I know historicly it hasnt been the most viewed format you guys have. BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH for bringing it back. One of my favorite thing is while editing some work photos to put critique the community on the 2nd monitor. Now with huge prices as well. It may not be great for viewers ship on youtube. But hopefully it brings enough traffic to the website and stuff, because is not only good for watching, but i feel like its also pretty great for the community. Thank you again, take care. Keep it up!
Started watching you years ago. Then I became pro photographer and I shoot weddings for a living. I even listened to most of your pandemic diares which (now you know) nobody including your children will want to watch again because of the length. Now watching your good old photography contest and reviews feels like meeting with old friend and having a beer together. I love that, thank you!
I loved this video... it helps me understand what a trained eye can pick out. the one photo that i really appreciate is the one from Dana (sun and tree). I appreciate that they had the vision in their mind and were able to accomplish it regardless of the pathway they needed to take. thanks for these videos.
IRT the annular eclipse photo and tree, the higher ISO is used due to the use of a solar filter. You have a lot of cut whenever you use the solar filter in front of your lens.
Hi guys, thank you very much for the feature! I'm the person behind the "Long exposure lighthouse" photo. I completely agree with your thoughts about the unsightly building next to the lighthouse, which unfortunately detracts from the overall beauty of the scene. I did consider cloning it out, but then I thought it would be too far from reality, especially since I also removed the horizon line.
It's either photography contest, or AI/software skills contest. Nowadays RAW files must be obligatory. The contest should not be about guessing if a contestant cheated.
Can someone have a single RAW file and also still push the file too far in software? We've never dismissed how someone created an image; it's always been about if the image is interesting and worth viewing. 100% true photography with no post processing doesn't necessarily interest me unless it's documenting something in a super interesting way. -P
@@FStoppers RAW files are not for reviewing, it's to check if the image is actually real 🤦♂ Otherwise you should specify that the contest is not really about photography, but arts and crafts.
@@FStoppers at the same time you need to find a way to exclude ai images or you'll trip over your own craft. Why view photographing to world if i can just make an ai image just as good (as a photographer I know the difference, but my fear is the younger generation don't)
@@smashexentertainment676Just you wait for fake raw files. It is just doing another calculation. Take a bunch of paired raw and final edits and you create a raw making machine.
Hi @fstoppers, my image was featured (nyc skyline). Thank you so much for being featured and I hope to continue improving so I can enter future contests. Also, I don’t know how to reach out for the free tutorial so any guidance would be helpful. All the best, Fernando Garcia
Oh man, I am a fan of the show guys! However, the description at 25:37 killed me! As a native New Mexican, with an appreciation for Geology, I found this image amazing! Understanding the incredible winds and how it pushed those mountains of sand exposing the weathered and hardened layer below. Not to mention the classic New Mexican Painted Sky! Beautiful! Nice work Liang Li. Must be a southwestern thing. Side note, New Mexican Green Chili is the ONLY Green Chili.
Having been to where this was done many times I can say this is a great image and required good planning or extraordinary luck to get. Something he does not understand is just how white this sand is. I have been to white sand beaches and they do not hold a candle to just how white and bright the sand at White Sands is. 25:29
I've sailed into bays in British Columbia where the (ocean) water was often so flat and clear that it WAS like floating on a glass mirror. That Douglas Fir might just be authentic, especially in still foggy weather.
Hi, Dana here with the eclipse shot. Thank you guys for selecting my work! I really appreciate the feedback. I wanted to note two things; the camera settings were like that because I had a solar filter on; that's why it was crazy bright seeming. I forgot to mention that in the details. I forgot to put down the exif data for the foreground shot as well, sorry for the confusion! Second, last night I watched the first lesson of the Photographing the World: Japan tutorial, love Elias work! Truly an expert, and i look forward to learning more from him. However it disappoints me just slightly that in that very lesson he took 80+ shots then exposure blends some of them together to make a professional photo, but says, and I quote Lee here, "well then it can't win" when he finds out mine was a composite as well. I am neutral on the debate; I believe there is a place for both types of work in the photography world, there are people who prefer one or the other, and many people who just don't care. But it was a little interesting, but not unexpected that it'd be turned down on that criteria. I get it, it's a whole sky not just patches of bushes or a few clouds being edited, and its not just any sky; its a major part of the photograph. And you're right; a silhouette in photoshop is way, way simpler than anything he was demonstrating in the tutorial. I am not a pro level editor, and it was not the highest level editing, so even I would knock points off someone for that. And maybe it just simply isn't an image worthy of winning, I'm totally OK with that. It just goes to show how complex this debate is, over how much editing is ok in landscape photography, and I'm glad my work was an example of such a controversial topic. It's good to know people liked it regardless, and thank you again for putting on this whole thing, allowing us folks to even have these moments :) I look forward to entering more, telling my friends, and the next eclipse, so I can do it right this time. I wanted it in one shot so bad just to avoid this exact scenario, though! Gah!
The issue is that your image wasn’t just a pretty image. It’s pretending to be a natural phenomenon but it isn’t. It’s like taking a picture of someone jumping an inch off the ground on a skateboard and then photoshopping them to look like they are jumping off a cliff. The shot would be amazing if it were real. Photoshopping an eclipse on top of any background is one of the easiest possible things to composite and therefore it can’t have much value. Very interesting debate though.
@@FStoppersthat makes sense, and I can see it. It doesn't come close to these other shots, that's for sure! I wish I had the skill in photoshop that these guys had; their editing is incredible, and compositions much better. I felt the tree/hill looked too flat, the foreground too red, all of it just... isn't good enough. So no complaints here, it was just a bit funny to hear composite listed as the reason it didn't win. But no it totally makes sense, I'll work harder next time. Easy.
