Yes, I do. Images generated entirely by AI is a computer generating the entire image, while using AI to remove and replace defects is still done by an actual photographer. It is no different than manipulating the image in the dark room with the exception that the sophistication of the tools available are much greater.

Funny you say that. We brought the snake into the ER in a large plastic bucket with a lid. While I was lying on the table, I saw the nurse look at the snake and immediately called for a crash cart. While I waited for anti-serum, I saw them using the paddles to shock the snake, and then the bravest nurse in the world was giving the breath of life. The snake did not survive. I don't know if it was because of me or if the nurse had a bad case of coffee breath. You ER nurses do like your strong coffee. I'm having the snake stuffed with its eyes wide open and its cheeks puffed out like someone was blowing down its throat.

This brings up multiple talking points.
1. Suits ... many have the degrees but lack what my Granny was famous for saying. All the education in the world doesn't do any good if you don't have horse sense.
2. Three hours under a car, during an active shooting and your paper (I refrain from including "news"), makes you eat the photos. Maybe you should have shopped them to other news outlets.
3. For how long was his mental illness known? Had he shot and killed a policeman, depriving his wife and kids of a husband and father, would his mental illness excuse his behavior?
4. Did discussing his mental illness solve any of the problems created by this individual?
5. I find it disturbing to give publicity to the family (via photographs and story), when it is most likely they knew of his condition and most likely protected him.
6. If he suffered from mental illness, how did he get a gun? Since it is apparent the family knew about his condition, what did they do to prevent him from having access to a gun?
7. It would not have been you embarrassing the shooter, his family did that for him.

We have a local newspaper that has gone through many transformations, but few of them included an appreciation for photography unless it was sports. They had to do that since football is a religion in Texas. But other than that, they wouldn't be able to spell "photojournalism", much less define it.

Until I retired, I was a crime scene photographer. We may have more in common than most.

I'm from the South, so you might want to consider using words that we country boys understand without opening a dictionary. Say, transcendent. Yet that might be giving me too much credit, so how about extraordinary?

Ah, heck ... use what words you desire, I'll just consult Dr. Google if I don't understand. Accept my gratitude for your supporting reply.

I have seen photographs in NatGeo that technically were lacking in quality. However, the choice was to have a photograph that was not perfect or to not have one at all. Sometimes, it is the impact of the photograph that matters, not the quality.

At the risk of sounding rude, what is your line of work?

I recently took a photograph of a rattlesnake that snuck into my backyard. I used a Nikon 50mm 1.4 lens. My wife scolded me, saying I should have used a telephoto lens. Should I have used my 2x teleconverter? Do you think the quality would have suffered?

By the way, I'm currently in the hospital, so if I don't answer for a while, don't get concerned.

First, he stated that he did not post in the bird section because he wanted a wider view of his post.
Second, you are correct; however, with new AI software, he can recover some of the lost sharpness
Third, I've never seen a recommendation to combine teleconverters, so I agree with you.
Fourth, Since he already owns a costly 400mm 2.8 lens, purchasing a 600mm f4 at $13,000 seems a bit outrageous since it appears he is not a professional selling his work. Many people use teleconverters but accept that they will not be tack sharp.
Fifth, with a 600mm lens, you will not need a teleconverter for most shots unless you migrate into wildlife, where an 800mm lens is better. However, either lens requires deep pockets.
Sixth, I also say good luck and keep on shooting. However, I'd only use the 1.4 or the 2, not both.

Seventh is not part of the question but from my personal experience. I recently shot a local rodeo from the stands. Being at the far end of the arena, I used a 1.4 tele on my Nikon 200-500 f5.6 lens. This was mounted on a Nikon D850. This, in effect, made my lens one stop higher, which wasn't the effect I wanted. I switched to my 70-200 f2.8 and exposure was much better, but I lost one stop when I tried the 1.4 tele. It may not seem like much, but one stop was noticeable.

Many years ago, I held a door open at a local store. A female (I think) scowled and admonished me, saying she didn't need a man to open the door for her. I replied, "I'm not ... I'm holding it open for the lady behind you". Can looks really kill?

Exactly right. In my older and hopefully wiser years, I've learned that women do not always appreciate candor, as many men are guilty of. It took me a while, but I eventually learned never to comment on a woman's impending pregnancy. The lady in question will have to tell me she is expecting, or I will need to see the baby's head crowning. So, ladies, if you are obviously pregnant, don't be offended if I don't mention your blessed event. You will have to tell me, or ... well, we won't go into the second observation.

Larry from Texas

I'm not sure if this is the proper place to show these photographs, but I am so excited about the latest Photoshop tools that I wish to show examples. They are nothing short of magic.

I have uploaded two photographs, the first is as it came out of the camera and the second after being processed in Photoshop. As a Texan, the Alamo is sacred ground. I hope I have done justice to a place that contributed to the birth of Texas.

Anyone who has visited the Alamo in San Antonio knows this photograph has been heavily edited in Photoshop. This was five years in the making. The white balance was changed to reflect my vision of how the Alamo looked in the early morning hours of the final battle. Also, if you have tried to capture this scene without people in view, you know it is virtually impossible. To accomplish this, I arrived at 5:30 am. It was very cold and windy. Also, if you have been there, you would know that I removed many modern items, such as metal posts, cables, a flagpole, and two grassy plots.

Again ... magic

If you are interested, the back story:

The Alamo – Sacred Ground

Around 5:00 A.M. on Sunday, March 6, 1836, General Antonio López de Santa Anna, self-proclaimed “Napoleon of the West,” hurled his army at the battered walls of the Alamo from four directions. Texian gunners stood by their artillery. As about 1,800 assault troops advanced into range, a canister load fired from the Texian’s cannon ripped through the Mexican ranks. Staggered by the concentrated cannon and rifle fire, the Mexican soldiers halted, reformed, and drove forward. Soon, they were past the defensive perimeter. Travis, among the first to die, fell on the north bastion, shot in the head. Abandoning the walls, defenders withdrew to the dim rooms of the Long Barracks. There, some of the bloodiest hand-to-hand fighting occurred. Bowie, too ravaged by illness to rise from his bed, found no pity. He was bayoneted in his bed. The chapel fell last. By dawn, the Mexicans successfully took the Alamo. The assault had lasted no more than ninety minutes. As many as seven defenders survived the battle, but Santa Anna ordered their summary execution. Many historians count Crockett as a member of that hapless contingent, an assertion that still provokes debate in some circles. By eight o’clock, every Alamo fighting man lay dead. Currently, 189 defenders appear on the official list, but ongoing research may increase the final tally to as many as 257.

No thanks. I've spent enough time in the gym to have any interest in what different-sized dudes look like on TV. The fact that you would think of this makes me wonder if you are doing a bit of bragging.

Ahem ... if I recall, ISO was not the term we used. It was ASA, admittedly it was basically the same concept, but by a different name.

Very Nice! Good Job!!