I'd like to thank Erwin and Jorgen for this thread, which I have been following without contributing for months now, and reflecting thereon.
Now I've thought it through in detail, I have realised how logically, philosophically, personally and aesthetically wrong my own position has been these last few digital years. From now on I'm going to drop my mantra, oft repeated to myself and those interested enough to ask, that I generally only do RAW 'development' and not 'image manipulation.'
From now on, unless the aim is purely documentary, I'm going to do whatever it takes to get the image I want, however 'dishonest'. Good taste may prevent one from the excesses of HDR and too much Fun With Filters but artistic integrity and processing restraint do not in any sense need to go together and it has taken me a while to see through the thin veil of Old School guilt that ever made me think they did because, truth is, they never did in the Old School and it was mere Digital Shame that ever made me pretend they did.
As long as the availability of extensive post-processing isn't used as an license for sloppy, 'I'll fix it in post' capture practice, it's open season.
Rose tinted lenses, whether on spectacles or used as a filter for memory, are inaccurate but they can be very satisfying, as Erwin demonstrates.
So thanks again. A truly liberating discussion!
Tim