross-sections from a bitmap. Rhino needs clean geometry to perform some of its advanced operations; sometimes it wont let you blend a trimmed surface and requires you to rebuild it among other things. This might force you to build you object in another way to allow for certain types of editing. Rhino isnt a parametric modeler, so that may be a concern if you are used to designing in a program such as Solidworks. And now for some completely bias opinions of some of the other programs Ive used. 3DSMAX: I like the interface and material handling of this program, but the modeling features are somewhat clumsy. There are a lot of modifiers like, twist, bend, etc., that are probably useful for animation, but not for modeling. I saw a demonstration of 3DSMAX 5. Its rendering engine is much improved, looked as good as Lightscapes. If youre into character design, they had some pretty need modeling tools for that as well. Truespace: Tried the demo, but I couldnt make much sense of it. I couldnt get fast results, so I got frustrated and deleted it of my hard drive. Cinema 4D: I downloaded the demo and while I liked the interface, I was still lost for the most part. I didnt find it intuitive and ended up erasing it as well. FormZ: Architects are supposed to love this program, so being an Architect, I decided I should try it out. In the 2d area it seems a lot like CorelDRAW, and as such fairly easy to pick up, but jumping to 3d seemed to require a few extra steps that I wouldnt need to take if I was modeling in Rhino. There may be a good program in there, a little more time with it would probably answer that question. Lightwave: I havent tried the demo yet, but Im very impressed with the work Ive seem coming from the LW users. I would like something for animation/rendering and Lightwave would be a cost effective way to go for me. But Im more familiar with 3DSMAX, if I could get 3DSVIZ and Final Render that would probably meet my needs, but that is a little out of my range at the moment. Also, seeing pictures of the Lightwave interface leaves me cold. Im hoping that I dont find it to sterile. I like programs that give you a pull-down menu, icons and a command bar. Havent to switch apps to render seems like downer as well. Amapi: Tried to do a revolve shape and it took me an hour to figure it out. Then it hung up and crashed. Oh well, I already have an app that can do revolves. Here in Kansas City, the number one used application is 3DSMAX, then Maya and followed closely by Lightwave. 3DSMAX seems to be dominant in the architecture / product field. Maya is dominant in the film/television commercial field and the freelance types use Lightwave. -Rhettro