I had exactly the same thought Dana. I had to laugh at Elia, who's famous for compositing photos together to create an impossible final image, penalising you for compositing two images together to recreate something that actually happened in real life.
@@AndyMullane Yeah its a hard thing to get ones mind around, but in fstoppers comment above, what they said kinda hit home. As a weird "art-landscape-composite" photo, it doesn't exactly ring as fantastic as if it were a real capture. As a composite, it isn't exceptionally spectacular; there are so many things you can do once you open that door, and a simple sky replacement? doesn't scream "god tier art photographer", nor does it scream "amazing landscape photographer". it sorta falls in the middle, psychologically. I am still happy with the photo, I've sold a few prints of it, a band picked it up for their album cover, and its going to be displayed and sold in a local gallery in my town so as far as accolades go, I think the results speak for themselves on whether people like it haha. BUT, from a competition standpoint, specifically for landscape photography, I can understand why this didn't hit the mark as a composite. It doesn't mean its bad, and doesn't mean I suck, but from this specific viewpoint it can't really be the winner so I totally get it. Solution? next time I'm doing it in one shot and everyone can absolutely kiss my a** :D
Submission rule for upcoming critiques: Final image + RAW as proof of authenticity. Only photos "authentic" enough are allowed to make it into the competition
With regard to the high ISO/long exposure discussion at 13:30: I think you need the ISO, Fstop, exposure combo because when you're shooting into the sun during an eclipse to get the corona, you require a special filter. I briefly looked into the requirements for a similar shot during a recent solar eclipse, and just remember something about needing a special filter.
Love the contests, but I gotta say. You had 20 images to pick and you picked a composite and an AI image. Its kind of a bummer seeing two slots taken up.
This is standard. They've always been amount making the photos on post. Turns out AI can just skip right to post, so it's even better for this kind of fauxtography
Seems like an original photo with EXIF data, whether RAW or JPG, should accompany the finished piece for authenticity in these contests. And if it's a composite of some sort, the author should detail the project. Then the judges can rate on overall photo feel and post-processing technique. The guy on our right seems to know more about common mistakes we make in post. Like the gradated fog behind the first peaks in the winner's photo. Either a dodge/burn mishap or a gradient was possibly added. The treehouse tree should have taken the cake imo. Perfect example of ETTR quality. Great content guys.
Flat images? I'm trying to figure out how to say this politely. You just mentioned that your photography skills are either nonexistent or extremely limited. It's alright, keep learning, it's beneficial. Consider refraining from posting silly comments to avoid appearing foolish. Happy shooting@@kevinharding9361
And you seem to have no idea of what a RAW file is. Until you do I'd keep those smarmy, ignorant, comments to yourself and I promise not to mention my 30 years as a professional photographer. @@reneweisz9157
@@reneweisz9157Post processing can be a creative part as well as photography. Why would you necessarily consider a skilled person in post processing bad in photography ? That does not make any sens..
I agree, the photo of the tree i thought would be better if the tree was shot vertically, i also think the tree would be a lot better if they were have some flowers blooming to give some dramatic effect and contrast to the whole rather monochromic picture.
29:19 living here in central Florida, I have photos of the sky that looks exactly like this on my phone. I send it to my friends all the time, it’s super nuts.
thank you, Gentlemen, for selecting the "Lone Survivor" (pink tree) 31:37 as part of your critique. I appreciate the comments and yes the hi-res prints look smooth.
These are some of your most entertaining videos so please keep doing them. But in the future definitely try to get a guest on that actually is experienced with the genre of photography that's being critiqued to actually make the critiques helpful and not just "ummm is this FAKE??" Also why the heck does Lee always criticize people for taking pictures of famous locations, and then constantly work with a photographer for photographing the world who's entire portfolio solely consists of photos from famous locations that have been shot millions of times?
Just curious about the winning entry - Church. There are highlights on the clouds with is the lowest part of the landscape, yet there are none, at least that I could see, on the mountains. Hmmmm? But, still love the image. Congrats to all.
Great, you had 20 images to choose and you selected an AI image, 1(or more) composites, 7 images of places that I instantly recognize and that have been photographed a million times and a milky way panorama over a lighthouse, which is also an extremely over-photographed idea (and yes it's entirely possible that the milky way was positioned perfectly, that's called planning). Also, the photo of the fog flowing through the trees is a fairly popular place and not an unusual phenomenon in that area. And about the question at 17:30, no you shouldn't discount the fact that it's an extremely popular spot, a huge part of landscape photography is finding a location and a good composition, if those things are served to you on a silver platter by thousands of other people that took the same shot, then it largely diminishes the value of the final product.
First you complain about about locations that have "been photographed a million times" and then follow it up with "shouldn't discount the fact that it's an extremely popular spot". Make up your mind.
@@LaughingLion4Ever Where is the incongruence? I don't think they should keep highlighting photos of the same popular spots, and if they do then they should judge them for what they are: a regurgitation of what many others have done previously.
The first shot is of Seceda (Italian Dolomites) at Ortisei. Gorgeous location and you can B&B in some of the huts at the top (10 mins walk to the edge). I walked down not up (I took the cable car). Internet : From the Col Raiser valley station, it's a 6 km hike to the Seceda ridgeline. It will take 3 hours at least to climb 984 meters up to Seceda.
I shoot raw. Contrast and color editing required. Lightroom is a must. If you composite....disqualify. If you clone, heal, or othewise alter....disqualify.
My thoughts exactly! Look at the Art created with astro photography by Nightscape Images - his art is amazing -- who says the only good image is a static single shot image! You guys are great, but viewing this left me somewhat disappointed!
