Boris seems to understand it, as he agreed with the comments. And, if you were to actually read my comments, you'll see that I like the shots Boris posted, but that seeing more of the city, about which I know something, would make for a better, more complete series. The pics that Boris posted could be anywhere - any wall, any mailbox, any town. Apart from the Hebrew on the signs, you wouldn't have a clue as to where these photos were taken. In fact, even with the Hebrew, they could easily have been made in cities like New York, other areas of Israel, and, at one time, even in India and some parts of Italy and Spain, amongst others.
It's not a matter of what the place means to me, or anyone else. What I understand Boris' intention to be is to show a bit of the character and personality of the city. If correct in that understanding, then Boris failed in his attempt, at least with the few photos he's posted, however nice and intriguing they may be. I want to see more, something that shows the character and the dynamic of the area. Showing a staged photo of a friend standing in front of a book stall, a single architectural detail, and a couple of falling down signs does not accomplish this, regardless of how well executed the photos may be. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Jostein > I don't understand the criticism from Shel and Michel at > all. Seems to me like they meet your images with a preconception on > what the place means to them, rather than opening up to what you have > observed.
