One of the things that has surprised me, since I started looking at some Poser art forums is that Poser artwork is seen as something inferior to work produced with Maya or 3DS Max. It's not simply a prejudice based on the capabilities of the programs. Poser, pure and simple, is not as capable a 3D program as many others, but it's also not as expensive as the others (less than 10% the cost of Maya or Max). Poser can still produce some very nice artwork. The prejudice is often simply the use of the program. I've read posts by people that have been approached to participate in online gallery art showings, based on the galleries on their websites, that were immediately uninvited when they explained how they produced their artwork. One minute, their art was good enough to show and the next it was considered garbage because of how it was produced. It is so weird to see a person's perceptions totally change their realities when they have new information. There was no question the art was good enough to display--the artist never would have been approached if that was at issue. Since the artwork wasn't created with a more expensive program, it was deemed junk. The online showcase was for 3D art, not Maya or program specific art, and Poser is a 3D art program. I've seen the same kind of prejudice against software created artwork by the traditional media based art communities. That's likewise very strange because it's hard to imagine that the traditional art world, which can be enamored by works that are literally just paint splattered on a canvas, but find a problem with something beautiful if it was created on a computer. It's all very silly. Art is not being judged by the final product, but by how it is created. The one thing that surprises me even more is that I'll occasionally see threads by people who almost seem to believe the bad press and feel like second class 3D citizens. It's almost as if they feel all the worse if the software makes it too easy to produce good work. That's strange because software is supposed to make chores easier. Whether the software produces a perfect sphere in a second or hours, a sphere is still a sphere. Maybe it's a greater accomplishment to force a program, not designed to make a sphere, to make a good sphere, but it's still a matter of not using the right program for the right task. The end result is still a sphere that doesn't look any better than the one produced in a second. Software doesn't have to be hard to use to be useful. If a person uses a pose, characters and props, lighting, and other things designed by somebody else to quickly produce an image that looks great, more power to them. That's the reason why people are using software over other media for their artwork. The average person doesn't really care how a great looking image was created. Only somebody really hung up in their invested wasted efforts is going to be bothered by something produced more efficiently.