>>3756883They were saying that the pole exists in real life and it is a waste of effort polishing the turd by pretending it's not there.
Yes, Gursky edited out a lot of stuff in Rhein II. In 1999. Before most people knew what photoshop was. Before the clone/heal tool as you know it even existed. When doing so was an artistic statement in and of itself.
Removing that pole from OP's pic doesn't make it closer to a platonic ideal. It doesn't make the scene more evocative. It's just you combining the generic advice of "you should never put a pole behind your subject without intent" with your natural tendency, as a newfag, to rely on excessive post-production to create evocative images.
You never once stopped to think that a power pole has no impact on whether or not a picture of a shopping center parking lot is evocative in the first place.
Nor are you visually literate enough to notice the graffiti on the pole you've suggested removing, which makes it more interesting to leave in by default.
This thread is full of people pretending to be able to talk about photography to try to attack the only person who actually provided coherent advice about photographic strategies.
Lemme ram my dick in your ass, buddy, you're a retard and that makes me horny.
