Opinions and assessments are welcome.

For those who disrespect the genre of city landscapes, I'll say right away - we're criticizing the photo, not the right to exist of travel photography. I liked the atmosphere, I tried to capture it to the best of my abilities. There was no action in sight, the town was deserted. I already see the mistake now - in vain I cut off the wall on the left, I wanted to focus on the car. For ease of comparison - the previous version

Interesting photo, I liked it!

The horizon is tilted))).. just kidding
The photo looks nice, but I'm missing something.

For those who disrespect the urban landscape genre itself, I'll say right away: we're criticizing the photo, not the right to exist of travel photography.

Valentin Zakharov, we respect the urban landscape genre, but when they say it's just a "travel photo," they mean it's just "I was there" and nothing more. Travel photography can also be beautiful, interesting, and a work of art, especially since no one is denying the landscape or urban landscape genre; you misread something somewhere.

As for this particular photograph, it's correct, but a bit boring.
.

Somehow everything is perfect.

Marina Glebova, you speak for yourself. I see that the main problem and bone of contention on this site is that people with visual experience don't want to look at photographs by category, for example, experimental photography, and as soon as they come across macro photography, they trash it, like a dung flower.

Valentin Zakharov, it's not about genres.
Here's a link, and I beg you to read it carefully, without skipping anything,
and to the end - http://www.antver.net/photodisappoint/index.html

Marina Glebova, you're speaking for yourself. I see that the main problem and bone of contention on this site is that people with visual experience don't want to look at photos by category, like experimental photography, and as soon as they stumble upon macro photography, they trash it, like it's a dung flower.

Valentin Zakharov, weren't you offended by the unsolicited advice to use the money you saved to hire a driver?

Atlas, don’t let these trifles bother you(c), let’s consider this as your wishes for me for the future.

Marina Glebova, Thank you very much, you can't even imagine how timely this article was for me, I am truly grateful. I was writing about how some militant adherents of the "other" photography, instead of providing a link in their review like yours that would explain their position, or simply writing, "a macro photo is the lowest genre for me," do the following: leave a five-letter review with the words ".o.no." I've seen it myself. Sometimes there are more letters, but the meaning is the same. Without explaining their point of view, their efforts produce the opposite result, since they leave no opportunity for the author to guess what was actually meant. They want to teach how to improve a website? The result is the opposite. If they're so advanced and smart that they've mastered alternative photography, they should understand that there's no reason to criticize those who paint cat macros. Just as Kandinsky had no reason to criticize those who paint signs. If you write, "I understand photography better," that's at least understandable. But if you write, "G.V.O.", nothing is clear.

Just like Kandinsky had no reason to screw up those who paint signs.

Valentin Zakharov, that's a funny comparison ))

If you write "g.v.o.", nothing is clear.

Illiteracy is akin to alcoholism - until a person wants to discover something for themselves, no other words will help, neither affectionate ones nor ones like "G.o. dull"

I can already see the mistake now - I shouldn't have cut off the wall on the left; I wanted to emphasize the car.

Valentin Zakharov, is it worth emphasizing?
It seems the viewer should themselves "discover" in the extinct urban landscape
the only "living" object.

Marina Glebova, I agree with Valentin - the article is interesting

Thanks to everyone who dropped by, and to Marina once again!!!

Valentin, your work is undoubtedly excellent. Please forgive me. Honestly, I'm terrible at it. I can't see it, that's all. I've shot a ton of footage, fortunately there's plenty of it in the city, but it's all wrong. Everything is incongruous and worthless. So I'm angry, at myself, of course. I responded to your comment completely inadequately, which makes me feel even worse. Not only are my photos mediocre, but my nerves are in tatters. I have no idea what to do or how to continue shooting, and photography is like a drug. On one hand, I love photography, and on the other, I hate that nothing good comes out of it. I'm repeating myself. Sorry.

Mistral, Accepted. And regarding the above, I also clearly see my ceiling, it's not high and I understand it. But I find solace in a quote from Chekhov, I think I don't remember it at all, but the gist was this: every dog barks as much as it can, but even the smallest terrier yips as bravely as a loud wolfhound. And there's no need to be ashamed of your place in life. Believe me, even if you whip up the right, beautiful shot according to all the recipes, which will become RD, it won't make things much easier. Creativity doesn't have to be productive, the main thing is sincerity. Well, patience and hard work. And also from B. Verber: You need to strengthen your strengths, not develop weaknesses. Good luck.

Mistral, Believe me, even if you follow all the recipes to create a beautiful shot that will become a RD, things won't get much easier. Creativity doesn't have to be productive; the main thing is sincerity.

Valentin Zakharov, Valentin, thank you for answering me. Your words, quoted above, very accurately captured my "searching." Well formulated. And good luck to you.