Joe, I would counter that when people Photo Shop their raw images, they are doing work of a sorts, work that appeals to them, work that ends with something that says, “This is how I do it.” Really, to me, if a person doesn’t ballast his tracks, I can overlook that and make an effort to look for other things on which he/she has spent time and effort. People who see my ballasted track may ask themselves why a person would go to all that trouble when they are interested in just running trains. What turns one person’s crank won’t budge another person’s crank.
I feel that many photo backdrops detract from what otherwise is a fine layout and image of same. The angle of view of the backdrop photo is all wrong for the modeller’s camera angle imaging the layout.
And the fact is that some hand-done backdrops, those painted by the builder, are not that great. Many realize this, and elect to go the Photo Shop route because it is vastly better than their own work, and maybe cheaper in the long run than acquiring a suitable image, enlarging it, printing it, getting someone else to enlarge and print it and ship it, yada yada…
When I view such images, I look first at the overall impression or effect, and then I begin to focus on elements. Often the backdrop, whatever kind it is, simply fades away for me and I begin to pick out details, how thing are arranged, the lighting, the focus, Rules of thirds, etc.
I believe I understand your point above, and I agree in principle that we should show what we brung. My point is that what he brung, and what we are to judge individually, is what Buddy shows us. The whole kit and kaboodle.
Crandell