วีดีโอ

I just heard about him today. Thanks for the video

I also found his photos very fascinating because I thought the situations photographed had actually existed. Until I found out that he massively edits his pictures using Photoshop. The jackets in the mine, for example, were multiplied using Photoshop. A lot of things were stamped out on the Rhine. So I wouldn't say he's a photographer, but rather a Photoshop artist.

Bahrain 1 is heavily edited.

Andreas Gursky’s work is really worth seeing in person, you will get lost in the detail. Beautiful.

Great video beautiful photos

For a retired person stock photography and video is great. I am doing the shoots anyway. The more I upload the more I make. If I was a professionals I think it wouldn't be so bad. If your out there anyway and see a subject to shoot I would grab it with my phone. I can shoot in raw with the photo along with 4k video. Might as well upload that stuff. You never know what designer are looking. Otherwise you get out completely.

You have to look at the positive side, you'll never become an alcoholic.

Matt, I'm looking for a certain picture but I've never been able to find it. It's HUGE, black and white (i think it was), and features over 400 soldiers resting on a hillside. Do you know of such a picture?

Is it possible that your criticism of distractions suffering from the same criticism that is directed at pixel peepers? Is your obsession with finding any tiny distraction perhaps no more than a distraction from the ultimate impact of the image taken as a whole?

Been to NZ about 2 weeks ago and have to say that the Wanaka tree is the BIGGEST TOURIST TRAP in New Zealand. Naturally I was not expecting much as its just a tree on a lake - but whether its in the water or 4m away from the waters edge like we saw it doesnt matter. ITS A WASTE OF TIME..............................

The perfect example of what happens when the art market system decides that an artist is a genius lol.

I bet hunter bidens photos would sell for more than any of these.😄

The picture Sha Tin (1994) is artistically unsatisfactory. If you are at a horse race, you pay attention to other people the horses and the surroundings and avoid looking at the bleak empty sky. By making a mistake in his composition, is the photographer trying to market the image as art? Is his art defined by torturing the expectation for a successful composition? I like El Ejido (2017) very much.

I know for sure the first one was posed. It was someone he knew.

These comedy wildlife photos are a genius idea. Most of them got me!

I've made a total of U.S. $4,400 since 2017 from my stock photos. That's a nice bit of change, but I've paid much more than that for my camera, lenses, and other gear over the years. Overall, getting into stock photography has cost me more money than I've made.

I love that all of these photos have an atmosphere about them, and your edits brought it out even more.

It's amazing how much you can shift the way we look at this image with these minor changes.

It's amazing what you are willing to go through to get the photo!

I really like your style of photography man! Devil punch falls is my favourite!

A trading floor is one of the most chaotic places in the world…

Andreas's real name is Where' Waldo.........................Jokes aside, his photos are fantastic. Clearly he was able to gain permission to photograph the interiors of the locations, something which perhaps people didnt attempt as they may have thought it was impossible to get permission. Everyone of us have a Gersky style image in our albums.

Yes I agree with you.

I think everyone tends to over analize those photos only because the photographer is famous, if those were taken yesterday by me or you people would be like "cool" *scrolls up*

Stock photography is such a scam on the part of the agencies. They clearly don't respect the photographers that provide them with the quality images that make them so much money. Percentages clearly favor the agency. Customers are partly to blame for the whole debacle, they want one place they can go to find the images they need rather than having to deal with individual photographers and making a contract with each one. The customer might pay a big price for an image to the agency and at best the photographer may get 30% of the sale price, usually 10% which really stinks. The agencies all claim they have the expense of maintaining the website and all that goes with that. Really? All they do is have their team disqualify images because they aren't tack sharp at 100% and all the other BS reasons they say. Then they just sit back and wait for all the sucker photographers to submit their images and collect huge profits for the work they didn't even do. The photographer that paid big money for their gear and training to learn how to use the gear and process the photos, who paid money to get to the locations for the pictures get peanuts. I think it's time photographers stop submitting photos to the stock agencies. Sure it's a way to make a few bucks and get a little prestige but wouldn't it be great if we could turn the tables on the agencies and get back to the way it was before the internet ruined it for photographers. Before that it wasn't uncommon for magazines to hundreds, even thousands of dollars for images directly to the photographer. If photographers would stop submitting images to the agencies this could happen again, it might take a couple of years but wouldn't it be awesome to get the just rewards for our hard work?

