My Lord of the Rings example is the difference between someone who strives to think independently (as you do) and someone who fancies themselves an artist because they have the skills and the tools but,in fact, does not trust his or her own imagination to create a vision beyond the one established by the film (or the book). To copy an image from a movie is not being an artist. I'm sorry, I just don't think it is, no matter how technically perfect it is. The artist was the person with the first vision who brought it to life. To me, and this is just me, skills and tools don't make an artist or a writer. I would be a writer if I was on a desert island without a piece of paper, computer, or stone carving implement in sight. It's not the tools or the ability to spell (sometimes) that make me a writer. It is not a paintbrush or a box of paints or a camera that makes an artist. My point is the same as yours. A good picture or a good story gives you the impulse to go beyond the original, if you have yourself the ability to allow yourself to flow beyond the original. My feeling, though, is that the play inside the mind is greater with words for me (and I never speak for someone else). What saddens me is people I see with obvious technical skills that seem to be staying within the perimeters of someone's else's imagination. You will argue: "But they are happy there, so why complain?" I am not complaining. I am simply thinking they could be more than someone else's imitator if they reached beyond the copying stage. Everyone, including Leonardo and Shakespeare, copied a master, had a mentor to follow, but artists go beyond their mentors and become mentors themselves. I don't see that happening often in the galleries here. I see it sometimes. Just not often. But then true creative forces like Leonardo and Shakespeare are once in a generation. I can't be too critical. I'm certainly not Shakespeare. I don't pretend to be. But I do strive, once in awhile, to be improve on what small gifts nature gave me. What I see, often, is someone with incredible potential who stops so long for applause that they begin creating for someone else and not in order to create something amazing...and then they begin repeating themselves endlessly -- perhaps because the applause becomes addictive and becomes the end instead of the work of art being the goal. Or I am simply overanalysing the whole thing. Am I arguing style versus content? I'm not sure. This was a ramble through my morning thoughts. I get that way without coffee sometimes. Hope your meeting went well. Thank you for commmenting so thoughtfully. :)