deriggs: Catalana, Two Hands, you all have bit taking hook, line and sinker.
Silence is the enemy of the vain and self-absorbed.
I cannot see what the problem here. Photoshopping to structurally and materially alter the content of a photo (eg creating a picture of yourself jamming with the Boss or standing on top of Mt Everest) should not be sanctioned . . . but altering the mood of a photo through skillful editing is surely a far more worthy form of artistry than winding up the knob marked "color saturation" . . which the protestors below seem to think is ok. I just don't get you guys!
I have met many accomplished, and financially successful, artists in my life none of whom felt the need to use the qualifier "pro" to describe what they did for a living. As an earning a photographer I have been frequently humbled, when surveying a genuine work of art, to reflect on the huge gulf of creative skill between that required to produce it . . and mine own. And yet I have never heard an artist attempting to elevate themselves by speaking, in sneering terms, at the tools chosen by their aspiring contemporaries. I am also sure they would not work themselves into a lather over the packaging used by Windsor and Newton. Buying esoteric equipment and giving up your day job does not make a photographer any more worthy than users of P&S cameras. Complaining about the appearance of the tools of the trade only confirms the fact that they are technocrats not artists.Were they alive today I doubt that Ansel Adams or Henri Cartier- Bresson would feel the need to enter this debate.