you know, i think like there is a subtle hidden line that separates interesting photorealistic artworks from not interesting ones. Sometimes i've seen some photorealistic paintings in wich the difference from the original photo was really unnoticeable. I think that artistic movement is called "hyperrealism".
But in some of them, even if i appreciate the awesome tecnique, and the incredible patience of the artist, i have to admit that when that subtle line is passed, i start to look the artwork in a different point of view. I start to think: "what does this work adds to the original photo? It is just a copy..".
I think the artworks is more interesting when you still have a hint that makes you realize it is actually a drawing, when you can see the brushstrokes, when you can see the artist unique style.
So i won't be disappointed at all if you can tell that your work is actually a painting. It makes it unique, and adds to it your personal touch.
And you do your works in a really wonderful and unique style. Compliments again! Hope to see other wonderful works from you soon! ^^
I totally agree with you and I might add that good photographs are in themselves a piece of art, so there would be no point in duplicating them. I don't have to worry about that end though - I am really a pretty crappy photographer. hahaha