I am sure this has probably been debated in the past, but maybe it should be given some closer examination. 1. Pure Photography 2. Enhanced Photography Is an image that has been significantly altered using software remain a photograph? When content, color, contrast, saturation, focus / sharpness is significantly altered out side of the camera or the developing phase remain a photograph? Color correction or makeing subtle adjustments for various short comings for a photo not withstanding. The use of composits, rendering, brushwork, selective blurs and a host of other manipulations remove the image from the realm of photography. It becomes a indication of a persons ability in using software rather than a camera. So it is no longer photography. The measure of a photographers skill, is measured on he ability to capture a image that is accurate, conveys a emotion, is properly lit, exposed, and composed. This is achieved by a painstaking process of finding the proper subject, lighting, exposure, composition. Then using the Camera the isntument of his craft and capturing that image. It is not taking any available image and manipulateing it into something else after the fact. While software is a powerful tool it is not photogtraphy, not even by the widest application. The use of software can allow the worst collection of images to look good and the best photographs look better. But it is not talent in photography. I am as good as anyone using photoshop, and can manipulate images to a degree that I can get just about any image that I can think up. But does that make me a good photographer? No I will be the first to admit it does not. Any image I post in the photography gallery has been a straight scan from a actual photographic print. The only post work has been on OLD B&W prints I've posted to clean up scratches and dust spots on the print. I was wondering that to do the photography gallery the most justice would it not be wise to seperate the Photoshop works from the pure photography works? Personally I am not at all that interested in images that have been heavily photoshopped. As it does not teach me anything about photography. It teaches nothing about loghting, composition, exposure, etc. It makes all of the prior values moot. I often find myself annoyed by going throught the gallery and selecting what seems to be a exceptional photgraph only to find when I see it full size it has been through the photoshop mill. Anyway as this is the photography gallery should'nt it be photography? Just my thoughts anyone else?