Enter November's contest now:📸 fstoppers.com/critique-community/drama The Hero Shot tutorial is $100 only this month: ➡fstoppers.com/product/hero-shot-how-light-and-composite-product-photography Enter the next Contest here: ➡fstoppers.com/contests Subscribe to the Fstoppers RUclips Channel: ➡ruclips.net/user/FStoppers Our Gear: 📷 and 🎥Workflow Recommendations: 🥰Our Favorite Gear ➡bhpho.to/3Q5pm01 💻Software📀 Adobe Creative Cloud ➡ bit.ly/3hjVXdE Boris FX Optics: ➡bit.ly/3N83bD6 Luminar Neo ➡ skylum.evyy.net/M6RAM Capture One ➡ captureone.38d4qb.net/NO29q 🛒🏪🛍 Support Fstoppers by shopping at: B&H Photo and Video ➡ bit.ly/3K7CrlX Amazon ➡ amzn.to/3hkTEXS 📸Follow Fstoppers on Instagram: ➡ instagram.com/officialfst... Follow Lee and Patrick's Puerto Rico Instagram: ➡ instagram.com/fstopperspr/
I gave up on having my photographs critiqued nearly fifty years ago. Here's why. As a young photographer, I entered one photo competition after another. Each time, I walked away with zilch, nada, zip. "To heck with this," I thought. I swore off photo competitions for good. Then, sometime later, a friend talked me into entering one last show. After much consternation, I packed my photos, took them to the gallery, filled out the entry form, and returned home. I didn't even attend the judging. The day after, I went to see the winners in each category out of basic curiosity. That was when I had my epiphany. I had won two first place ribbons, two second place ribbons, and one honorable mention. That's five categories. In that instant, I learned that one thing will tower over one's work in these situations. The "taste" of the judges. Art is subjective. It wasn't that my work was lacking; I simply hadn't found any judges whose tastes were similar to mine. I've not entered a competition since. Do not make pictures for others. Make pictures for you!
Hurrah! Spot-on. Sir Paul McCartney, when asked for whom the Beatles produced music and for whom he wrote it, replied that they and he did it for themselves - try doing it for others and it won't be authentic or any good (I paraphrase). Good art needs good heart and that cannot be applied like producing a specialty burger to cater for this week's tastes or customers. Cheers.
About your question 'why do we rate photos anymore?' I think it is worth doing. But there are problems. I have found the FStoppers community the strongest critical opinion. Photos that I thought were 'Great'... have been rated very low. Conversely, others have highly praised photos that I thought should be labeled 'snapshots'. I have gotten a certain grove, of photos that I can guess that 'Stock' companies will accept, and some that will even that will sell. But I only recently joined FStoppers in the past year, and have yet to figure out what this community will like. Even watching your video on that 2nd picture, and wanting to give that guy 2-stars... That's a very critical opinion, for such a beautiful picture. You wanted him to change the house or something ...sorry. Or crop it? Sometimes, people can be just too critical. But also those were photos that were picked out to be special out of 1000s. yet , still 2-stars? no. I mean how can you rate 'specially picked photo', just like you would any johnny-5 photo. Many people post to Fstoppers, and many of those photos might "need work". Maybe you get me. Anyway I digress. why do we rate anyone's photo. I think I realize that in order to post a photo Fstoppers, it better be really good. I need to make sure its even the best of the ones I post on 'Stock'. Because the Fstoppers community is brutal. Maybe the 'brutal' is good and bad. Because we can learn something from it. Maybe. Sometimes I think it could be just 'Brutality and opinion'. though. Watching this video, I think some of it was just 'over analyzation'. But of course someone does have to win.
I actually like the Serengeti National Park image. It is simple and tells a story about rain in a grassland. The fact that anyone could have taken it with a phone should not discount the value of the photo. The crop could have been more wide angle if we took off the bottom where there were no raindrops. Could definitely be a winner!
I agree! Beautiful shot, tells a story, has character, while most of the others just seem sterile, more of the same we been seen online last year's .. If so in the Serengeti photo I would say the photograph could benefit from a lower angle
Sorry to be a downer, but not a single one of those images did anything for me. They’re all technically nice but left me cold. I couldn’t see much of the artist’s personality or unique perspective coming through.
Isn't this the kind of reply that would prompt a question: 'Why do we rate photos anymore?'. The fstoppers community is the most critical community I've ever run across. Too brutally critical. Everybody has their own opinion. so one person will rate 'snapshot'.. next person rates 5-stars. Not much consensus. but a lot of brutality. Let me ask, how does one's personality come through in a landscape photo? Are you talking about photos with people. Or actual landscape photos.
