[What I would like to see is for the artists to be COMPLETELY HONEST and state what post work has been done on the images they post, no matter how slight it may be. Even a small description of their technique might be nice.] I tend to agree with that. It may be unfair of me, but I do tend to be more impressed with an image that took a lot of effort and innovation, rather than a pp trick or filter, etc. I don't consider myself a purist per se...after all, I do think the final piece of art is what is more important, not just the tools used. But I still think it's important to give credit where it's due when someone develops a certain skill with one program. For example, if you see a decent image that was digitally painted from scratch versus a stock photo that's been filtered and manipulated, I'm more likely to be more impressed with the digital painting...even if the processed stock photo looks nicer. Which leads me to wonder if some don't post their methods of creation for that very reason?