On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:46:02 -0800, Winsor Crosby wrote:
>Why not keep it simple and use the classifications for
>what they obviously represent?
Because the classifications obviously represent different things to
all of us. The exhibits and competitions I've seen over the past
several years have included a wide variety of landscape definitions.
I've seen straight ahead nature shots, architecture shots,
cityscapes, and seascapes all displayed as landscapes. Consider that
my own http://www.beancotton.com/cgi-bin/show_picture.cgi?pic=3 took
top honors in the landscape category at the Delta Fair 3 years ago,
despite the fact that it shows no land at all!
I agree with you that we should keep things simple. However, in my
opinion, thats best done by using a broad, flexible definition rather
than excluding widely used and accepted variations.
BB
-
B.B. Bean bbbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bean & Bean Cotton Co
http://www.beancotton.com
Peach Orchard, MO
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|