@@robertkoernke588 There's a level of subjectivity in art! If other people like it, I'm don't want to stand in their way or ruin the enjoyment, or tear down anyone who is enjoying their hobby! If an artist has created a photograph that means something to them, then my opinion should really not be important to them. When I say that it leaves me cold, I mean in terms of my personal taste. When you ask how personality comes through a landscape photograph, there's any number of ways. For example, subject selection. If you're photographing something as famous as Mt Fuji (which has probably been captured in more artistic works than any other mountain in the Earth's history), then maybe think about what's distinguishing your picture from the thousands of representations that have come before? Are you telling a story about contemporary Japan? Does Mount Fuji mean something to you personally? Do you want to comment on the pre-existing depictions of it? Once you have that broader idea, you can match a technical execution to it.
@@robertkoernke588 I thought I posted a reply but it seems to have disappeared so I will re-post a shorter version. First, I get that everyone is different. If the photographer is enjoying their hobby and their work means something to them then that is what matters, not my opinion or anyone else's. Second, I think that there's a lot of ways that you can show individuality in landscape photography. Choice of subject, choice of composition, imposing creative limits on yourself. Choice of subject is a good place to start thinking about this. If you're going to photograph Mount Fuji (possibly the most artistically depicted mountain in world history), then you might want to be thinking about how you can expand on what has already been done. How have Japanese artists historically depicted it? Do you want to tell a story about contemporary Japan? A more personal story? Or something else? Then match your technical execution against that vision.
@@robertkoernke588 I will also say that the one I really liked was the photograph of the African tree in pouring rain, which they didn't like. I also thought that their suggestions would all substantially worsen the shot.
@@merricfoley6481 well technically, as I said in another comment. They must have liked it enough to include it in this study. But then they tear their selections to sheds. I'm going to quote a Simpsons episode.... "I need a Food-Critic that doesn't poopoo everything that he eats" Homer: "hmm, usually takes a few hours". The point I make is, that no matter how great the photo is, they will still poopoo it. But someone does have to win, and there are things people can learn. But as you said, opinions vary, and a narrow view isn't always the best view.
I'd like to see a critique/review of more "everyday" photographs rather than all of the epic landscapes/cityscapes. E.g. Christopher Anderson's "Marion"
So first off, I think landscape editing has become way too over the top and I am gravitating towards softer and more natural edits, kinda along the lines of Thomas Heaton and Adam Gibbs. Just enough editing to bring out the lighting and subjects but not the crazy dramatic saturation and dodging and burning. And second I do understand where you guys are coming from in the sense that you want to know the backstory of an image so you have something to talk about.....but counterpoint, maybe if the image itself doesn't give you enough to talk about then its not worthy of the critique. I think it'd be fun to see you critique images that you have zero info on and just let the image speak for itself.
I agree, a lot of professional landscape photos end up looking as generic as an airbrushed supermodel with that too-perfect sheen and lighting which you know didn't happen on location.
Great video! I have to say most of the critiques are very valid! As a landscape photographer myself, I find that we tend to shoot too many times with wide angle lens. Sometimes the best image is the most simple composition that could be made just zooming in. Sometimes is better to not include the foreground because the image gets too much complicated. Keep up the good work!
I enjoyed it, I definitely like the talk about what gear was used, and whether it was manipulated. I've entered contests were the photos cannot be manipulated, except for General lightroom, kind of stuff. And there's so much Ai out there, My interest decreases the more the computer has been put in charge.
To Patrick's question on the dolomites pic and whether you can buy land there: I'm living in South Tyrol (Northern Italy, where the Dolomites are) and unfortunately, you can't buy land there. Everything is owned by someone and it doesn't get sold, because it's so valuable. But even if you are crazy lucky and get your hands on some land - it doesn't mean that you can build there. Since the incredible landscape and tourism are South Tyrol's most important income resource, every building has to be sanctioned by the government (in order to not destroy the beautiful scenery). And even if they allow you to build (which they won't in those beautiful spots), they will tell you how high you can build. So almost impossible to build there.
With the first photo, I'd crop to square format to create a mirror image and eliminate most of the foreground rocks. Re editing, I do very limited editing in Affinity Photo. If the image works SOOC so much the better. I shoot 3:2 or 2:3 as per the sensor and later, in Affinity, think about cropping with the same ratio or crop to 4:3 or 3:4 or square. These are the formats I choose to print via a print lab.