I almost didn't enter either man. I saw some of these other works and thought I had no chance in hell of ever comparing to these amazing photographers. I was surprised, pleasantly. You might just be as well :) and it's free, can't beat free!
Not sure about midjourney but I've been playing with Stable Diffusion a lot and if you take an exported png file from anyone, you can throw it into Comfy and it will build the entire workflow including the prompts and allow you to produce the exact image on your local machine. -P
Oh and a by the by : come on guys, just do an image look up before the critique (it'd take literally 15 mins max.) and you'll know every location (Seceda, Mt Bromo, Indonesia, Lonely tree etc.) in advance and be able to skip the "where is this". And how can you guys go to the Jokulsarlon Glacier Lagoon and not shoot Diamond Beach !! Gobsmacked. Anyway I love these critiques and for me (yeah I know no-one cares :D ) they have to be wall hangers : 1. Icelandic Volcano 2. Slovenia 3. Manhattan
ok final comment. All the shots look nice enough , except the AI one. Many out of my reach geographically and post processing skills. So some of you may think my comments are invalid. OK. Whatever. The AI shot really was trash though and a blind person could have pointed it out. AI and outrageous composites have not place in real photography. Just my 2 cents.
The tree looks like it's pregnant. That might be the smallness of my phone screen. Also I'm prejudiced against 100% center balanced shots. Vertical orientation would probably help
Regarding the photo composite: How you judge it depends on your frame of reference. From an F/64 group perspective, realism is important, and photo composites are horrible. On the other hand, from a pictorialist perspective, ideas and storytelling are important, the idea is great, and the photo compositing is no problem. Some pictorialists might think the storytelling is a bit lacking. So, make the frame of reference explicit when discussing pictures, otherwise, people with different frames of reference will never understand each other.
I don't think compositing is wrong. He could've also taking a multiple layer photo in-camera i.e. dual exposure and blended the two images. Also one of the most expensive images ever sold is completely manipulated. Shot by Andreas Gursky. "Rhein II" that sold for $4.3m Never ever tell anyone photo manipulation is bad, is wrong, etc. No. It's all part of the art form. The superior art form is what actually in the mind. That's the real camera.
Were they??? I was over in Christmas valley the night before, camped at the dunes haha. I should've been there earlier! I learned that from the critique; it failed not just because it was a composite, but because of all the things you can do with a composite I did the least interesting thing, because it originally wasn't supposed to be a composite. Didn't have time to correct or think up something more wild. I'd originally planned this Aztec style sacrificial thing instead of a tree on the ridge, I thought that'd be the sickest eclipse shot. Something primal and a little dark. Alas, I backed out of getting a model and props and makeup and wardrobe and just went for a tree... ended up being a $1000 mistake 😅
I think a distinction should be made between photography and AI image’s because well, if a camera wasn’t used in the process it’s really only an image and not a photograph. I use lots of post processing tools including AI but if you are just putting prompts into software I’m sorry but you are not a photographer, your an artist.
You got it :) had a solar filter on, didn't put the data for the tree shot (figured it was less important, since it wasn't anything special in and of itself)
20:10 - Seriously, if you're even considering accepting AI, then you're entire argument for downrating composite photos has no foundation. Maybe consider setting very specific criteria for each competition. Examples: Straight from the camera, no edits except for cropping. Color/light adjustments, composite photos (all types). AI generated images/mixed composites (AI & photos).
I hate the styles of photos on this contest cuz it seems to be too much processed. I don’t call them fake but certainly missing some goodness of photography. They are almost just CG art.
Yeah, it's sad! Apparently, that's what they do themselves. Elia Locardi puts in hours of Photoshop work on a single of his images. Would've loved to submit some of my favorite authentic shots but no point when being judged against photoshop artists
@morcjul I've thought a lot about this since the contest, and it makes sense from a certain standpoint. I thought to myself, "do you think ExxonMobil cares if the photographer used photoshop? Do Hollywood movie covers go pure raw files?" The answer is 100% no. Any commercial photography, fine art photography, art photography, most portrait photography, is going to ask for some level of editing, from basic color correction from the flat low contrast raw, to entire reconstruction of hundreds of images into one composite. So given that any photographer making bank is going to edit their photos, composite them, etc, it just doesn't make sense to get upset about stitched together images. The only people who are purists I've decided are photographers who enjoy photography. Not clients, not customers, not consumers, just other photographers. So we have a choice on what to grade on; what other photographers like, or what is the most appealing work available using modern camera technology. I dont blame them for leaning towards the side of industry standard here, and I dont think it's fair for anyone to blame them for it either.
This was by far the worst competition ever. At least for me. I have several top ten results in these contests and several of my images has been picked for critique of the fstoppers. But now my World class rated portfolio images was reduced to "needs work" images. Never happened before. It took away all of my joy. I absolutely didn`t expect to get a top ten place this time, but I sure didn`t expect to be totally destroyed either. Guess the prices brings out the worst in the community..
Surprised you didn't mention that the lighthouse pic and the single tree in lake are pretty famous pics already. Why would you want to change the reality of a notable landmark? ( you didn't like the smaller structure next to the lighthouse) .. yeah well, why not take the marks off the Liberty Bell. Too much encouragement to alter the reality in my opinion. Back to the conversation about when to call it photographic art and when to identify image as AI.
Yes you are wrong with your assessment of the Fairy lake tree. It is not fake. I have seen many pictures of this tree. Some better than this one, but it is a real.
