Street or not street

[ABrosig]

I was going to say street when I first saw it, then not when I read the description. Then, I realized I'm with most of the other responders: Who cares how it's categorized? It's a cool image. Nice job.

I had a very annoying disagreement with the moderator of an "Art" board not that long ago if a photo qualified as a still-life or not. Despite the fact I'd set the image up completely and photographed it as a still-life in my mind, this person was convinced it wasn't a still life, because it was an image of a rocking chair next to a window. Just goes to show (me, anyway) that what other people think doesn't really matter a hill of beans. It's all about what I think about the images I make.

So there. Off the soap box now. Still think its a great image.

 

[shadowfox]

I don't get all the fuss. It's actually simple:

If the image practically classified itself as a street (or still-life, or landscape, or what have you), then the image belongs to that class. Enjoy it.

If another image didn't fit neatly into one of those common types, then it becomes subjective. Each of us has the right to classify an image into our own box of "photography types" and no one is forcing us to agree uniformly. Enjoy it.

To me, this is a street-photo. Yes, it's staged, but without the man in the background, it won't be nearly as interesting as it is. But that's a subjective view of mine.

To you, it may not be street-photo. And it's A-OK!