Man those iceland glacial river aerials are a dime... no wait.. a nickel a dozen. They are pretty though. Just a very common photo of something that it's kind of hard to take a bad photo of.
Your question is a good one. A related question I have - and this is in no way intended to be insulting or offensive to anyone - is why should the photographers creating these images care or give any weight or consideration to what rating you give it? What I'm getting at is whether you think "This is good" (a nominally objective evaluation of the image's merits resulting in a score) is really just masquerading for "I like this" (an entirely subjective report). This is not a comment or criticism on your feedback, which provides some interesting suggestions the image creators might find useful. But I'm concerned that people may think that pleasing competition judges makes the images meaningfully better, when (in my view) the only evaluation that matters is whether the creator feels that they have expressed themselves well; whether they have realised their creative vision.
@@DanteJDM hate to burst your bubble but it’s the exact same setup, no ND filter, color grade is straight out of camera (except bw at the beginning). -P
@@FStoppers Something changed because the motion blur looks a lot better than previous videos otherwise I wouldn't have noticed. And it's not a bubble, it's a compliment, well, was.
Got a little bit carried away with zooming in to crop on things at the end but otherwise very pleased to be in agreement with your observations. Good job.
In the second photo the pool of water is probably a water hole for cattle. Patrick's color scheme for the Iceland photos I thought was better. I agree the dramatic Japan Temple image is a great version👍 The focused stacked image of the Matterhorn is at least a 3 but probable a 4, come on Lee hahaha. I like the last image and I could see this printed and hung on a bathroom wall. Fun critique guys 👍👍😎
All of these are very underwhelming, and has this "stock" feel I can't really enjoy at all. Aligning the balloon? Focus stack? HDR? What happened to the interesting imperfection? At least the drone shot and the palm trees with word salad deviated from this a bit
Love these videos. I've been watching them for years and always get a lot out of them. I find that the fstoppers community is quite harsh in its rating. For example I uploaded an image to this contest and it received a few 1 stars from people even though it clearly isn't a snapshot. A lot of people firing from the hip in that community.
You unlocked a wedding photographer annoyance…brides always want a picture with them standing inside the gazebo which is always bad lighting. I’m like let’s take a picture over here with the gazebo way in the background lol. You just end up taking both to make them happy.
Thanks for the breakdown! A bit off-topic, but I wanted to ask: I have a SafePal wallet with USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). What's the best way to send them to Binance?
Another issue with Fstoppers photos, that I think was slightly mentioned at least early in the video. Under the subject of 'Why do we rate photos?'. (one of the guys made a joke about printing a 7ft photo?) Some of us create photos for large TV screens or for printing. Especially when it comes to landscape photos. Yet when posted on Fstoppers, they cannot be adequately judged because your only seeing basically a thumbnail of the real detail. I realize in the age of instagram that this is less and less the case, and many people are looking at photos on phones. And I already had an argument on Fstoppers with another poster, who acted as if, my thoughts had no basis in 2024. I just look at versions of a few of my fstopper posted landscape photos versus the real versions, and see the stark difference, even on my 27in monitor, let alone my larger screens. Or what happens if I did print a 7ft photo. I was planning to participate in this contest, and didn't get around to it. So when I rate a photo, I sometimes look at the photo from the perspective, of how would it look like if stretched to an even bigger view. Which you can only do in your head on fstoppers... Conversely.. I do look at my own photos on my phone. Interestly, in the day where the square-er photo is becoming more popular, actually it is a very wide photo that does the best on my phone. (think about it...) The Phone resolution is oblong. So an abnormal long pano, actually does the best on your phone. Maybe people haven't thought of that. Or a very tall cropped photo? But I digress again.
I enjoy the video and I can learn lot. However, The critiques seem to focus on whether the photo is real or fake. I would rather you to talk more about composition, color, emotion/story a photo trying to convey.
Sorry guys, but, again, why do you care to know what gear was used, what editing was done. I don't want to know the back story of a photo. Does the photo speak to me or not - that's it. You views are very old-fashioned in my opinion.
You can have that opinion, you're entitled to it, but it's not everyone's. Especially in the age of AI, the back story is key for me. It's one way for the photo to speak to me. I want to know why certain decisions were made, how the artist came to be in that spot at that time, and what influenced them to produce the art in front of me. Not having that is precisely why I find AI art to be gross. I am here for the human element, the human decision making. Remove that and you have an empty shell of an image.
Story matters yes... but I like to know what gear, especially when it shows that the most expensive gear isn't needed to take a great image. Knowing the edits also helps me learn more about editing. I think I know a bit about editing but I always find something new and interesting when looking at other people's edits.