Lol sorry for fooling you with the AI image, but I had to keep it honest. Gonna have to strive for the tutorial in the next contest I guess! Here’s some details on how it was generated though. I tried a couple different free AI image generators, but most were just really bad, unrealistic results. I ended up using Fotor AI as the image generator as it seemed to do the best job out of the free apps at realism. I did have a goal in mind for the final image and probably spent about 2 hours tweaking the description that I used to get exactly what I was looking for. I wish I saved the exact wording I used, but it was something along the lines of “photorealistic landscape with spectacular sunset on a lake surrounded by mountains. Small broken down boat on the water with abandoned buildings in the distance.” I tweeked it a bunch and generated several hundred images before I found this one, which I really liked. I cloned out some weird things that it put around the boat and one of the mountain peaks, then crafted a random story and submitted!
Heres the tree in the sun issue.... When anyone presents an image like that it screams " Look what I did ! " Problem is.. you didn't do it !! It looks great , but...........
I understand. Yeah it split the difference between being full on artistic expression (the heavy red hues), and a realistic portrayal of the location in a way that definitely makes it seem like exactly what you said. The reason it ended up that way was purely the circumstances; I'd planned for this shot, got there after months of planning, only to find out it was impossible with my equipment. I am adamant and stand by the fact this can be done in one shot. So... in a few years, I'll rent the gear and go get this shot. But I had two choices that morning; either stick with the plan, or make up a new one with the eclipse already underway. I chose to be safe and at least get A shot, one good shot like I wanted (or the elements to create it) rather than screw around and end up with nothing, except a 23 year wait to the next eclipse in my corner of the world. I went safe, and while it didn't win this competition, this eclipse photo is now an album cover for a band out of Texas, is soon to be in a local gallery, and is hanging on several people's walls as sold prints so I can't be too mad. While photographers seem to care a lot about composites, customers sure don't seem to :) and in the end, what pays is what is optimal. We all gotta eat. Plus, it's not a horrible picture, even if it is a composite. My nieces dad called me while I was typing this to ask me what a composite is and why everyone is so angry about it, if that tells you anything about the average art viewer 😂
@@Lemonpopz Hey cool to conect with you. First I do believe that image is indeed possible. Planning, waiting and circumstances in combination make for high stakes. The sun image by its self is great. I am a purist as far as what an image represents. I am wondering though , of those who bought your image how many know it's a composite. Do you disclose that up front or only if someone asks?? How many folks will buy that album believing that is an out of camera image?? My guess is nearly everyone who sees it for the first time 5 years from now will take for granted its legit. I hope this does not sound harsh but I would have a hard time hanging it on my wall printed on a 20 dollar poster from Wal-Mart if I knew it was a composite. Real things impress me the most. I hope circumstances allow you to get this image for real someday and I hope I get to see it. Peace...
@bock1965 I do disclose it up front to everyone, and explain what it means :) I told the gallery, every Facebook group I posted it in, even here I said it right at the top (you can see on fstoppers contest page, look for highest rated images from this one) its a composite. I think one of the struggle points is it looks just real enough that people think I'm trying to play it off as natural; in reality I owned up to it fully. It sucked. I was heartbroken I couldn't do it in one, because I knew this type of blowback would come. I knew if I couldn't do it in one shot people would be upset. I got hate mail in Facebook for it, people bombarding me, calling me a fake, telling me to take it down. Hundreds of comments of people outraged I even call myself a photographer. Saying I should quit. A LOT of hate, seriously hundreds of people in just 2-3 weeks, kicking me over this. And really, I'm kicking myself hardest. I wanted it in one, so bad, so this wouldn't happen. So when I couldn't, I absolutely was up front about my failures, even to people who purchased prints. I get the purist mindset, but I also factor in the first photographic composite was less than a year after photography was invented. And I remember that it took 100 years for people to even call photography art. Nowadays we take it for granted that photography is art, but many refuse to believe in editing. Ansel Adam's heavily edited his photos. He was also a fan of compositing. Things like this made me realize that while there is a place for purist photography, there is equally a place for art photography. What we've failed to define thus far in history is where to separate them, so when someone watches a critique like this they know what type of photography to expect, or to submit. I would never submit this and try to pass it as a single shot, but given the winners photo was a 4 shot composite with a possible fake sky, I also question even the purists dedication to pure photography. Is it the illusion of pure, SOOC shots that they like, or the actual? Because also.. astrophotography. There is zero way to do it without editing and have anyone find it appealing. So if milky way skies are OK, and night sky is filled with stars, it's ok to replace or remove or add stars. But not our star? It's such a fuzzy line. Not to self promote but I'll probably upload a video if I ever get that single shot eclipse shot, just look out for me :) I want to go to the middle east in a few years and catch the next one
How about a contest where the rules are No composites. Of any kind. All images can only be adjusted in the following ways. Sharpness. Lighting , Color , Contrast. And the only content change can be by way of content removal , because adding content would be compositing. Also not rearranging content within the frame. In essence a REAL PHOTOGRAHY contest. Not an art assembly contest.
You're assuming people wouldn't just lie about it not being a composite? And sure, you could request a raw file from EVERY single entry, but that would take forever to double check everyone's homework. That sounds like a ton of work to be giving away prizes to people.
@@waynedennyphoto I agree those are difficulties and pitfalls of my idealistic fantasy contest. Vetting the images could be a near impossible task. At some point though we are going to have to abandon the idea of a photo contest and just call them image creation contests. If you you use a camera as part of the process , ok. If you don't , ok. Someday if not already a person will just go out and snap shots of a fence , a field , several cows , a barn , some bales of hay , some hills and clouds and then plug those into an AI to composite those into a super nice image. After which they will post that image and say look what I did. That's no longer photography. .... I will say it to my self , OK Boomer....
