Some landscape from Leesburg, Florida

[RSL]

.

[biker]

Am I missing something? There's not too much landscape in this picture - haven't you uploaded a wrong picture?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I see it as inner landscape (or: indoors landscape.)

Not all landscape needs to be trees and waterfalls.

[BradSmith]

I see it as "street".  Must be. It's from Russ. 

Not all street has to be underexposed curbs, sidewalks, silhouettes of people and storefronts.   

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Yes, "indoor Street" will also do.

[RSL]

What is landscape? Considering arguments regarding street, seems a fair question -- about any genre. I doubt there's a valid verbal definition of landscape.

[32BT]

What is landscape? Considering arguments regarding street, seems a fair question -- about any genre. I doubt there's a valid verbal definition of landscape.

Street (in the broad sense of the word) is defined as "not in the studio". Landscape definitely is not in the studio. Your picture seems a studio cleverly disguised as a café. So it is neither street, nor landscape. Simple.

;-)

[RSL]

Is a picture of a single flower landscape?

How about if the flower picture includes a couple square feet of dirt? Or grass?

Notice, Oscar, that this picture includes a tree outside the front window.

[32BT]

Is a picture of a single flower landscape?

Of course not, that's "nature".

How about if the flower picture includes a couple square feet of dirt? Or grass?

It may be "architecture" under some circumstances...

Notice, Oscar, that this picture includes a tree outside the front window.

Well, if that was the true intent of your image, are you sure you're wearing the correct subscription glasses?
(sorry, couldn't resist).

;-)

[RSL]

You're forgiven, Oscar. But, let's face it: that's a tree out there, so it must be landscape. Well, there's also a street out there, so maybe it's street.

Golly, when you try to define visual art genres with words you really can get wrapped around the axle.

Yet, anyone you ask will tell you they know exactly what "landscape" means., even though they can't define it.

[Martin Kristiansen]

Snapshot of an interior obviously.

[Ivophoto]

It’s an atmospheric, not sure what kind of an atmospheric, but an atmospheric it is.

It could be a TV screen atmospheric.
Or a furniture atmospheric.
Or just another ‘I’m bored sitting in a pub’ atmospheric.

No, it is a ‘start a discussion no matter about what’ atmospheric.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

There are, of course, really only three "classic" genres: Landscape, Portrait, and Square.
This shot is wider than it is high, so it must be Landscape.   

[amolitor]

The fact that there is not a sharp and clear dividing line between two things is often trotted out, incorrectly, in support of an argument that looks a lot like there's no difference between these two things.

There is a large grey area between sick and healthy, between rich and poor, and yet we seem to have no trouble agreeing that these are categories which exist. Perhaps it's true that street photos and landscape photos also exist.

[RSL]

It’s an atmospheric, not sure what kind of an atmospheric, but an atmospheric it is.

It could be a TV screen atmospheric.
Or a furniture atmospheric.
Or just another ‘I’m bored sitting in a pub’ atmospheric.

No, it is a ‘start a discussion no matter about what’ atmospheric.

Every photograph is an "atmospheric" Ivo.

[Martin Kristiansen]

Every photograph is an "atmospheric" Ivo.

Not the stuff shot on the moon. No atmosphere there.

[Ivophoto]

Every photograph is an "atmospheric" Ivo.

Does this mean we agree on something?

[Ivophoto]

There are, of course, really only three "classic" genres: Landscape, Portrait, and Square.
This shot is wider than it is high, so it must be Landscape.   

There is a lot of color distraction, .....

[RSL]

Not the stuff shot on the moon. No atmosphere there.

Good point, Martin. Most accurate observation yet in this thread.

[RSL]

Does this mean we agree on something?

Unbelievable as it may seem, looks as if we do, Ivo.