I agree, and also I have seen literally hundreds of images that look more or less the same as these. They're technically amazing and I'm certainly unable to achieve these technical levels. But I can't see the point in reproducing stuff that was made so many times before. Do we need more postcards of beautiful sunsets and beautiful lakes with mountain reflection, all in HDR ? As you said, does the photo speak to me ? Yes, but it's saying stuff we've all heard, stuff we've all seen literally a thousand times. Surprise us, please.
Why? My guess is getting clicks and some moments of feeling superior to the poor beginners and laymen. I do not know what your qualifications are. I often disagree as I have none. Yet, most of the time you make far more sense than the reddit hyenas.
You guys seem like great guys but you gotta know you are on the extreme end of photographic reality. Spending time on fake or real is fruitless and will be even less productive with the advent of ai. Photos should be grouped in 2 buckets: 1) Either authentic 100% that have had basic editing and 2) those that reality has been altered in any way. Nothing wrong with either but you all miss the point and some great images by guessing and devaluing images based on assumption. Not trying to be mean. Ask your viewers to categorize based on criteria laid out and move on to focus on the beauty of them all.99% of the non photophile community doesn't care. They just know how it makes them feel. If you want to expand and grow photography this might be a better approach.
Why are you two so obsessed with what's fake and what's 'real'. Whether it's done in camera or in post, it's all art. It doesn't matter how the end result is achieved. One of the prizes in your contest is a smoke machine. Fake! So what? You keep saying 'is it real? No? A photo isn't real to begin with. Forget the notion of real.
Because these are photo contests, not art contests. I don't have a problem with either, but in this case it's perfectly fine for these guys to want to restrict their contests to photography, or what they consider photography to be. It's their contest. If you want to run a photography contest with a focus more on the artistry of post-production, great! I might be interested in subscribing to that as well. All forms of art have their place. Some people simply have a preference on where they put the line between a "photo" and "art", that's all.
@@AustinSlack @FStoppers all fair comments. I would argue that photography IS art. PS is part of the process. Otherwise what is your definition of photography? No editing whatsoever? I'm not sure the fstoppers lads have restricted the contest to 'photography' or outlined what their definition is. Does is matter if a sky is 'real' or has been dropped in? Are there any rules here? If so, what are they? If it's 'photography' only then let's stipulate no editing. Ansel Adams did a lot of dark room manipulation. Was he a photographer?
@@dave_sports_photos I think most of the time it's just to be fair to photographers who spend time and effort getting the shot. I do a lot of photojournalistic photography, and there's a big element of luck by taking the time and effort to be in the right place at the right time. E.g. waking up at 3am to get to a location in the hopes someone walks out of their house.
Enter November's contest now:📸 fstoppers.com/critique-community/drama
The Hero Shot tutorial is $100 only this month: ➡fstoppers.com/product/hero-shot-how-light-and-composite-product-photography
Enter the next Contest here: ➡fstoppers.com/contests
Subscribe to the Fstoppers RUclips Channel:
➡ruclips.net/user/FStoppers
Our Gear: 📷 and 🎥Workflow Recommendations:
🥰Our Favorite Gear
➡bhpho.to/3Q5pm01
💻Software📀
Adobe Creative Cloud
➡ bit.ly/3hjVXdE
Boris FX Optics:
➡bit.ly/3N83bD6
Luminar Neo
➡ skylum.evyy.net/M6RAM
Capture One
➡ captureone.38d4qb.net/NO29q
🛒🏪🛍 Support Fstoppers by shopping at:
B&H Photo and Video
➡ bit.ly/3K7CrlX
Amazon
➡ amzn.to/3hkTEXS
📸Follow Fstoppers on Instagram:
➡ instagram.com/officialfst...
Follow Lee and Patrick's Puerto Rico Instagram:
➡ instagram.com/fstopperspr/
I gave up on having my photographs critiqued nearly fifty years ago. Here's why. As a young photographer, I entered one photo competition after another. Each time, I walked away with zilch, nada, zip. "To heck with this," I thought. I swore off photo competitions for good. Then, sometime later, a friend talked me into entering one last show. After much consternation, I packed my photos, took them to the gallery, filled out the entry form, and returned home. I didn't even attend the judging. The day after, I went to see the winners in each category out of basic curiosity. That was when I had my epiphany. I had won two first place ribbons, two second place ribbons, and one honorable mention. That's five categories. In that instant, I learned that one thing will tower over one's work in these situations. The "taste" of the judges. Art is subjective. It wasn't that my work was lacking; I simply hadn't found any judges whose tastes were similar to mine. I've not entered a competition since. Do not make pictures for others. Make pictures for you!