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you're the problem, not the stock business. I do about 1000$ a month with about 18000 photographs spread on 15 sites and I'm not at full capacity because only one site for now as my full portfolio the other ranging form 1200 to 6000 photographs.

when you are from a certain sexuality and/or a certain religion it's more easy to become celeb. it's a FACT.

Never volunteer to work in a sweat shop.

It's a matter of shooting what sell. Stock images are mainly used for advertisement and we don't see many ads with landscapes or buildings. So if you want to make money on this, you have to shoot people lifestyle.

personally i see stock photography / videography as a kind of dividends investment plan , as long as you set up a batch production workflow , you can upload a lot of assets in pretty short time. then it makes money automatically , it's like investing in trading stock market but without loss risk , only gains , as long as you enjoy practicing photography and doesn't waste time in editing , you can upload few hundred pictures a week or even daily . for exemple if you like to shoot animals , you can shoot hundreds pictures of the same species over time and upload all of them at the same time once you have a lot of them, so you'll have to keyword only once . what takes time is to identify the niches , everytime you take a picture of something , try to take at least 10 various pictures of the same subject . i can easily take between 500-1000 pictures a day ,even more if there is a big event . stock photography has to be seen as an over competitive industrial market with an extralarge customers audience, so you need to identify niches and then mass produce for these niches . Of course it's not very interesting if you live in an expensive western country , but for people who live in cheap countries , even expats , it can be interesting if you enjoy to explore and cover any kind of subjects stock photography is NOT for artistic creators/customers , it's basically for EVERYONE who need images for articles , newspaper, blogs , advertising ,graphic design, etc if you make beautiful unique artistic quality images , sell them to art galleries , publish books , posters , prints, etc and of course stock video is way more interesting in terms of earning possibilities and you can also apply a batch workflow and multiply the earning ratio . for exemple when you are in a beautiful spot , take at least 10 pictures and 5 videos of it or even 10x more if you can , of course it's easier if you follow the briefings and shotlists of the plateforms.

When looking at the commissioning rates, I can only think of a really bad deal these stock photo platforms give you as a photographer. But since there's so much photos out there, they can easily do it with good profits (other than the photographers). I don't think that AI will really end the stock photo market, but in some areas it might do. We'll see.

Oh well, there goes my great idea. New subscriber though. Cheers mate.

Hey Matt, if all you can afford with stock photography earnings is a case of Bud, then you may as well not bother. :) Thanks for the video.

Thanks again Matt, This is a great lesson for editing and what to look for and why. I can critique my own images a bit better for it! And edit them of course!

Hi Matt, loving this doco. My grandmother was a Dombrovskis so these resonate in an extra special way. Loving this special!

I appreciate the fact that you explain why you are making the edits you do because I am not using LR or PS, but I can apply the same princples using my photo editing software. Thanks for the video.

I thought it funny in your bad photo at the 35s mark you zoomed and for me, that was a much more interesting image. The reason it was funny is that when post processing my images it's more common than I'd like to admit that I've shot too wide and that the best bits of the image require a heavy crop in order to make them appealing.

This was very interesting, as the lighting was often contrary to what we "learn" today. Like that our eyes are drawn to the brightest parts of the image - but in these images it is often the *dark* parts that draw the attention (like with the myrtle tree image)! Or having lighting situations that "most of us" would not consider to be good for landscape photography.

Great critique of some photos of THAT tree. It is a pity that the branch has been cut off - they have caught the person who did it as least! My favourite was Carl Lammi black and white and yours. Both with the birds in the branches.

Thanks once again Matt.

Thanks Matt! This is a great video, looking at the less than great as well as the best. This is such a great learning tool.

My winning numbers are 1, 3 & 5. That said I then look at those 3 and see their commonality and reflect on what it says about my preferences. Volkatunda sent me off googling ....solved :) Thanks for sharing!

your 2% success rate is about 100 times better than what I get. Failure here I come!

Very helpful with curating & post production but most definitely not with my travel budget.

I really enjoyed your take on these images and thank you for expanding my landscape techo vocab ;)

Hey Matt - A Great dissertation on Peter's work... Good to see the remastered files...