>> |
ac
!!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>240702 I can certainly see where you're coming from here. I think the central point of disagreement is:
>it's obvious that the point of focus here is the ENTIRE street. 1. This wasn't really obvious to me. Given that, yeah, the tree and so forth make sense. But: 2. "The entire street" is not really a point of focus. There's no there there. It's like sticking one of those little plaques that tells about the art up on a blank gallery wall and claiming that the entire wall is the art (which, granted, people will do, but it's still a pretty cheap move). The shot has no subject, it just has background, and it's not a particularly compelling background at that.
|