A lot of you seem to be reacting heatedly. George Tirebiter and Paul Francis both made clearly considered comments about process and result. That site does appear on the face of it to value the process more, and you can also see that the result is also in a much finer league. On the other hand, the ones who are most vocal about keeping that purity of content prove to be pretty useless themselves for providing it when you go to find examples of their results.

My degree is in film, where many craftspeople like to grant themselves credibility by calling it a 'collaborative art' when you really have too many cooks spoiling the pot and overvaluing their own roles when they're really less concerned with making art than having a gravy train. The only film works that could ever be called art were made by auteurs with a single, unifying vision that survived to the end by not allowing derivitive interpretations to distort it in production. It's not really a matter of how much effort you put into it, but  how much responsibility you can claim for it when it's done.

And while many of you think the CG responder was being a dickhead, I do believe he had suggested that without making that claim of responsibility, no one viewing the image could know what credit the original poster could take. But the original poster, instead of answering the charge, simply pulled the image

Now I know some of you are going to crawl up my ass for what I'm suggesting here, but I haven't actually seen the results that started this ranting thread, nor heard how much of it the original poster did himself.