I was chatting with my older brother last night about the relative merits of Roger Zelazny's Amber books.  It turns out he is a much bigger fan of them than I am (or, as he put it, Roger = Heretic).  I was thinking about this earlier and realized we have the same issue about other authors, such as Hemingway (who he also prefers).  What links both authors together in my mind is the brisk, stripped down way they write...no flourish or excess of description.  I find I prefer having more detail rather than less.

This ties very closely to questions of taste in photography.  I've mentioned here previously that I am not a big fan of black and white photography since I see the world in color rather than shape or texture.  The stripping away of color (for me) strips away some of the life inherent in the image.

rue anenome rue anenome

The same difference in taste can apply to the amount of detail that makes upan image.

Pelicans and Gulls

Or realism vs. abstraction

White Wings Tea Rose

They're all images I like (and like to take).  Whether someone else finds one preferable to another is, ultimately, a matter of taste.