JimiThing, Can you please explain to me why this photo has to "tell a story"? I find that comment rather strange. What "story" does this shot of yours tell? http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/texture/featured/49/

Every photo should tell a story and/or invoke an emotion of some kind IMHO. If it doesn't, then what is the point? Don't get me wrong, this is not a bad photograph, but as for the impact and relevance, I only find it average. Just having 4 of something does not automatically mean you get a 5 rating for relevance.

As for my photo, you asked what the story was, well I suppose it is what you make of it. For me, that wall reminds me of my childhood. We used to play wall ball against an old brick wall much like that. I had thousands of scrapes and scratches because of that wall. The theme was texture, and that immediately came to my mind. A nice rough texture. If you don't see it, thats OK. It obviously impacted enough folks to give it some high ratings and got featured. I didn't personally think it deserved it, but hey, I've been wrong a bunch around here.

So back to your photo for a second. 4 Sheep in a field nibbling on some grass is indeed 4, but I just don't see much more than that here. Maybe this is too common place, or just not my cup of tea.

JimiThing, I suggest you read what Garry Winogrand says about photography for a different point of view than the one you are espousing. You might find it enlightening.

Yes yes yes, but even Winogrand's approach to photography includes a bit of what I am saying. He often talked about having respect for the medium by letting it be descriptive. Letting it do what it is intended to do, document a moment in time. If being descriptive is not story telling I don't know what is. The truth is art, in any form, must impact the viewer. If it doesn't, why do it? I suggest you not assume I am an ignorant prick, "espousing" pure dribble. No one artist has all of the answers so quoting one is pointless.

You seem so upset by my comment. I don't understand why. I gave you above average marks for everything except relevance and impact. For those I gave you average marks. If you are not here to listen to the criticism of your peers, then what are you here for?

Winogrand stated, "Photographs do not tell stories". That's about as crystal clear as it gets. What "story" does this shot of yours tell? http://www.weeklyshot.org/theme/light-architecture/response/41/
The following article is tailor made for you JimiThing. http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/06/great-photographers-on-internet.html
Also, don't assume I was upset about anything. I simply wanted an explanation about your comment, that my photo "doesn't really tell much of a story". If you're going to critique a photograph then be prepared to have the critique make sense.

I am not going to continue to go around and around with you. I do not have to defend my work any more than you do. I did not challenge you to a photography philosophy duel. You brought that on. If you buy in to what Winogrand sells, thats great for you. I disagree.

I at least have the decency to offer my opinion here in this forum. That is something I have not seen from you. You've never commented on one of my images. So until you offer up your opinion, don't get defensive over mine.