I am not going to say much about the nudity. It has always been what it is. It's no surprise that it's popular. People collectively pay billions of dollars to see it and all that goes with it.

Now we get to see how our art rates in context with other digital art and some reality has set in. We have talked about this so many times before, but I'll say it again:

1. Most fractal images have faces that only their creators love, along with other fractal artists

2. Most viewers don't care about what we feel when we have discovered or learned something new

3. Most viewers don't care about the math

4. All that matters is the final product, not the software or the process that was used to create it (not even if it's an Apophysis image ;-))

We have also talked about the "inbreeding" that takes place in this community. We tell each other how great our art is and then we start to believe that "outsiders" will believe the same thing. When we show our art along side the other visual art and let non-fractal artists judge it, we are disappointed by the results.

None of these thoughts are new to me. I've been thinking them for a long time and they are based on real experience. But I'm still a believer. Along with the negative stuff, I have seen fractal based art stand up against the other art. We enjoy a legitimate art form and I plan on continuing to enjoy it.

The new gallery format has had no impact on my participation here. I have not been as active but that is because my interests have been elsewhere.

I have mixed feelings about the charts. I do think that they are a better reflection of reality, and there is value to that, but I wouldn't mind seeing art charts by gallery too. I hesitate though because I don't want to see a return of the hot 20 mentality that many of us grew to despise or ignore. As long as the big charts stay intact, to remind us of reality, gallery charts would be good. Besides, you never know - maybe fractal based art will occasionally dominate the big charts. I would enjoy that.

Keith