And in much photography that is done of people on city streets (I'm avoiding using a categorical name), one of the most interesting features is very often ambiguity. Why? Because it stimulates the viewer's mind to do some creative work on his/her own rather than just being a passive bystander.
Ambiguity is very often present in the work of the great Street Photographers, as Russ so often points out. It can also work well in many abstract images, and perhaps in some other types of photography. If you have several layers of possible meaning in an image, it can give you something different each time you view it. And that gives it more staying power, for those of us who enjoy variety.
Yes, ambiguity is one of dozens of qualities that a photograph can express. But honestly folks, the idea that all street photography is ambiguous is a local absurdity present only in this clique here. Some of you need to get out more often. You might
discover photos that are explicit, or honest, or frank, or mysterious, or playful, or sentimental, or romantic, or confusing, or shocking, or humorous, or pathetic, or sympathetic, or compassionate, or inquisitive, or patriotic or subversive, or rhythmic, or ironic. What a world is open to the camera and the artist!
I know, I am the rude interloper disturbing the peace here, but I also know there are people who actually DID want to get critical feedback which goes beyond the "+1" and "I like it" realm. And, for that to happen, people have to know that the world of photography is not contained in the word "ambiguity." Not even the world of street photography.
And just as a note of technicality about the thread, I purposely expressed the idea in the opening that "taxonomy" was not important. That means I could care less what formal category the Dear Leader thought your photograph belonged in, if you used a camera, and were in the streets, this would be a thread to post in. Seemed unambiguous to me.