Hurrah! Spot-on. Sir Paul McCartney, when asked for whom the Beatles produced music and for whom he wrote it, replied that they and he did it for themselves - try doing it for others and it won't be authentic or any good (I paraphrase). Good art needs good heart and that cannot be applied like producing a specialty burger to cater for this week's tastes or customers. Cheers.
you guys need to have access to the original raw unedited photo too, too much time spent questioning what it originally looked like.
Not gonna lie I have forgotten about these for like the past couple years. Glad it popped up on my feed again
Same here.
B&W storm photo was by far the best and really the only shot in here with personality. Everything else looked curated for Instagram.
Patrick going completely off the rails at 28:00 is golden
Also, really appreciate when y'all critique you give tips on how to improve the image!!
About your question 'why do we rate photos anymore?' I think it is worth doing. But there are problems. I have found the FStoppers community the strongest critical opinion. Photos that I thought were 'Great'... have been rated very low. Conversely, others have highly praised photos that I thought should be labeled 'snapshots'. I have gotten a certain grove, of photos that I can guess that 'Stock' companies will accept, and some that will even that will sell. But I only recently joined FStoppers in the past year, and have yet to figure out what this community will like. Even watching your video on that 2nd picture, and wanting to give that guy 2-stars... That's a very critical opinion, for such a beautiful picture. You wanted him to change the house or something ...sorry. Or crop it? Sometimes, people can be just too critical. But also those were photos that were picked out to be special out of 1000s. yet , still 2-stars? no. I mean how can you rate 'specially picked photo', just like you would any johnny-5 photo. Many people post to Fstoppers, and many of those photos might "need work". Maybe you get me.
Anyway I digress. why do we rate anyone's photo. I think I realize that in order to post a photo Fstoppers, it better be really good. I need to make sure its even the best of the ones I post on 'Stock'. Because the Fstoppers community is brutal. Maybe the 'brutal' is good and bad. Because we can learn something from it. Maybe. Sometimes I think it could be just 'Brutality and opinion'. though. Watching this video, I think some of it was just 'over analyzation'. But of course someone does have to win.
I have to say, it's fun to watch these when you submit a photo.
I actually like the Serengeti National Park image. It is simple and tells a story about rain in a grassland. The fact that anyone could have taken it with a phone should not discount the value of the photo. The crop could have been more wide angle if we took off the bottom where there were no raindrops. Could definitely be a winner!
I agree! Beautiful shot, tells a story, has character, while most of the others just seem sterile, more of the same we been seen online last year's ..
If so in the Serengeti photo I would say the photograph could benefit from a lower angle
Can't wait to see the feedback on this contest!
Sorry to be a downer, but not a single one of those images did anything for me. They’re all technically nice but left me cold. I couldn’t see much of the artist’s personality or unique perspective coming through.
Isn't this the kind of reply that would prompt a question: 'Why do we rate photos anymore?'. The fstoppers community is the most critical community I've ever run across. Too brutally critical. Everybody has their own opinion. so one person will rate 'snapshot'.. next person rates 5-stars. Not much consensus. but a lot of brutality. Let me ask, how does one's personality come through in a landscape photo? Are you talking about photos with people. Or actual landscape photos.
@@robertkoernke588 There's a level of subjectivity in art! If other people like it, I'm don't want to stand in their way or ruin the enjoyment, or tear down anyone who is enjoying their hobby! If an artist has created a photograph that means something to them, then my opinion should really not be important to them. When I say that it leaves me cold, I mean in terms of my personal taste.
When you ask how personality comes through a landscape photograph, there's any number of ways. For example, subject selection. If you're photographing something as famous as Mt Fuji (which has probably been captured in more artistic works than any other mountain in the Earth's history), then maybe think about what's distinguishing your picture from the thousands of representations that have come before? Are you telling a story about contemporary Japan? Does Mount Fuji mean something to you personally? Do you want to comment on the pre-existing depictions of it? Once you have that broader idea, you can match a technical execution to it.
@@robertkoernke588 I thought I posted a reply but it seems to have disappeared so I will re-post a shorter version.
First, I get that everyone is different. If the photographer is enjoying their hobby and their work means something to them then that is what matters, not my opinion or anyone else's.
Second, I think that there's a lot of ways that you can show individuality in landscape photography. Choice of subject, choice of composition, imposing creative limits on yourself. Choice of subject is a good place to start thinking about this. If you're going to photograph Mount Fuji (possibly the most artistically depicted mountain in world history), then you might want to be thinking about how you can expand on what has already been done. How have Japanese artists historically depicted it? Do you want to tell a story about contemporary Japan? A more personal story? Or something else? Then match your technical execution against that vision.