That doesn't interest me at all. We don't live in 1990s. That's like asking someone to produce music that was only performed with live instruments or film movies without scripts, edits, or special effects. While it can be done, and some people might appreciate it, why force everyone to go back in time and be confined to an old process? -P
@@FStoppers I get it , you guys are about being relevant in the current atmosphere of the photographic world. You are nurturing a climate of professional image creation. Unfortunately the lines between photography and digital image creation are being blurred so much the two are virtually indistinguishable. Maybe I am old and out of touch. Maybe my dslr already disqualifies me from going on about real photography. After all I do use affinity photo and it's in painting brush to remove unwanted elements. Maybe I am as dishonest as the rabid compositers and the hyper processors. I know there are others out there quietly nodding in agreement with me. Peace brothers... lol.... I do enjoy your critiques. The images in this one by and large were excellent. Maybe I will enter a portrait in the next one and then complain how unfair it is for those guys to have pretty models and I am stuck whom ever I can corner on the street... hahaha
@@FStoppers And by the way there are big followings for people producing music with only live instruments. Why do you think people flock to live performances?? There are a great many folks would love it if there favorite artists put out some albums recorded live.
Join the next contest: www.fstoppers.com/contests
I know historicly it hasnt been the most viewed format you guys have. BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH for bringing it back. One of my favorite thing is while editing some work photos to put critique the community on the 2nd monitor. Now with huge prices as well. It may not be great for viewers ship on youtube. But hopefully it brings enough traffic to the website and stuff, because is not only good for watching, but i feel like its also pretty great for the community. Thank you again, take care. Keep it up!
So glad that Critique the community is back. Keep them coming guys. 😀
Started watching you years ago. Then I became pro photographer and I shoot weddings for a living. I even listened to most of your pandemic diares which (now you know) nobody including your children will want to watch again because of the length. Now watching your good old photography contest and reviews feels like meeting with old friend and having a beer together. I love that, thank you!
I loved this video... it helps me understand what a trained eye can pick out. the one photo that i really appreciate is the one from Dana (sun and tree). I appreciate that they had the vision in their mind and were able to accomplish it regardless of the pathway they needed to take. thanks for these videos.
So pumped to see this format back.Enjoy the 20 count.
IRT the annular eclipse photo and tree, the higher ISO is used due to the use of a solar filter. You have a lot of cut whenever you use the solar filter in front of your lens.
Hi guys, thank you very much for the feature!
I'm the person behind the "Long exposure lighthouse" photo. I completely agree with your thoughts about the unsightly building next to the lighthouse, which unfortunately detracts from the overall beauty of the scene. I did consider cloning it out, but then I thought it would be too far from reality, especially since I also removed the horizon line.
beautiful work Leo!
@@brianbeattyphotography Thanks a lot Brian !🙂
Your image gave me chills. You did beautifully!
Love that the critiquing is back guys, always enjoyed these in the past, always learn a lot and always entertaining.
Same here, surprising how much I've learned from these critiques.
It's either photography contest, or AI/software skills contest. Nowadays RAW files must be obligatory.
The contest should not be about guessing if a contestant cheated.
Can someone have a single RAW file and also still push the file too far in software? We've never dismissed how someone created an image; it's always been about if the image is interesting and worth viewing. 100% true photography with no post processing doesn't necessarily interest me unless it's documenting something in a super interesting way. -P
@@FStoppers RAW files are not for reviewing, it's to check if the image is actually real 🤦♂
Otherwise you should specify that the contest is not really about photography, but arts and crafts.
Agree mate! RAW as proof of authenticity should be bare minimum @@smashexentertainment676
@@FStoppers at the same time you need to find a way to exclude ai images or you'll trip over your own craft. Why view photographing to world if i can just make an ai image just as good (as a photographer I know the difference, but my fear is the younger generation don't)
@@smashexentertainment676Just you wait for fake raw files. It is just doing another calculation. Take a bunch of paired raw and final edits and you create a raw making machine.
Hi @fstoppers, my image was featured (nyc skyline). Thank you so much for being featured and I hope to continue improving so I can enter future contests. Also, I don’t know how to reach out for the free tutorial so any guidance would be helpful.
All the best,
Fernando Garcia
Missed this series guys! Please keep them coming.
Oh man, I am a fan of the show guys! However, the description at 25:37 killed me! As a native New Mexican, with an appreciation for Geology, I found this image amazing! Understanding the incredible winds and how it pushed those mountains of sand exposing the weathered and hardened layer below. Not to mention the classic New Mexican Painted Sky! Beautiful! Nice work Liang Li. Must be a southwestern thing. Side note, New Mexican Green Chili is the ONLY Green Chili.
I know what it is. The image has a story in it.
Having been to where this was done many times I can say this is a great image and required good planning or extraordinary luck to get. Something he does not understand is just how white this sand is. I have been to white sand beaches and they do not hold a candle to just how white and bright the sand at White Sands is. 25:29
Love it! Thanks for sharing @@atrix19851185
I like the tree and treehouse best. It's calming to look at, and the proliferation of branches keep it interesting.
I've sailed into bays in British Columbia where the (ocean) water was often so flat and clear that it WAS like floating on a glass mirror. That Douglas Fir might just be authentic, especially in still foggy weather.
20 was the perfect length for me. Congratulations to the well deserved winner.
25:29 Trust me, if you go to White Sands National Park, you will change your mind!! It is out of this world, especially at sunset!!!
Thank you for bringing this back!!!
Hi, Dana here with the eclipse shot. Thank you guys for selecting my work! I really appreciate the feedback.
I wanted to note two things; the camera settings were like that because I had a solar filter on; that's why it was crazy bright seeming. I forgot to mention that in the details. I forgot to put down the exif data for the foreground shot as well, sorry for the confusion!
Second, last night I watched the first lesson of the Photographing the World: Japan tutorial, love Elias work! Truly an expert, and i look forward to learning more from him. However it disappoints me just slightly that in that very lesson he took 80+ shots then exposure blends some of them together to make a professional photo, but says, and I quote Lee here, "well then it can't win" when he finds out mine was a composite as well.
