Originally Posted by walter23
That would be the City Center, just down the street from me. This project is supposed to be architectural gold in that the designers of each building are at the top of their fields and well regarded.
I said here that "City Center is impressive in it’s size and to me, an antiseptic look. All that glass and stone is astonishing. It is clean, polished and sharp. City Center is definitely a testament to the talent and creativity of the designers and builders."
However, I haven't been back. After the initial awe wore off, I went back to shooting buildings with more character, ones with flaws, that I found more interesting.
Oddly enough I do take a lot of pictures of people's houses. I don't work for an estate agents, it's something I'm strangely quite interested in, architecturally anyway and p[erhaps about where people live etc. How where they live influences their life etc.
That said I have seen some truly appalling estate agent photos; today I was looking with my parents and one of the photos was angled down to show just a square patch of grass....
Digging a bit farther back, the word real apparently originates with the Latin res, for law; and it's akin to a sanskrit word rayi, or property.
Originally Posted by Steve Smith
Love this word stuff. Now, what was the original topic here?
Trophy shots and other architectural stuff used to be a small but worth doing part of my biz (not claiming to be an actual architechural photographer, and refering proper jobs to a buddy who is). These days, nothing, and my bud's business sucks. I blame the increasingly pedestrian tastes of a nation headed for idiocracy.
I agree. Don't get me started on what people accept as passable photography these days.
Originally Posted by JBrunner
I cry that we lose a chunk of our national and societal visual history every time someone's camera phone falls in a toilet....
The negative is the equivalent of the composer's score, and the print the performance.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I always thought we used the term real estate to differentiate it from fake estate. As usual, I was wrong
Originally Posted by MikeSeb
"Gotta little problem with personal space, and I've been pounding the Jager. My breath and behavior have been driving the patrons away" -"Whipped Cream" by Ludo
My photography blog: http://silver-light0.blogspot.com/
I believe the word "real" in the term "real property" is a latin based word to attribute absolute property rights as rights that were granted to the real or royal. Real property used to be a real thing in this country (USA) before the neo-serfs decided that it was alright to accept the burden of paying taxes on the land. To my recollection, all other property rights in the world were either unclaimed and/or natural such as to indigenous peoples or some head honcho war lord or lucky inheritor owned the land and everyone else had to pay homage somehow to that big dude. Real property is a new term. Kings title. Allodial title to land. Unwavering, unfettered property rights. On your own property you are very much a King! A King in a land of many sovereign Kings! That is REAL Estate.
Originally Posted by MikeSeb
I love the wilderness and I love my trail cameras, all Fuji's! :) GA645, GW690 III, and the X100 which I think is the best trail camera ever invented (to date).
Real Property is best understood when it is contrasted with personal property. I found this by wandering the internet:
William Blackstone, in his 1756-1759 Commentaries on the Laws of England (Volume 2), wrote:
"Things real are such as are permanent, fixed and immovable; which cannot be carried out of their place, as lands and tenements.
"Things personal are goods, money and all other moveable; which may attend the owner's person wherever he thinks proper to go."
Continental and scandinavian legal tradition use terms such as "immobilien" (German: immobile things), "fast egendom" (Swedish: fixed property) etc. The Russians, and many states in the former Soviet sphere, similarly, use terms like "nedvizhimost", which means immovable. (French I do not know about.) Still, international legal discourse often use English language terms such as real property, real estate, property etc. It is always a mess to use common law terms to describe other legal systems if you are not very stringent.
It is often said that the queen still owns much of the land in Britain, while you americans would have full title yourselfs. Maybe the difference in terminology can traced from that fact.