That's exactly my point: it's the truth to the kids' vision, not accuracy in any physical sense in the eyes of others. But when the kids' vision is perceived by the audience, it's no longer just a piece of cardboard that these kids are playing with. And I think, mhv, you're in the audience already.
Originally Posted by mhv
I was responding to the post of "straight photography" as being the best approach to represent the reality, but I don't think it is. It's not about the method or a techinique. But that doesn't mean Ansel Adams' photos miss out the truths from the reality: They indeed seem to contain some.
It's not an either/or kind of argument. That's my point. I think you and I are saying the same thing, essentially.