I am neutral on the debate; I believe there is a place for both types of work in the photography world, there are people who prefer one or the other, and many people who just don't care. But it was a little interesting, but not unexpected that it'd be turned down on that criteria.
I get it, it's a whole sky not just patches of bushes or a few clouds being edited, and its not just any sky; its a major part of the photograph. And you're right; a silhouette in photoshop is way, way simpler than anything he was demonstrating in the tutorial. I am not a pro level editor, and it was not the highest level editing, so even I would knock points off someone for that.
And maybe it just simply isn't an image worthy of winning, I'm totally OK with that.
It just goes to show how complex this debate is, over how much editing is ok in landscape photography, and I'm glad my work was an example of such a controversial topic. It's good to know people liked it regardless, and thank you again for putting on this whole thing, allowing us folks to even have these moments :)
I look forward to entering more, telling my friends, and the next eclipse, so I can do it right this time. I wanted it in one shot so bad just to avoid this exact scenario, though! Gah!
man, an absolute madlad photo, a win for me for sure!
The issue is that your image wasn’t just a pretty image. It’s pretending to be a natural phenomenon but it isn’t.
It’s like taking a picture of someone jumping an inch off the ground on a skateboard and then photoshopping them to look like they are jumping off a cliff. The shot would be amazing if it were real.
Photoshopping an eclipse on top of any background is one of the easiest possible things to composite and therefore it can’t have much value.
Very interesting debate though.
@@FStoppersthat makes sense, and I can see it. It doesn't come close to these other shots, that's for sure! I wish I had the skill in photoshop that these guys had; their editing is incredible, and compositions much better. I felt the tree/hill looked too flat, the foreground too red, all of it just... isn't good enough. So no complaints here, it was just a bit funny to hear composite listed as the reason it didn't win. But no it totally makes sense, I'll work harder next time. Easy.
I had exactly the same thought Dana. I had to laugh at Elia, who's famous for compositing photos together to create an impossible final image, penalising you for compositing two images together to recreate something that actually happened in real life.
@@AndyMullane Yeah its a hard thing to get ones mind around, but in fstoppers comment above, what they said kinda hit home. As a weird "art-landscape-composite" photo, it doesn't exactly ring as fantastic as if it were a real capture. As a composite, it isn't exceptionally spectacular; there are so many things you can do once you open that door, and a simple sky replacement? doesn't scream "god tier art photographer", nor does it scream "amazing landscape photographer". it sorta falls in the middle, psychologically.
I am still happy with the photo, I've sold a few prints of it, a band picked it up for their album cover, and its going to be displayed and sold in a local gallery in my town so as far as accolades go, I think the results speak for themselves on whether people like it haha. BUT, from a competition standpoint, specifically for landscape photography, I can understand why this didn't hit the mark as a composite. It doesn't mean its bad, and doesn't mean I suck, but from this specific viewpoint it can't really be the winner so I totally get it.
Solution? next time I'm doing it in one shot and everyone can absolutely kiss my a** :D
Submission rule for upcoming critiques: Final image + RAW as proof of authenticity. Only photos "authentic" enough are allowed to make it into the competition
With regard to the high ISO/long exposure discussion at 13:30: I think you need the ISO, Fstop, exposure combo because when you're shooting into the sun during an eclipse to get the corona, you require a special filter. I briefly looked into the requirements for a similar shot during a recent solar eclipse, and just remember something about needing a special filter.
Love the contests, but I gotta say. You had 20 images to pick and you picked a composite and an AI image. Its kind of a bummer seeing two slots taken up.
100% agree
This is standard. They've always been amount making the photos on post. Turns out AI can just skip right to post, so it's even better for this kind of fauxtography
love this videos! they teach me so much and always gave me inspiration
Seems like an original photo with EXIF data, whether RAW or JPG, should accompany the finished piece for authenticity in these contests. And if it's a composite of some sort, the author should detail the project. Then the judges can rate on overall photo feel and post-processing technique.
The guy on our right seems to know more about common mistakes we make in post. Like the gradated fog behind the first peaks in the winner's photo. Either a dodge/burn mishap or a gradient was possibly added. The treehouse tree should have taken the cake imo. Perfect example of ETTR quality. Great content guys.
Awesome video, the only thing I would of alter is the orange hue in her skin tone
Thanks guys! Love this series!
I wish I knew this contest was coming. I always really those critiques.
You guys should do an In-Camera only phtoto contest. No processing, flat raw profile only.
I think we have before and I’m sure we will again.
Yes a bunch of totally flat images would be amazing ... not.
Flat images? I'm trying to figure out how to say this politely. You just mentioned that your photography skills are either nonexistent or extremely limited. It's alright, keep learning, it's beneficial. Consider refraining from posting silly comments to avoid appearing foolish. Happy shooting@@kevinharding9361
And you seem to have no idea of what a RAW file is. Until you do I'd keep those smarmy, ignorant, comments to yourself and I promise not to mention my 30 years as a professional photographer. @@reneweisz9157
@@reneweisz9157Post processing can be a creative part as well as photography. Why would you necessarily consider a skilled person in post processing bad in photography ? That does not make any sens..
I missed this format!
Please, insert also some crappy pictures for the show.
Also Street photography (candid) would be cool for the near future.
My submission got a 2.8 so close enough to 3 stars im happy with it
B&W tree house pic reminds me of infrared film
I agree, the photo of the tree i thought would be better if the tree was shot vertically, i also think the tree would be a lot better if they were have some flowers blooming to give some dramatic effect and contrast to the whole rather monochromic picture.
