After seeing many post on the issue of speed, I have to wonder to myself is faster better? Somehow I can't picture two art historians debating on weather John Doe was better then Rembrandt because he produced 3 pictures a day. I make images that say something to me and hopefully say something to the person veiwing it. The number of pictures done per day per week or per year has nothing to do with art in my opinion. I was wondering how other people feel about this? I can understand that in a proffesional atmosphere you are willing to sacrifice some quality for speed there is a deadline to meet. I can also understand all things being equal faster is better. But how do other people view it? When an image is done do you say "I am glad this only took me 10 mins to do" or do you say "this is me, this is what I want to say"? In the end will it be the program that produces a picture with one single click going to be the winner? At what point will it stop being the artist and start being the program? Perhaps we give our programs too much credit now, they are just tools. I hope. Just my views would love to hear what others have to say. Griggs