Insulted and don't know what to do (kinda long)

[shootingstar]

With the ease of digital photography to anyone and everyone plus software to alter photos, I can see why there continues to be strong debate of where photography lies in value of "art" vs. "craft".

I had photograpahy as a hobby where I did use my Nikon SLR heavily which I later bought a bounce flash and add-on zoom-wide angle lens. Now I don't use it anymore since digital cameras. hence, I no longer identify photography as a hobby.

Are my photos with my digital cameras better? Well, geez I sure would have to spend more money on more sophisticated digital camera(s). sometimes I hate the robotic confines of a cheaper digital camera that doesn't allow me the same fine-tuning control on focus, depth of field, lighting and timing compared to SLR. I used to shoot more accurately and faster/on-target timing with an manual SLR vs. your $300-$500.00 digital camera (no add-on accessories).

I value photography as art, on these base criteria as an amateur untrained person with no art degree:

*photographic sharpness/crispness/acuity
*depth of range contrast
*unusual long-short perspectives
*colour richness and depth(not necessarily diversity of colour, which can be too much and a cheap way of gaining artistic license)
*inspiring, pleasing marriage of colour with visual emotion/passion/subject empathy
*metaphoric/poetic suggestion

and when photography is used in mixed media pieces:
*effective visual blending with other media/mediums/textures ...textured papers/tissues/textiles, paints (watercolour, acrylic, etc.)