Haram esh-Sharif

[rabanito]

Temple Mount - Jerusalem

[JNB_Rare]

Have to say that I really like this image.

[petermfiore]

Have to say that I really like this image.

I agree...very nice.

Peter

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I agree...very nice.

Peter

Me too.

Eric

[James Clark]

I love this. 

[rabanito]

Glad to hear that,

A very old picture, one of my favorites.

Thank you friends.

[John R]

Well it is dynamic and classic in look. Spontaneous is the word I am looking for.

JR

[Jim Pascoe]

It is a lovely picture.  But, much as I'm not a hardline definition sort of guy - this is in the wrong section.  There seems no point in having a 'Street' section if almost anything goes.....

Jim

[RSL]

Golly! Ya think so, Jim? Let's face it, Street Showcase has been just another User Critiques ever since it started.

[faberryman]

Golly! Ya think so, Jim? Let's face it, Street Showcase has been just another User Critiques ever since it started.

Pick up the tonearm. There is a scratch on the record.

[RSL]

Golly! Ya think so, Jim? Let's face it, Street Showcase has been just another User Critiques ever since it started.

And, let's face it, I'm a reason -- maybe the main reason -- we even have a Street Showcase. Dumbest thing I've done in ages. From what I was seeing in the other segments I should have known better. Duh on me.

[Rob C]

And, let's face it, I'm a reason -- maybe the main reason -- we even have a Street Showcase. Dumbest thing I've done in ages. From what I was seeing in the other segments I should have known better. Duh on me.

Like Frankie sang: regrets, I've had a few...

:-)

[RSL]

 

[Telecaster]

One could stop and consider that the percentage of off-topic posting here might have something to do with an over-aggressive desire on the part of at least one of the forum's instigators to curate its contents in a way widely seen as too narrow. So photos that most photographers would likely accept as "street," and that would otherwise get shared here, don't. Along with this, some folks might choose to register their annoyance at "the rules" by breaking 'em.

-Dave-

[rabanito]

I considered this picture to be "street" because it was taken at a public place with lots of passers-by  around and myself lying on my back , armed with a Nikkormat + 200mm waiting for that sitting dove to fly.
"L'instant decisif" 

[RSL]

One could stop and consider that the percentage of off-topic posting here might have something to do with an over-aggressive desire on the part of at least one of the forum's instigators to curate its contents in a way widely seen as too narrow. So photos that most photographers would likely accept as "street," and that would otherwise get shared here, don't. Along with this, some folks might choose to register their annoyance at "the rules" by breaking 'em.

-Dave-

Dave, there aren't any "rules" for street photography, any more than there are rules for landscape photography. If you know of any landscape "rules," please explain what they are. In a way, street is like landscape. You learn what falls into the landscape genre by studying a lot of landscape pictures, not by reading "rules." Street works the same way. To learn what constitutes the landscape genre you study the work of people like Adams, Weston, and their successors. To learn what constitutes the street genre you study the work of Kertesz, Cartier-Bresson and their successors. That's all there is to it. There are people who will tell you that the street genre is changing -- being "modernized." If somebody tells you that, ask him if the same thing is happening to the landscape genre. He'll probably stand there and scratch this head. You may hear a hollow sound when he does that.

[32BT]

The problem is simple: if you give people just two options "landscape" and "street", than anything remotely "urban" is going to end up in the non-landscape option. People didn't get the intention of the rather specialised showcase category because the categories aren't sufficient as they say.

So, once the forum is cleaned up some time in the future, and the categories sorted out properly, we can probably solve this issue as well. Until that time perhaps rename this showcase section "urban" and be done with it.

[faberryman]

So, once the forum is cleaned up some time in the future, and the categories sorted out properly, we can probably solve this issue as well. Until that time perhaps rename this showcase section "urban" and be done with it.

Or not let any one member of the forum be the arbiter of what is and isn't street.

[RSL]

The problem is simple: if you give people just two options "landscape" and "street", than anything remotely "urban" is going to end up in the non-landscape option. People didn't get the intention of the rather specialised showcase category because the categories aren't sufficient as they say.

So, once the forum is cleaned up some time in the future, and the categories sorted out properly, we can probably solve this issue as well. Until that time perhaps rename this showcase section "urban" and be done with it.

Why "urban?" Better yet, get rid of the street showcase altogether and let the stuff fall into user critiques. Street doesn't necessarily have anything to do with "urban."

[32BT]

Or not let any one member of the forum be the arbiter of what is and isn't street.

That particular showcase was instigated with a certain specialised subgenre in mind.  Assigning a curator for a specialised subgenre might actually proof useful, although i won't be volunteering for the job tbh.

Having said that: "any one member" does not equal "moderator" so you could simply post whatever you believe worth sharing under any one header and add unwanted commenters to your ignore list. Of course, the original intent of that particular header wasn't made sufficient clear a priori, which makes it possible that the confusion regarding intent is mistaken for confusion regarding genre.