That's like saying a LF camera was used by Ansel Adams to create beauty. From a historical perspective, one can't argue with that. He did indeed use a LF camera for most of his famous and breathtaking pictures.
But if LF cameras had not been available, do you think he might have used MF?
And if photography was not invented yet, do you think he might have gone into painting? Or perhaps music (he was an accomplished musician too)?
AA knew how to use an LF camera to express beauty. He knew how to use light, how to compose and how to capture the moment. And most importantly, how to PP his images (dodge and burn, etc) for the greatest impact.
Where did the creativity come from? That's not the same as how it's expressed.
Anything can be used to express creativity-- music, graffitti, painting. Before you can use PP, you should have an idea how to do it in your chosen tool of expression.
i have to disagree with this one. i think PP can be used to express your creativity. look at dave hill's work. his images are all heavily PP'ed and extremely creative.
at the end of the day to PP or not to PP is a personal preference. and arguing about which option is better or more 'true' just takes away from photography.
it's all about how the photographer sees a scene and wishes to present it to their audience. whether this involves PP or not does not matter...
