Digital BW, The Print

Mark, 

I too, couldn't care less about how the artist did his work, or how
manipulated it is. I just don't.  One exception is journalism and/or
documentary photography, I wouldn't want the photographer doing anything
that would alter what the viewer thought  he was looking at.  But he
could spot, remove hairs, straighten horizons, lighten, darken, etc;
that wouldn't bother me.  There sometimes is a thin line. A lot of
people cared when National Geo moved a pyramid a few feet so the
composition would be better. Didn't bother me at all.  When Time
magazine altered OJ simpson's photo into a much darker, foreboding
image, I think they went too far This really did have the effect of
making him appear meaner and nastier. I know a lot of great
photographers that manipulated their popular images, and if they weren't
documentary photographs, It doesn't bother me. That's what brings out
the artist in the person.

As for Dylan, I'd rather listen to a year of long fingernails being
dragged across a slate blackboard than his music. Or any other music in
the last 30 years or so. No one performing today holds any interest
whatever for me as far as Popular music goes. Great music started dying
the year that electronic instruments became popular.

Nearly every group or person today sings like they are in desperate need
of an enema.

There are, of course a few classical composers that are still writing
great music, but not many.

Jerry