<p>the other line that confused me was:
“Few buildings, at least before photography, were observed with more passionate care.”
where it describes how much effort he put into detail</p>
<p>i thought it asked which quality he wasnt </p>
<p>so he wasnt inferior</p>
<p>^ what question was that? The answer should probably be meticulous, but I don’t even remember that question</p>
<p>i thought there was a question asking what was not mentioned in the passage</p>
<p>And the choice was like Artistically inferior</p>
<p>What question r u thinking of for “meticulous”?</p>
<p>Oh yeah, that was it. I thought he was saying it asked which one he was</p>
<p>yeah the answer is artistically inferior
question asked what hes not
that was the only one with choice as meticulous, which he was, another way of saying “taking passionate care”</p>
<p>so anyways, since there is contradicting evidence for the photography question</p>
<p>Which do u think is the “BEST” answer?</p>
<p>There is not contradicting evidence for the photography question. </p>
<p>“But are they really so true to life? Or are they, like photographs, a mix of fact, error and wishful illusion”</p>
<p>That is the exact quote from the passage.</p>
<p>what about “Few buildings, at least before photography, were observed with more passionate care.”</p>
<p>Tell me how that proves that photography is “realistic”? All that tells me is that photagraphy has a lot of details, just like the artist, who also put in a lot of details. </p>
<p>Secondly, how can any indirect conclusion overrule what’s blatantly stated?</p>
<p>@thequestionmark: it describes photographs as being accurate which, to me, would make it realistic</p>
<p>can we discuss the dutch golden age 1 that was the hardest passage in my opinion anyone else agree??? the dancing 1 was ez, the harlem 1 was ok, and the palm tree 1 was ez. what city was the fruitfulness of his life any1 no the answer?</p>
<p>^Utrecht. I don’t remember the dutch gold age question</p>
<p>yea it said in the passage it was utrecht or whatever</p>
<p>You guys do realize that the passage made a clear distinction between accurate, and realistic?</p>
<p>He was an accurate painter, but not neccessarily a realistic one. Just because he paints like a photographer doesn’t mean that photography is “real”. The answer to the question is in what’s clearly stated: a mix of fact, error and wishful illusion.</p>
<p>You guys need to learn to let go when the answer is clearly not the best one out there.</p>
<p>How much do u think -2 will be?
at 33 or a 34?</p>
<p>^ 34 imo</p>
<p>10char</p>
<p>What did y’all say for the mainland trees question? I said less likely to be endangered because there were always predators and they weren’t randomly introduced or invasive</p>
<p>^I honestly can’t remember what I put. Reading is my worst section and I had to just put a guess down on that one and another one…I believe I put A lol, but I have no idea what that answer said</p>
<p>@jkaplan: Yes, it was the ‘less likely to be endanged’ answer. I forget what the rest of them where, but they didn’t fit in the context of the passage.</p>