i been having a longstanding argument with a friend of mine lately, and the bone of contention is the definition of 3D art.
more specifically, 3D modelling.
When most people think of rendering in 3D, they generally mean making something in like maya or 3dsmax or somesuch. Painstakingly putting a model together and shaping it bit by bit. He strongly maintains that rendering in programs like poser aren't really 3D, because most of it is done for you - you just pose how you want, stick a few lights in and a background, and its done.

I suppose it comes down to how you see it, and what you want to do with it. He wants to be able to say "i made that figure from scratch"; I want to say "look at the way the light accentuates the model". In other words, I'm more concerned with the "artistic" side of it, rather than the technical side. If i want technical, I'd learn maya and make models from scratch. Poser, for me, isnt about boasting about my leet model making skills, its about using a program as a replacement for something that is currently out of my reach - a studio complete with model, lighting and background. A model i can "photograph" however i like, doing whatever i like, at whatever time of the night i choose.

So yes, poser may not be 3D art per se, but that doesn't mean it's not art. To that end, I'm gonna start posting my renders, whatever theyre classified as.


So there, FS