In general reply to hornet3D, moriador, and Netherworks,. (Sorry, the forum doesn't seem to have a way to make multi-quoting easy...)

There's a difference between pursuing "Poser" 3D Art and general 3D art. I'm not saying Poser art isn't that, but there's a different mindset between Poser enthusiasts and general 3D artists.

Imagine that you love to collect and to arrange paper dolls. You have a professional supplier for paper doll products, so you're generally happy. But, after awhile, you run out of interesting paper doll gear. You like to pose and arrange your paper dolls and take photos of them, adjusting the lights and camera settings as necessary. (Think "Cottingly Fairies." Google if necessary.)

After awhile, you start wondering if you can make your own paper doll accessories or even whole doll figures. So, you buy some scissors, an exacto-knife or three, some good quality paper and then sit down to watch some tutorials or go through a tutorial pdf on "How tos." Maybe you couldn't afford these materials or maybe you found that you didn't have the skills or the time or patience to learn all the details you think you'd need to know in order to create your own paper dolls and accessories. So, you stop trying and try to find satisfaction in "what you have" instead of "what you want."

There is nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, it's a mainstay of human commerce. :) Everyone practices this need vs cost dynamic. I buy a car because I can't build one and I'm darn sure that, if I could, no State would be foolish enough to license it!

But, if I'm not satisfied with the cars or paper dolls that are available, what do I do? I have found that I can't create them and am not satisfied with what it is available. There are three options available to me: I pay someone else to create them, which will cost a heck of a lot of money. I lobby for creators to produce what I believe I want (which many are doing here) or I learn to find satisfaction with what I have by trying new things, within the capability of tools and skillsets that I currently possess.

An option that is not logical is to assume that "what I have" is somehow worthless to me or "broken" simply because I have reached the full capacity of its capabilities. Instead, I have to be proactive and I need to pursue those things that attracted me to the medium in the first place. Thinking "outside of the box" in order to continue to pursue what I like, but taking it to fresh areas, would be a good choice.

I don't render a lot. I find it more fun to construct objects and figures, texture them, mess with materials, get some idea of how they render and then move on. I might get one good render up, just to brag to myself about my work. :) But, after that, it's generally forgotten and I move on to something else. (One of these days I'm going to get around to resurrecting an old hard-drive and flood my old projects out as freebies. One day..)

But, let's take a passion for assembly and rendering "outside of the box" in order to explore where it can go. Sure, there are limitations, but if I've reached them in one area, I can't agonize over what I am not willing or an unable to affect, can I? I can, however, affect how I choose to pursue a solution with "what I have", though, right?

Composite shots are an interesting thing. Much like the "Cottingly Fairies", composite shots take 3D objects and, with a bit of kludging, camera tracking, whatevers, place them in a real-world setting. It takes nothing extra, except some suitable pics, to start doing this. Further, there are a lot of things one can do, from heaping on a lot of post-work to doing one's best to create a composite shot completely within Poser/DS, with no postwork. That is incredibly difficult to do and it's a worthy ambition for a dedicated Poser user.

Anaglyphs are another pursuit that can be realized just with the tools a Poser user already uses. Well, you'll have to go buy some paper 3D glasses to fully appreciate it, but it's "doable." And, it could prove to be a lot of fun creating actual "Three Dimensional Art" using 3D.

Stereoscopic images are another true "3D" art solution. It's an older format than colored/polarized glasses, but it's arguably easier to render. There's even a free script, somewhere around here, that sets the camera angles for you. But, even that's not too hard to do, by hand. After that, all you need is a bit of practice focusing or, if you're brave, get a good quality print of each image and build yourself a viewing box thingie.

Animation. Poser has a lot of capability in that area. If you're like me, you never once touched much of anything to do with Poser animation. But, then again, I moved outside of Poser fairly rapidly. Some people have saturated their experience of Poser without ever moving into animation and I think that's a shame. They obviously like the program, but don't use half of its capabilities. So, what's stopping someone who loves Poser, but hasn't explored animation? Only themselves.

The point is this - If you are unhappy with your experience and you feel that you have reached the limits of "what you have", have you truly examined everything that "what you have" offers? If you can't or won't expand your experience set in order to delve deeper into the genre that you appreciate so much, then you've got to push onward in exploring what you can do instead of worrying what you can't do.

I think that Poser and DS have a lot to offer their fanbase, yet. Are there issues? Yes, there most certainly are. The biggest issue is that Poser and DS are primarily designed for Poser and DS fans, not for general "3D Art" that pushes the tech boundaries that the industry has reached, today. That means that they've painted themselves into a niche corner and you, the longstanding user-base, are going to eventually get bored if they don't do something "new." In some ways, both are attempting to combat this issue, primarily through targeting game development. It's a smart move and they'll both attract some attention from some game developers who are just starting out and want some easily created content. But, it will never reach the deeper depths of "game development content" because it's just not designed for that. Instead, it will hold a small portion of the market or a very unique group that doesn't want to go any further than necessary in order to scratch their itch.

Go out there and scratch your itch with "what you have." If you want more than that, there are plenty of avenues you can pursue. But, if you do not wish to pursue those avenues, you simply have to "Make Do." There isn't any other logical option available.

Note: Truly stepping past Poser/DS into "3D" art and constructing one's own content can be intimidating. But, that intimidation will be short-lived, the more experience you have. For myself, and it's only anecdotal, I find "Photoshop" more intimidating that just about any 3D package I've ever tried to use. (With the exception of Blender. I still have nightmares...) I find it incredibly difficult to craft a decent texture. At least, not one up to my standards. But, I can model anything, so I "make do" with kludging textures together in Photoshop or by "cheating" using nothing but procedurals. I "make do" and my dissatisfaction with textures has nothing to do with the quality of any program nor any other solutions that are available to me. I am content with that. When I am no longer content, I will push myself to learn how to create good textures. Maybe I'll even create a "great one" or two? I don't look forward to the day when I must start Photoshop tutorials... But, come it will.