I am glad that you started doing these contests again.
29:19 living here in central Florida, I have photos of the sky that looks exactly like this on my phone. I send it to my friends all the time, it’s super nuts.
thank you, Gentlemen, for selecting the "Lone Survivor" (pink tree) 31:37 as part of your critique. I appreciate the comments and yes the hi-res prints look smooth.
These are some of your most entertaining videos so please keep doing them. But in the future definitely try to get a guest on that actually is experienced with the genre of photography that's being critiqued to actually make the critiques helpful and not just "ummm is this FAKE??" Also why the heck does Lee always criticize people for taking pictures of famous locations, and then constantly work with a photographer for photographing the world who's entire portfolio solely consists of photos from famous locations that have been shot millions of times?
I had to composite the eclipse too. How else are you supposed to do it? No other way to get that dynamic range
Just curious about the winning entry - Church. There are highlights on the clouds with is the lowest part of the landscape, yet there are none, at least that I could see, on the mountains. Hmmmm? But, still love the image. Congrats to all.
36:49 exactly what elia used for his mt bromo shot, this one looks better than the one he took of the same spot...
Great, you had 20 images to choose and you selected an AI image, 1(or more) composites, 7 images of places that I instantly recognize and that have been photographed a million times and a milky way panorama over a lighthouse, which is also an extremely over-photographed idea (and yes it's entirely possible that the milky way was positioned perfectly, that's called planning). Also, the photo of the fog flowing through the trees is a fairly popular place and not an unusual phenomenon in that area.
And about the question at 17:30, no you shouldn't discount the fact that it's an extremely popular spot, a huge part of landscape photography is finding a location and a good composition, if those things are served to you on a silver platter by thousands of other people that took the same shot, then it largely diminishes the value of the final product.
Best comment
First you complain about about locations that have "been photographed a million times" and then follow it up with "shouldn't discount the fact that it's an extremely popular spot". Make up your mind.
@@LaughingLion4Ever Where is the incongruence? I don't think they should keep highlighting photos of the same popular spots, and if they do then they should judge them for what they are: a regurgitation of what many others have done previously.
Im interested what photos in particular do you think involve Ai?
@@noahcrossley7352 the one at 40:53, where the owner of the image clearly states so
The disqualified fog waves looks an awful lot like some of Michael Shainblum's shots around the bay area.
Well Brittany is well known for bad weather and gray sky nearly 6 months of the year, so, the lighthouse is just right like it should ;)
Iv seen sky’s in Indiana that blue behind dark clouds
The first shot is of Seceda (Italian Dolomites) at Ortisei. Gorgeous location and you can B&B in some of the huts at the top (10 mins walk to the edge). I walked down not up (I took the cable car). Internet : From the Col Raiser valley station, it's a 6 km hike to the Seceda ridgeline. It will take 3 hours at least to climb 984 meters up to Seceda.
I am impressed how still the scene must have been in the winning photo, to be able to stitch a panorama. No photoshop magic there.
I shoot raw. Contrast and color editing required. Lightroom is a must.
If you composite....disqualify.
If you clone, heal, or othewise alter....disqualify.
I had a laugh at how little you guys know about Astro photography lol
My thoughts exactly! Look at the Art created with astro photography by Nightscape Images - his art is amazing -- who says the only good image is a static single shot image! You guys are great, but viewing this left me somewhat disappointed!
Florida does this all the time
Do you guys worry at all that photos submitted will be AI enhanced??? also, when will the real estate contest be?!?!
AI will definitely become more and more of a problem. Real Estate is coming.
Wow, first photo came out swinging. Hard to follow haha
I agree with Patrick. The sand is too messed up.
Great to see these critiques back.
I wanted to participate but got intimidated seeing the submissions of all the other participants.
Submit anyway and join the fun.
@@FStoppers Will def give it a go when I deem my entry worthy enough.
I almost didn't enter either man. I saw some of these other works and thought I had no chance in hell of ever comparing to these amazing photographers. I was surprised, pleasantly. You might just be as well :) and it's free, can't beat free!
Same. Did not want to get laughed at.
time to get some 1s my man, nothing wrong with that
There is a way to review the metadata of an image generated with midjourney or AI?
Not sure about midjourney but I've been playing with Stable Diffusion a lot and if you take an exported png file from anyone, you can throw it into Comfy and it will build the entire workflow including the prompts and allow you to produce the exact image on your local machine. -P
Critique the community and photog vs photog (pye, Trevor, and others) should be a once a fortnight thing.
Oh and a by the by : come on guys, just do an image look up before the critique (it'd take literally 15 mins max.) and you'll know every location (Seceda, Mt Bromo, Indonesia, Lonely tree etc.) in advance and be able to skip the "where is this". And how can you guys go to the Jokulsarlon Glacier Lagoon and not shoot Diamond Beach !! Gobsmacked.
Anyway I love these critiques and for me (yeah I know no-one cares :D ) they have to be wall hangers : 1. Icelandic Volcano 2. Slovenia 3. Manhattan
ok final comment. All the shots look nice enough , except the AI one. Many out of my reach geographically and post processing skills. So some of you may think my comments are invalid. OK. Whatever. The AI shot really was trash though and a blind person could have pointed it out. AI and outrageous composites have not place in real photography. Just my 2 cents.
Called the AI picture before you mention it. For me, the smothness of the entire picture gave it away. Real world is never that perfect.
The tree looks like it's pregnant. That might be the smallness of my phone screen. Also I'm prejudiced against 100% center balanced shots. Vertical orientation would probably help
Regarding the photo composite:
How you judge it depends on your frame of reference. From an F/64 group perspective, realism is important, and photo composites are horrible. On the other hand, from a pictorialist perspective, ideas and storytelling are important, the idea is great, and the photo compositing is no problem. Some pictorialists might think the storytelling is a bit lacking.
