Well, after posting some of my older stuff at the gallery over the last couple of days a semi regular response seemed to be generated. "Is this a photograph?" That brings up a good question. Can a still life for that matter be a photograph, or rather, can one photograph a "created" setup and call it a photograph, or should it then be considered "mixed medium?" In my book the answer is yes, its a photograph, which is why I posted here. I had another image that I posted yesterday in which I scratched the emulsion on the 4x5 down and then painted it for a background. To me, that crossed the line into mixed medium and I posted there. If you feel that any kind of photograph in which the photographer manipulates any of the elements in the image before the shutter is tripped is not a photograph than you may want to reconsider portraits and such for if one can move a body around what difference is the movement of an inanimate object. (Damn thats a long sentance for an ex-journalist.) The reason I bring this up is just to get some of you thinking about what you're doing. Come on folks lighten up a bit. There's some wonderfully creative and talented people that I've seen here. You all should feel like you can experiment and hang it on the line and then bring it back here to get constructive criticism on your vision and technique. That way everyone gets a little better...which is a cool thing. See your photography history for the f64 group. With the internet you don't have to travel to Carmel or New Mexico. Oh, and by the way, nothing I post in the photography gallery is digitally manipulated. Its straight stuff with a 4x5 or an RZ. The trick is the lighting. Keep creating everyone!