Mother? I thought it was you, in another user name. I should mention, all the other entrees are me with different log in names... except for you (Alan), ICE T (you again (?)) and of course Pepe.
Now, I could be wrong but I read sw101's page 3 "nice efforts pepe" as nice try but rather standard, corporate, etc.
It is true that the computer is only a tool, intrinsically no less (or more) powerful than the pen. BUT it is a shame to think that the power in the CGI is in its ability to be "essentially a photograph". This is simply a seduction. This tool can teach us different things than the pen (or simply gloss) and we must learn to use it as a means of exploration. Then we will be somewhere with this tool. The act of representation is a process, this is often incorporated into drawing. But the ease (relative ease) of making a computer image look salable, has kept us from exploring it's possibilities to inform the process, and instead we simply re-present... as seen by Pepe's claim to the images but disavowal of the design.
Porn is not a woman and teaches us nothing about sex, CGI are not photos of a building and when used, or conceived as such, teach us nothing about design.