It was pretty obvious that this site wasn't the origin of the pics, since there's no photographer credit and the rest of the site is linkbait. They've been ripp

It was pretty obvious that this site wasn't the origin of the pics, since there's no photographer credit and the rest of the site is linkbait. They've been ripped from all over eg the photos of the church were by Rick Harris: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickharris/sets/72157620856257576/with/3681744600/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickharris/sets/721576208562575... It's pretty annoying to see this. The originals were CC-licensed; all they had to do was give credit? And linking back to the originals lets you download them in hi-res, find out where they were taken, what camera settings were used... anyway. Here's a different article from 2009 (containing some of the same images), showing that you can have a gallery like this and credit all the photographers. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/27/detroit-is-not-dead-photos_n_3652645.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/27/detroit-is-not-dead...