@@robertkoernke588 I will also say that the one I really liked was the photograph of the African tree in pouring rain, which they didn't like. I also thought that their suggestions would all substantially worsen the shot.
@@merricfoley6481 well technically, as I said in another comment. They must have liked it enough to include it in this study. But then they tear their selections to sheds. I'm going to quote a Simpsons episode.... "I need a Food-Critic that doesn't poopoo everything that he eats" Homer: "hmm, usually takes a few hours". The point I make is, that no matter how great the photo is, they will still poopoo it. But someone does have to win, and there are things people can learn. But as you said, opinions vary, and a narrow view isn't always the best view.
I'd like to see a critique/review of more "everyday" photographs rather than all of the epic landscapes/cityscapes. E.g. Christopher Anderson's "Marion"
So first off, I think landscape editing has become way too over the top and I am gravitating towards softer and more natural edits, kinda along the lines of Thomas Heaton and Adam Gibbs. Just enough editing to bring out the lighting and subjects but not the crazy dramatic saturation and dodging and burning.
And second I do understand where you guys are coming from in the sense that you want to know the backstory of an image so you have something to talk about.....but counterpoint, maybe if the image itself doesn't give you enough to talk about then its not worthy of the critique. I think it'd be fun to see you critique images that you have zero info on and just let the image speak for itself.
I agree, a lot of professional landscape photos end up looking as generic as an airbrushed supermodel with that too-perfect sheen and lighting which you know didn't happen on location.
Great video!
I have to say most of the critiques are very valid!
As a landscape photographer myself, I find that we tend to shoot too many times with wide angle lens.
Sometimes the best image is the most simple composition that could be made just zooming in.
Sometimes is better to not include the foreground because the image gets too much complicated.
Keep up the good work!
I enjoyed it, I definitely like the talk about what gear was used, and whether it was manipulated. I've entered contests were the photos cannot be manipulated, except for General lightroom, kind of stuff. And there's so much Ai out there, My interest decreases the more the computer has been put in charge.
To Patrick's question on the dolomites pic and whether you can buy land there: I'm living in South Tyrol (Northern Italy, where the Dolomites are) and unfortunately, you can't buy land there. Everything is owned by someone and it doesn't get sold, because it's so valuable. But even if you are crazy lucky and get your hands on some land - it doesn't mean that you can build there. Since the incredible landscape and tourism are South Tyrol's most important income resource, every building has to be sanctioned by the government (in order to not destroy the beautiful scenery). And even if they allow you to build (which they won't in those beautiful spots), they will tell you how high you can build. So almost impossible to build there.
With the first photo, I'd crop to square format to create a mirror image and eliminate most of the foreground rocks. Re editing, I do very limited editing in Affinity Photo. If the image works SOOC so much the better. I shoot 3:2 or 2:3 as per the sensor and later, in Affinity, think about cropping with the same ratio or crop to 4:3 or 3:4 or square. These are the formats I choose to print via a print lab.
Man those iceland glacial river aerials are a dime... no wait.. a nickel a dozen. They are pretty though. Just a very common photo of something that it's kind of hard to take a bad photo of.
Your question is a good one. A related question I have - and this is in no way intended to be insulting or offensive to anyone - is why should the photographers creating these images care or give any weight or consideration to what rating you give it? What I'm getting at is whether you think "This is good" (a nominally objective evaluation of the image's merits resulting in a score) is really just masquerading for "I like this" (an entirely subjective report). This is not a comment or criticism on your feedback, which provides some interesting suggestions the image creators might find useful. But I'm concerned that people may think that pleasing competition judges makes the images meaningfully better, when (in my view) the only evaluation that matters is whether the creator feels that they have expressed themselves well; whether they have realised their creative vision.
photo critique and photo challenge are my favorite type of videos from you guys
So agree, my family and friends think I’m the world’s greatest photographer…but in the photography community I’m middle of the road at best 😂
“You have to take the hack saw…”😂😂
Hey! Super happy to see you guys finally added an ND filter for natural motion blur. The video image looks great and I love the subtle grade!
@@DanteJDM hate to burst your bubble but it’s the exact same setup, no ND filter, color grade is straight out of camera (except bw at the beginning). -P
@@FStoppers Something changed because the motion blur looks a lot better than previous videos otherwise I wouldn't have noticed. And it's not a bubble, it's a compliment, well, was.
