@ Kort: strange that you can read my reply, as I almost immediately deleted my post... is my reply still there?... because I can't see it... Yeah, I wrote that there aren't many images in there that qualify as still life... but I realised that my definition might be too strict and traditional. I studied the genre of still life from its origins, over the 'Golden Century' in Holland until modern times, and wrote about it... the pure still life as an art discipline, that is. But hey, times change, and everyone can fill in the definition as they see fit... certainly here in our photography section. That's why I deleted my reply... (and also because this thread wasn't the place to start a discussion on the subject). Still I believe that it takes more than just a capture of some objects for an image to be called 'still life'... And yes, I did vote..!

We do not see things as they are. ǝɹɐ ǝʍ sɐ sƃuıɥʇ ǝǝs ǝʍ