Thank God, Misha! (I think we needed a brief interruption in what's surely to become a thorn in some people's side. I had (have) no intensions of ticking people off - or to try to place myself "above" anyone at all. There have been several excellent points made (on both sides) - and I have enjoyed greatly the spirited discussion. I will be the very first to admit that my comments are made purely as opinion - and in no way to be misunderstood as "rules" that anyone should follow (except me). I'm the one who griped about "program modes" when they first came out, and then there was multiple-program modes....making it (to me) more difficult to learn the various modes of the camera then it would be to learn the basics of photography (which you STILL need to know in order to use these program-modes to their fullest degree!) What I fell in love with about photography was a pure blend of the technical and the artistic - I can think of no other medium that requires each to such a degree. Within my personal realm of subject matter, I need to be a chemist, naturalist, entomologist, biologist, physicist, artist, etc. - venture into shooting portraits and you need to be a psychologist, humanitarian, socialist, etc... I have no problem with "the art" being created within Photoshop - there are works that could not be created otherwise. My gripe (if that's what it's to be labeled as) is with photographers who haven't developed the skill yet to convey a message with the camera - and taking more time learning Photoshop than photographic skills. - I also would like to point out that jacoggins makes an extremely valid point - this is supposed to be fun, and nobody is to say what is "enjoyable" for anyone else. I would also like to point out a quote from DHolman "As long as you're not a documentarian, then whatever you need to do to get the image you want, you do." I fully agree with this as well. Slynky - I really do enjoy "goin' at it" with you - I think we both get something out of it. You stated "Perfect exposures are not commonplace.." - well, I have to ask why not? It's not like there are any surprises when you focus your camera at a subject. If you understand exposure and know how your camera's meter reacts to different tonalities (or whatever meter you;'re using" - there is absolutely no excuse for not getting 36 good exposures on a 36 exposure roll - and composition is not something that you need to look at after you make the exposure. I don't see why "perfect exposures" should be such a problem - it shouldn't. Yes, there will be situations where the contrast range of a particular composition may be out of the range of the film's recording capabilities, but you should be aware of that before making the exposure as well. I fail to see the excuse for bad exposure - but am willing to listen. (Believe me, I'm not trying to rub you wrong - I honestly would like to discuss/argue this a bit more with you - you tend to let it all out, which I really like) Other statements: When I made the statement about "commercial photographers letting dust on small products by....that can be taken out in photoshop" - I was speaking from experience - as part of a catalog with some 400 items in it, I played the part of the "art director" - overseeing the photographer doing the shoot. During the entire three days it took to shoot the products (small, cabinetry hardware - where a dust fleck looks like a piece of concrete), I kept hearing "well, that can be taken out in Photoshop", while I kept saying "no, go ahead and get it out now". I was the one who was going to have to retouch the images and put the catalog together. Now, this is a photographer who I have worked with for several years (going on 18 or so years) - and he was always a bit more efficient...but it seems he's gotten lazy (what does he care - he bills out $1,800 day rate anyway) - but now my client is going to be paying me $75/hr to retouch images). maybe I shouldn't gripe - time is money - but I would much rather spend time developing more challenging projects than "dust and shadow fixes" where a $10 can of Dust-Off (and a light tent) would have done the trick. Used to be, when this photographer and I would have a conversation, we would talk about photography...now, all he wants to discuss is Photoshop techniques. Anyway - I really have enjoyed this debate and do want to apologize for any feelings that may have been hurt - it was not my intension. Marc