Got a little bit carried away with zooming in to crop on things at the end but otherwise very pleased to be in agreement with your observations. Good job.
I can see Mt. Fuji from my rooftop in Tokyo. It appears fairly often. 10% must be way too low.
In the second photo the pool of water is probably a water hole for cattle. Patrick's color scheme for the Iceland photos I thought was better. I agree the dramatic Japan Temple image is a great version👍 The focused stacked image of the Matterhorn is at least a 3 but probable a 4, come on Lee hahaha. I like the last image and I could see this printed and hung on a bathroom wall. Fun critique guys 👍👍😎
The first image looks cool when oriented vertical (rotate 90°)
All of these are very underwhelming, and has this "stock" feel I can't really enjoy at all. Aligning the balloon? Focus stack? HDR?
What happened to the interesting imperfection?
At least the drone shot and the palm trees with word salad deviated from this a bit
The mountain reported used for Paramount movies is reportedly Artesonraju in the Peruvian Andes.
Love these videos. I've been watching them for years and always get a lot out of them. I find that the fstoppers community is quite harsh in its rating. For example I uploaded an image to this contest and it received a few 1 stars from people even though it clearly isn't a snapshot. A lot of people firing from the hip in that community.
Soooooo landscape photography is just like “what would this place look like after the apocalypse?”
I really feel like travelling to take pictures, but my fear is going and not having luck with the climate
You unlocked a wedding photographer annoyance…brides always want a picture with them standing inside the gazebo which is always bad lighting. I’m like let’s take a picture over here with the gazebo way in the background lol. You just end up taking both to make them happy.
Thanks for the breakdown! A bit off-topic, but I wanted to ask: I have a SafePal wallet with USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). What's the best way to send them to Binance?
Hi in this kind of video what microphone setup do you use ? Lav ? Or shotgun ❤
Another issue with Fstoppers photos, that I think was slightly mentioned at least early in the video. Under the subject of 'Why do we rate photos?'. (one of the guys made a joke about printing a 7ft photo?) Some of us create photos for large TV screens or for printing. Especially when it comes to landscape photos. Yet when posted on Fstoppers, they cannot be adequately judged because your only seeing basically a thumbnail of the real detail. I realize in the age of instagram that this is less and less the case, and many people are looking at photos on phones. And I already had an argument on Fstoppers with another poster, who acted as if, my thoughts had no basis in 2024. I just look at versions of a few of my fstopper posted landscape photos versus the real versions, and see the stark difference, even on my 27in monitor, let alone my larger screens. Or what happens if I did print a 7ft photo. I was planning to participate in this contest, and didn't get around to it. So when I rate a photo, I sometimes look at the photo from the perspective, of how would it look like if stretched to an even bigger view. Which you can only do in your head on fstoppers... Conversely.. I do look at my own photos on my phone. Interestly, in the day where the square-er photo is becoming more popular, actually it is a very wide photo that does the best on my phone. (think about it...) The Phone resolution is oblong. So an abnormal long pano, actually does the best on your phone. Maybe people haven't thought of that. Or a very tall cropped photo? But I digress again.
If Patrick doesn't have a migraine in this video, he's doing a great impression of me with a migraine. Especially pressing his thumb on his eyebrow.
you have to ask people to link a raw file all these phots, so you can take a look at it, if you feel iffy about some photos
13:02 Lake Bled is really awesome place
I enjoy the video and I can learn lot. However, The critiques seem to focus on whether the photo is real or fake. I would rather you to talk more about composition, color, emotion/story a photo trying to convey.
Did you happen to know? God's rays are actually called Crepuscular rays.
"Mt Fiji"
C'mon man...who on this planet does not know Mt Fuji 😆😅
I like the 2nd photo a lot. I don't like the rating on that photo.
Great Video
The last image I think I would have liked the last image better if it was a 'square crop' with less white...maybe.
A quick Google image search on that first photo finds that it was in Switzerland... Seealpsee is a lake in the canton of Appenzell Innerrhoden
I liked the last image, may be the description was made with AI? haha, cheers from Argentina
21:20 the first pagoda image is much better than Elia's
There is a hot pixel on the camera.
Sorry guys, but, again, why do you care to know what gear was used, what editing was done. I don't want to know the back story of a photo. Does the photo speak to me or not - that's it. You views are very old-fashioned in my opinion.
We like to know it all. It might not matter what camera it was shot with but sometimes it's fun. It's also fun to know the back story. -P
You can have that opinion, you're entitled to it, but it's not everyone's.
