That is where we seem to be disagreeing. Why should there be a difference between fixing an exposure in the dark room or fixing it on the computer? I don't think it's fake to fix an exposure or things like that. To add in or take out parts of a picture, that is fake. I guess I see my computer more as a digital dark room. I use it to make my photos as good as I can. Just like I would do in a darkroom correcting exposure and such. That's the type of manipulation I'm talking about. I just don't see how using digital software to make the picture better is a bad thing. Making a color more rich...I don't really see that as any different than using a filter on my lense and getting the same effect...the photo was manipulated. Whether manipulated before or after, the composition is still the same, the subject is still the same. I would never add something into a picture that wasn't there and say that's how I took it. For fun and as a joke, I have done things like that. I took two pictures of my friends, taken at the same place, but at different times and combined them to make it look like they were all there together. But, that's not a photo I would ever try to pass off as "real". I've also done the same thing with both of my dogs...I've created (well, I'm still working on it) a picture where they are together. It's something I'm working on just for myself. My dog died last year, and I'll never have a picture of her with the new one...it's just something for me. I think it's fun to use Photoshop to play with my images. I like to use different filters and make photos look like paintings, sketches, etc. But I would never say that's how I took the image!