WIVELROD wrote, At the end of the day it does come down to simple common sense...is it a photographed image or not?? Could the image have been created in a camera instead of photoshop? NILLA wrote, Heavily Postworked- Does it still resemble a photo? Then yes it belongs in the Photography gallery. Your image doesn't look anything like what you started with? Then you need to find another gallery. NILLA wrote, Tubes??? hehehe! If you downloaded a tube from a site, meaning it isn't yours, you didn't create it, then it doesn't belong here in Photography. NILLA wrote, 3D elements- like Bryce, Poser & Fractals etc. Hehehe, I think RR has fractal, Bryce and Poser galleries here don't they? If you used any of these 3d elements then upload it there please. PERRY6 wrote, I love seeing the variety in the Photography community: straight photo and digitally altered. It would be great if there were sub-sections for the different varieties or, at least, the artist would make everyone aware of the status of the image. (actually, many already clearly indicate this already.) TEDZ wrote, I see the Statements on some "Postings"...."NO POSTWORK"....just like a stand against Rock'n'Roll by those of the Bing Crosby era....as it would be the Ruination of Mankind. dBgrafix wrote, Photo manipulations:I guess time to make a stand on this.They can be interesting,and they are photographs,until they are distorted.Then we need a section for Manips. DBgrafix wrote, I believe some people get used to a certain Gallery. They find friendships in them and perhaps feel out of place posting in a different section. TomDart wrote, Sure, this is line to cross and I can't say where. I wouldn't want all such manipulations left out totally. LostPatrol wrote, I fully understand why there should be a limit to the amount and type of postwork done but go too far backward and RR photo gallery wont exist at all. LostPatrol wrote, Isnt the whole point of photographic art to be creative and as original as possible? Tedz is right we should join the revolution in fact we all have already. TomDart wrote, So, I use power tools when I can, make nice things, still it is jewelry. There is no person on a pedestal telling me my work is not jewelry. There is not a person telling me a particular form to which I must submit. TomDart wrote,Yet, I am here for one primary reason: To learn from the creative and technically accurate work of others and have fun in the meantime. TomDart wrote, I do not want purists on ivory towers telling me that what I do must be the kind of work they dolest it not be real photography. I want to see the images of 3dguy, Cynlee, Tedz(!!), logiloglu..Lostpatrol..ah the many others. There in is diversity and from a personal point of view, I need diversity to grow. I do not need an ivory tower of specific criteria to decide if my image(good or bad as it might be) is a photograph IN ESSENCE. Zhounder wrote, MHO photo manipulations - as said before, Does it still look like a photo? Gunsan wrote, Photoshop is here to stay, that's for sure. I think it workes well as it does, without adding new genres. The people who are proud of publishing photos without postwork just write it under the photo, so as I have seen. And those who make postwork more than the usual sharpening etc. tells that. The only main thing is that it is your own photo. SNAKEY wrote, Now a suggestion to get over this debate. When we go to upload pictures, we first select the Gallary, then the Genere and title and so on. I would suggest that either a new box maybe introduced which may specify if any post photowork has been done or if its a pure photo in it's raw form from the camera. Or else.... it could be part of the Genere itself......... or maybe a Gallary for untouched photos?? These are some of the options that I would recommend. Honestly, I have never used the mixed medium or 2d gallary to post my pics ever. Maybe, renaming it would help me look towards that direction. Gallimel wrote, What could make the difference to me would be to post ALSO the original source or sources. That could be also a way to learn how to make postwork. And a way to learn about composition and to define also better the artistic inspiration and ability of the photographer. Gallimel wrote, All said and done... I still believe a photo completely not manipulated that achieve artistic impact has to count slightly more than what was obtained after postwork. TallPockets writes, It is going to be almost impossible for everyone to agree on which standards should be applied to photos vs. manipulations. My only suggestion to the hard-working moderators in this wonderful gallery, would be that whatever rules you choose to put into effect, that they be enforced equally, irregardless of who uploads something. I think most genuine people can agree to disagree about photography definitions as such. But, if Renderosity is going to set one rule or a number of standards, then please apply those you do set. That, imho, is the main cause of friction among many Ive spoken with here. I, too, admire the sheer brilliance of those who use post worked software programs, and someday, I would hope to be even half as proficient. Hats off to their genius! However, some here cannot afford such high ticket items, while some others here choose to remain more of a purist as it were. Some peoples are against so called progress. Most are not. They just want a level playing field based on certain criteria. To each their own, I say. My beef is that when you have to compete with ultra technological advances it is a mis-match. In boxing and in wrestling they have divisions for weight classes. For fairness, as it were. If a heavyweight fought against a lightweight, it would not be a pretty sight. When Playboy magazine publishes the centerfold pics each month even the models will tell you they are airbrushed to high heaven. Just be honest and upfront about the procedures is all Im suggesting. I continue to think that the voting should be eliminated entirely. In talking to others here, many tell me (privately) it is the #1 cause of animosity. Many feel it has become a popularity contest and not a true quality contest any longer. If youre in the crowd welcome aboard the main engine of the locomotive. If youre not, enjoy the caboose ride. I am surprised a great deal that there is little, if any, postings below photo uploads describing how someone envisioned the shot, took the shot, framed the shot in his/her mind, dealt with lighting issues while taking the shot, post worked the shot, or any other actual helpful hints or instructions that might make a photographer a better one (if someone has requested comments). In the writers gallery, there is more of a descriptive bent toward what the uploader was thinking as it were. I keep reading about how this, or any gallery here, is mainly here to help others reach a higher quality level. Ive found that a lot of people dont seem open to sharing their skills as it might mean that they arent top 20 as often (from opinions of many others spoken to me). The very fact that this discussion was started/posted just points out the deep divisions that exist. As does the replies. I dont envy the moderators who have to set up the standards. Its a no win job. Good Luck. Again, just kindly enforce the standards you do choose, whatever they are, if any. Most respectfully, TallPockets.