I completely agree, the Voyager photographs have a certain je ne sais quoi to them that Webb never did. Of course there are differences in processing, and the v

I completely agree, the Voyager photographs have a certain je ne sais quoi to them that Webb never did. Of course there are differences in processing, and the visible vs infrared plays a role, but at the end of the day I think the biggest part is the various artifacts of the lens+sensor systems JWST has. This is most obvious in the lower quality images; compare JWST's Uranus and Voyager 2's Neptune for two "low-quality" images with artifacts. Or, for higher quality, Hubble vs JWST's Pillars of Creation. To me, the former could be on a poster on any kid's wall and the latter could not. That said, JWST does have some images with an ethereal quality of that bygone age of space. Its images of Jupiter's auroras and the Whirlpool Galaxy make me feel quite some things, and it did by far the best NGC 1433.