An interesting question Stephen as even on this site I am not sure what qualifies as a straight image.
My personal opinion is that for years photoraphers have been spotting prints ( removing dust spots ). Some of those more profficient in the art were also able to remove minor blemmishes. So if it could be done in the traditional darkroom then I do not consider it to be cheating or wholescale digital manipulation. I posted my F3 shot in the digitally manipulated thread and yet in my darkroom days I have produced images using the same technique at the time of taking the photograph.
Looking at your two Olympus pictures side by side Stephen, I think what you have done is within my bounds of acceptable. Nothing dramatic, ............................. he says just making sure you have not changed the name.
When I did black and white printing I used to create a printing map. Dodge here, burn there. I have even added a sky. All before the age of digital and nobody ever knew I had done anything other than produce a straight print, and even when told it did not raise an eyebrow. I could not afford the paper costs now, as I may have used a dozen sheets of printing paper just to arrive at the result I envisaged when I took the shot in those days.
It will certainly be interesting to know what other members think.
At what point do we declare the image as digitally manipulated.
Don