I wonder whether the same "rules" still apply when capturing images of other man-made art works, such as sculptures. Often with photos I hear "get in closer", "crop closer", "find an unusual angle". etc. But when this cropping and angling makes the sculpture something less than what the original artist made, then I say no. Is it just me, or is a photo of a face of a statue just not the same as a photo of a face of a person? A photo showing a statue from below just not the same as a person standing above the photographer. I think the problem lies in that the original artist have already distilled the image down to what needs to be shown, and already displayed it in a way that shows it off to best effect. Of course there are exceptions, but in looking through the photos in this post, in quite a few of the photos taken from unusual angles or crops, I felt that I weren't seeing anything special, just somebody trying out his luck with randomly trying angles and crops, where a plain shot of the statue would have been simpler and better. Now I know a few people will show how wrong I am with a few example posts, but I suspect those are, with this type of subject, where the subject is already man made art, be the exception! Not that I know anything, I'm just a GWAC.