Shyrell Melara <shyrellmelara@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > In a demacratic society, of course, majority rules. But I still > object to composing a completely computer generated image in PS (or > any other program) and calling it photography. On the other hand, the image that started this discussion consisted of a photographic background with a computer-generated figure inserted; it wasn't completely computer-generated. And many programs for generating images use photographs of various textures which they then modify and apply to even the computer-generated part of the image. To some degree I share the feeling that the computer generated figure isn't photography; but I don't think we've gotten a good *definition* to actually draw the line anywhere yet. -- David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
