[Zig]

Hmm.
Once again I have the vague feeling that if one posts several gallery-standard shots, one may get bumped down to being missed by a proportional swathe of stuff that is, IMO, lowering the common denominator. The "curse" of ST perhaps. Am quite philosophical and emotionally-neutral about it now, whether I'm right or not.
Anyway...my last one in the gallery for a while:
This time a final view of Royal Crescent, Bath, at f8.

[Irma]

Very nice detail in your picture, specially in the foreground, as if I could touch it! All looks very sharp!

Am quite philosophical and emotionally-neutral about it now, whether I'm right or not.

I am also not too emotional with this one, maybe with the time starts getting its own character.

[Toad]

I'm not really grabbed by this one. My gut feeling is that this one would gain from having a bottom crop - a bit above the path. Sorry.

[Zig]

No worries my man.
I know what you mean Rob; when I tried that it lost the gracefulness of the length. But yep, the bottom curve doesn't actually relate much to other lines in the shot perhaps.

[Kombisaurus]

I really like the colours and simplicity of this one Zig.

For some reason, unlike Rob and Irma, I like it more than some of your other recent ones... It just kind of sits back and waits for the viewer to appreciate it rather than trying to tell the viewer what to do. It's more contemplative. I like that.
But I guess there's no accounting for taste.

Thanks for posting it.

[Zig]

Actually, Ade, that's an interesting point: the inclusion of people in shots is always some thing I do with a sense of purpose, often suggesting facets of humanity or "ennobling the human drama"...there is a meaningfulness after all in including people, I find.
The above shot is one of very few pics I've taken of late that is "landscapy" in my hitherto former style, with the deliberate exclusion of humans apart from the one viewing, so I'm wondering if that itself allows its "contemplativeness". Ta my man.