Street Art 2

[KLaban]

I was asked for my view; I gave it. I think that any photograph posted here (by which I mean in any forum area) which isn't "not for comment", either expressly or, by being posted in the "without prejudice" thread, impliedly is fair game for sensible, rational and preferably constructive comment.

Jeremy

Then we're in complete agreement.

My issue was with the implication that images posted not for critique were there just for showing off.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Who gives a shit.

If this was supposed to be humorous, it isn’t. Poor taste, as a minimum. More like gratuitously vulgar.

[Rayyan]

I did not introduce such a ' phrase ' in my conversation. It was directed in a response to me, in another post.
Thus I gathered that for the person concerned such language was the norm; and would thus easily understand it.

Take it up with him Slobodan. I just throw back what is first directed at me.

Thank you.

If this was supposed to be humorous, it isn’t. Poor taste, as a minimum. More like gratuitously vulgar.

[Rob C]

I did not introduce such a ' phrase ' in my conversation. It was directed in a response to me, in another post.
Thus I gathered that for the person concerned such language was the norm; and would thus easily understand it.

Take it up with him Slobodan. I just throw back what is first directed at me.

Thank you.

You do realise, don't you, that not everyone who disagrees with you is your enemy?

:-)

[Rayyan]

You do realize that initiating phrases such as are the subject of the last few posts is not criticism; but as Slobodan mentioned is ' gratuitously vulgar '.
I have let a covert, and not a very proper implication, by you go unanswered.
Not because I didn't get it, but because it might have been unintentional.

Criticism, I will take.
Try to be snarky or cynically smart with me, you will get it right back with interest.

You do realise, don't you, that not everyone who disagrees with you is your enemy?

:-)

[Rob C]

You do realize that initiating phrases such as are the subject of the last few posts is not criticism; but as Slobodan mentioned is ' gratuitously vulgar '.
I have let a covert, and not a very proper implication, by you go unanswered.
Not because I didn't get it, but because it might have been unintentional.

Criticism, I will take.
Try to be snarky or cynically smart with me, you will get it right back with interest.

What are you trying to say?

How can something be both "covert" yet "unintentional" at the same time? And where did I criticise anything? I avoid the critique threads for the very reason that I do not enjoy playing second-guesses and they help nobody. Yet, many others apparently do, both enjoy giving and receiving it, but I have no idea why.

Perhaps if you spell it out, I might understand what you are talking about. As it is, I hear lots of noise, but  not a reason for said noise... if I know to what you refer, then perhaps I can illuminate.

:-)

[Rayyan]

On July 10, 2018 your response to one of my posts...in the ' Click ' thread , reply #9
Perhaps you would re-read the thread.
' unintentional ' was used to give you a plausible excuse ( a way out ).

"
....
Yep, absolutely no need to "proclaim" anything here; we could just break camp and all wander off onto the wilderness that awaits.

Forty days or forty years - who gives a shit, one way or the other?

Rob "

What are you trying to say?

How can something be both "covert" yet "unintentional" at the same time? And where did I criticise anything? I avoid the critique threads for the very reason that I do not enjoy playing second-guesses and they help nobody. Yet, many others apparently do, both enjoy giving and receiving it, but I have no idea why.

Perhaps if you spell it out, I might understand what you are talking about. As it is, I hear lots of noise, but  not a reason for said noise... if I know to what you refer, then perhaps I can illuminate.

:-)

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Ruyyan,

I was trying to give you a gentle reminder that you are in breach of forum etiquette, alas...

Stalking a member in another, unrelated thread, posting vulgarities (and nothing else) out of context, and with the sole purpose of exacting a petulant revenge, while exposing all of us to the unpleasant tone the thread has turned to is a serious breach of forum etiquette, and frankly, civilized behavior. Now the whole page has been devoted, instead of photography, to your ill temper.

If you have a problem with what someone posted on your thread, you have two options:

- report to the moderator
- ignore the poster

This forum is not an "after school, behind school" type of place to duke it out.

[Rayyan]

Slobodan,

Why am I not surprised that you point the finger at me.

I asked a simple question of you...who initiated this ‘ vulgarity ‘?
You have chosen not to respond to that query.
But you go off on a tangent assigning blame to me.

If I initiate such language or exhibit uncivilized behavior; members have the right to chastise me.
If I respond to vulgarities, I am not going to be anyone’s whipping boy.

And neither, I hope, this to be a forum where old boy networks try to protect one another even when in the wrong.

This is my last post in this thread ( but I never say never...I shall see ).

Sigh.

Ruyyan,

I was trying to give you a gentle reminder that you are in breach of forum etiquette, alas...

Stalking a member in another, unrelated thread, posting vulgarities (and nothing else) out of context, and with the sole purpose of exacting a petulant revenge, while exposing all of us to the unpleasant tone the thread has turned to is a serious breach of forum etiquette, and frankly, civilized behavior. Now the whole page has been devoted, instead of photography, to your ill temper.

If you have a problem with what someone posted on your thread, you have two options:

- report to the moderator
- ignore the poster

This forum is not an "after school, behind school" type of place to duke it out.

[Rob C]

On July 10, 2018 your response to one of my posts...in the ' Click ' thread , reply #9
Perhaps you would re-read the thread.
' unintentional ' was used to give you a plausible excuse ( a way out ).

"
....
Yep, absolutely no need to "proclaim" anything here; we could just break camp and all wander off onto the wilderness that awaits.

Forty days or forty years - who gives a shit, one way or the other?

Rob "

Well, I have read the post to which you refer, and in it I mention one of my health problems. This seems to have annoyed you for some reason, and you imply I should keep it to myself. In return, I say yes, and in similar manner we should all shut up and retreat to the self-encompassed little world we inhabit where we desert outer relationships and live like hermits.

And the problem is?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Well, here is my attempt to get the thread back where it belongs: Street Art. Real Street Art, I mean.

 

[BobDavid]

Well, here is my attempt to get the thread back where it belongs: Street Art. Real Street Art, I mean.

 

Literally, street. ... I like the set.

[Rob C]

Literally, street. ... I like the set.

Yes, nice work that depends on a receptive eye - both sides of the image!

;-)

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Thanks, guys.

[RSL]

Eric, what'll you ever do if they stop putting tar on cracks in the pavement?

Good eye!

(I know you don't think this is street photography.)

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Eric, what'll you ever do if they stop putting tar on cracks in the pavement?

Good eye!

(I know you don't think this is street photography.)

Thanks, Russ.
I guess I'd have to buy a used tar-dripping machine and start making my own art.

Of course it's not Street Photography. But if I got a shot of tar jumping across a puddle, I might say differently.   

[Two23]

You do realise, don't you, that not everyone who disagrees with you is your enemy?

:-)

+1

I really dislike the trend in our culture where if someone disagrees with another's opinion, they are automatically "evil."  I grew up in an era where differing thoughts and opinions were graciously tolerated.


Kent in SD

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Three more "Real" Street Art, from the same outing.
These are all converted to B&W, so the yellow lines aren't yellow. Should I "yellow" those lines in the two that have the lines?
In the one without the center strip line, the tar is white because of the angle of the sunlight reflecting off the tar.

Cheers.

[LesPalenik]

That's a real street art, indeed, Eric. Well seen and well captured.

I would leave the yellow lines out, but maybe I'd try to increase the contrast or make it slightly darker.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Thanks, Les.
I'm still playing around with them.