Marv, I said, "I like 'em all," because all of them are good street shots. Seamus is very, very good at this. If you're going to do street you can learn a lot from him. He blows it once in a while, and sometimes I think he's too quick to post something, but he's one of the very best street shooters on LuLa.
There's nothing wrong with pretty. The problem is with something that's merely pretty. If you'd like to use a shot to decorate a wall there's nothing wrong with merely pretty either. I see tons of that kind of thing every time I go to an "art fair," and it sells well, especially when the color saturation has been driven to the Marlboro ad level.
But there's a difference between photographs that are decorative patterns or mementoes of a tourist trip, and art. I've said it many times before and I'll say it again. A really good photograph gives you a feeling -- a jolt -- you can't put into words. And bottom line, that's the problem with trying to describe what makes a photograph good. You can't do it. It's like Potter Stewart trying to define hardcore pornography. He said he couldn't define it, but he knew it when he saw it. It's the same thing with any good visual art.
And as far as being critical of someone who's trying to learn, how is it going to help him if he posts some crap that never should have been posted and everyone says, "It's great," "Fine shot," "+1,"?
