What is photographic value? Is the answer a clearly defined attribute that all photographic images should be held to? Aren't we talking about something so utterly subjective that it's almost meaningless to have a conversation, and in particular, on a post that is touting some fun gadgets for people that most likely could care less what people think of their images (true artist prerequisite). Clicking a filter to add atmosphere to an image is incredibly fun, it's an editorial decision (artistic intent), it's fun, it's personal, it gets people involved. Why are people so quick to make judgements? I can see these images in a family photo album, and I can see the family taking pride in their art, while having a living journal to remember and share a point in time.
MPA1: Why would you want it, though?I tried both LR and Aperture and found the latter much more useful. Also, it's not free - you're paying for it in the camera price. I dislike the Adobe march to dominance and find it ethically questionable of Leica to do this.
So 1980's??, I guess, if you busted your chops in Photoshop, manually creating masks etc., and what not back then (not pushing a button), you learned the true nature of post digital production. As for Nik, anyone can toss on a Nik filter (a simple algorithm created by a programmer) and get a stylized looking photo. If you call that photographic mastery or artistry, well, you would have to say it's akin to plagiarism. Build a color process in photoshop, create a style all your own, that takes some effort, and creativity.
I should say, I feel like I'm sort of cheating when I've tried a demo version of NIK and slid around with them there sliders. To each his own, didn't mean to say anything against you and your process.
Thank you - thanks to my daughter, who puts up with my photographic foibles!