Especially in the age of AI, the back story is key for me. It's one way for the photo to speak to me. I want to know why certain decisions were made, how the artist came to be in that spot at that time, and what influenced them to produce the art in front of me.
Not having that is precisely why I find AI art to be gross. I am here for the human element, the human decision making. Remove that and you have an empty shell of an image.
Story matters yes... but I like to know what gear, especially when it shows that the most expensive gear isn't needed to take a great image. Knowing the edits also helps me learn more about editing. I think I know a bit about editing but I always find something new and interesting when looking at other people's edits.
I agree, and also I have seen literally hundreds of images that look more or less the same as these. They're technically amazing and I'm certainly unable to achieve these technical levels. But I can't see the point in reproducing stuff that was made so many times before. Do we need more postcards of beautiful sunsets and beautiful lakes with mountain reflection, all in HDR ? As you said, does the photo speak to me ? Yes, but it's saying stuff we've all heard, stuff we've all seen literally a thousand times. Surprise us, please.
One thing I learned from this is Elia sleeps a lot. 20 minutes in and 2 stories have already involved Elia sleeping.
That last pic reminds me of an in-n-out drink cup and a nuclear blast.
The more offhand comments I gather, sounds like Eliya is a handful to work with.
Pretty sure paramount mnt is mnt Everest no?
Why? My guess is getting clicks and some moments of feeling superior to the poor beginners and laymen. I do not know what your qualifications are. I often disagree as I have none. Yet, most of the time you make far more sense than the reddit hyenas.
Young Sylvester Stallone on the right?
You guys seem like great guys but you gotta know you are on the extreme end of photographic reality. Spending time on fake or real is fruitless and will be even less productive with the advent of ai. Photos should be grouped in 2 buckets: 1) Either authentic 100% that have had basic editing and 2) those that reality has been altered in any way. Nothing wrong with either but you all miss the point and some great images by guessing and devaluing images based on assumption. Not trying to be mean. Ask your viewers to categorize based on criteria laid out and move on to focus on the beauty of them all.99% of the non photophile community doesn't care. They just know how it makes them feel. If you want to expand and grow photography this might be a better approach.
All the images looked a bit too AI.
Is this video not color graded 🤔
It looks like a macro photograph of a dragon’s arteries
They all look fake as Jake.
Maybe choose some actual photos for the next crit session?
Not tryna promote drinkkng but have you guy's tried doing these while sipping something. Might be funnier
The picture qua;ity of the viedo (you guys, ) was awful. The submitted images were also flat and noisy. Was your camera set correctly? --BAK--
Hundreds of submissions and these are the photos you settled on? 🤢
@@cnna12392 is there a specific one you wanted to see? Yes, with hundreds of images we can only review a small sample of them. -P
Then maybe your content should be consumed only in the US.
Unsubscribing 🚶🏾🚶🏾🚶🏾
Why the hell did first guy think we wanna look at distorted, boring ass rocks when there is such a beautiful sunset in the image? Bizzare
She's is your satellite
She just married you
So turn on your smoke machine
And Marshall stack
Why are you two so obsessed with what's fake and what's 'real'. Whether it's done in camera or in post, it's all art. It doesn't matter how the end result is achieved. One of the prizes in your contest is a smoke machine. Fake! So what? You keep saying 'is it real? No? A photo isn't real to begin with. Forget the notion of real.
Because these are photo contests, not art contests. I don't have a problem with either, but in this case it's perfectly fine for these guys to want to restrict their contests to photography, or what they consider photography to be. It's their contest. If you want to run a photography contest with a focus more on the artistry of post-production, great! I might be interested in subscribing to that as well. All forms of art have their place. Some people simply have a preference on where they put the line between a "photo" and "art", that's all.
@@AustinSlack @FStoppers all fair comments. I would argue that photography IS art. PS is part of the process. Otherwise what is your definition of photography? No editing whatsoever? I'm not sure the fstoppers lads have restricted the contest to 'photography' or outlined what their definition is. Does is matter if a sky is 'real' or has been dropped in? Are there any rules here? If so, what are they? If it's 'photography' only then let's stipulate no editing. Ansel Adams did a lot of dark room manipulation. Was he a photographer?
@@dave_sports_photos I think most of the time it's just to be fair to photographers who spend time and effort getting the shot.
I do a lot of photojournalistic photography, and there's a big element of luck by taking the time and effort to be in the right place at the right time. E.g. waking up at 3am to get to a location in the hopes someone walks out of their house.
Because creating incredible looking AI images is not impressive. It requires no skill. Photography requires skill
@mattm7426 Do you use PS?