Forgive me if I misunderstood what you wrote, but I get the impression that you are not at all happy about Michaelīs lack of liking for your picture. Well, if you insist in posting on a photgraphic site, then you have to be able to accept the views that others have.
For my part, I have no respect for that sort of photographic oeuvre either - it is neither hare nor hound. It took me ages to get into a frame of mind where I could think of digital photography without a metaphorical sneer coming unbid to my lip. It started with picture libraries, where images appeared of people windsurfing over huge waterfalls, something which is so obviously impossible that it offends me in some way I canīt quite figure out. Visual lying, perhaps.
Now, thatīs not to say I donīt respect very clever use of digital work in movies etc. (Matrix?). But for still pics - not really. Even cosmetic and fashion photography seems to have gone that one degree beyond the very fine line between convincing and just becoming a joke. Of course the world of fashion is illusion; the trick, though, is surely that the viewer/potential purchaser should not feel too patronised.
Your pic doesnīt fall into that category, of course, but where would you yourself think it fits? Itīs very easy to knock pigeonholes, but life tends to be more free of stress that way!
Notwithstanding my own aversion to early digital, I have embraced it these last few years as a huge step forward. Perhaps it does, to some extent, put photography into the hands of the masses with predictable consequences, but then, so did the Box Brownie, something which did not stop stars from being born - I almost said created, but that could be a touch cruel. However, I might be pigeonholed myself as a traditionalist, but I think digital offers more than enough scope for honest work which does, at the end of the day, have an identity as a photographic work.
So, no, not my cup of tea at all, but thatīs just my mind and the world is full of many others!
Ciao - Rob C