So, make the frame of reference explicit when discussing pictures, otherwise, people with different frames of reference will never understand each other.
**NO NUT NOVEMBER IS UPON US!**
yes yes yes yes Cull the AI !!!!!
I don't think compositing is wrong. He could've also taking a multiple layer photo in-camera i.e. dual exposure and blended the two images.
Also one of the most expensive images ever sold is completely manipulated. Shot by Andreas Gursky. "Rhein II" that sold for $4.3m
Never ever tell anyone photo manipulation is bad, is wrong, etc. No. It's all part of the art form.
The superior art form is what actually in the mind. That's the real camera.
Nice change with only selecting the good images. Gives more credibility to Fstoppers and it’s community
Went that far to post a Composite, should of put a Big Horn Sheep in there too, they were across the Road the night before haha
Were they??? I was over in Christmas valley the night before, camped at the dunes haha. I should've been there earlier! I learned that from the critique; it failed not just because it was a composite, but because of all the things you can do with a composite I did the least interesting thing, because it originally wasn't supposed to be a composite. Didn't have time to correct or think up something more wild.
I'd originally planned this Aztec style sacrificial thing instead of a tree on the ridge, I thought that'd be the sickest eclipse shot. Something primal and a little dark. Alas, I backed out of getting a model and props and makeup and wardrobe and just went for a tree... ended up being a $1000 mistake 😅
Wow
Welp... I joined and as expected I did terribly. I tried. I really did. LOL
Did we pick your image?
@@FStoppers oh no. I did terribly in the community ratings. My submissions probably barely even caught your attention.
The image at 13:10 is cool, for sure. But the fact that it wasn't real makes me feel like it's more digital art than photography. Glad it didn't win
@13:31 apples and oranges, this along with sky replacement = bad photography and can only be considered compositing
Ok
I cant believe u guys rate the 1.st photo with 4. It's 5+ ...
I think a distinction should be made between photography and AI image’s because well, if a camera wasn’t used in the process it’s really only an image and not a photograph. I use lots of post processing tools including AI but if you are just putting prompts into software I’m sorry but you are not a photographer, your an artist.
No! You are not an artist. If you order an image through a.i. you are the client! The artist is the software and the creators of it.
@@juniore159 good point
I’ll bet the shot into the sun/tree, used a ND filter. Maybe that’s why the iso is up.
You got it :) had a solar filter on, didn't put the data for the tree shot (figured it was less important, since it wasn't anything special in and of itself)
make them send you raw files next time, so you know what was photoshopped
20:10 - Seriously, if you're even considering accepting AI, then you're entire argument for downrating composite photos has no foundation. Maybe consider setting very specific criteria for each competition. Examples: Straight from the camera, no edits except for cropping. Color/light adjustments, composite photos (all types). AI generated images/mixed composites (AI & photos).
I hate the styles of photos on this contest cuz it seems to be too much processed. I don’t call them fake but certainly missing some goodness of photography. They are almost just CG art.
Yeah, it's sad! Apparently, that's what they do themselves. Elia Locardi puts in hours of Photoshop work on a single of his images. Would've loved to submit some of my favorite authentic shots but no point when being judged against photoshop artists
@morcjul I've thought a lot about this since the contest, and it makes sense from a certain standpoint. I thought to myself, "do you think ExxonMobil cares if the photographer used photoshop? Do Hollywood movie covers go pure raw files?" The answer is 100% no. Any commercial photography, fine art photography, art photography, most portrait photography, is going to ask for some level of editing, from basic color correction from the flat low contrast raw, to entire reconstruction of hundreds of images into one composite.
So given that any photographer making bank is going to edit their photos, composite them, etc, it just doesn't make sense to get upset about stitched together images. The only people who are purists I've decided are photographers who enjoy photography. Not clients, not customers, not consumers, just other photographers. So we have a choice on what to grade on; what other photographers like, or what is the most appealing work available using modern camera technology. I dont blame them for leaning towards the side of industry standard here, and I dont think it's fair for anyone to blame them for it either.
I knew straight away that AI image was not real. They’re almost ALWAYS just slightly soft looking
Photographers talk too much about how the picture was taken, story etc. Just take the photo and let me enjoy it, especially if it its a landscape.
The cave shot looks meh....
HA I said it was AI !!
Worst one to be the winner
This was by far the worst competition ever. At least for me. I have several top ten results in these contests and several of my images has been picked for critique of the fstoppers. But now my World class rated portfolio images was reduced to "needs work" images. Never happened before. It took away all of my joy. I absolutely didn`t expect to get a top ten place this time, but I sure didn`t expect to be totally destroyed either. Guess the prices brings out the worst in the community..
Surprised you didn't mention that the lighthouse pic and the single tree in lake are pretty famous pics already. Why would you want to change the reality of a notable landmark? ( you didn't like the smaller structure next to the lighthouse) ..
yeah well, why not take the marks off the Liberty Bell. Too much encouragement to alter the reality in my opinion. Back to the conversation about when to call it photographic art and when to identify image as AI.
40:25 seems AI generated
Yes you are wrong with your assessment of the Fairy lake tree. It is not fake. I have seen many pictures of this tree. Some better than this one, but it is a real.
Don't like Apple...
Lol sorry for fooling you with the AI image, but I had to keep it honest. Gonna have to strive for the tutorial in the next contest I guess!
Here’s some details on how it was generated though. I tried a couple different free AI image generators, but most were just really bad, unrealistic results. I ended up using Fotor AI as the image generator as it seemed to do the best job out of the free apps at realism. I did have a goal in mind for the final image and probably spent about 2 hours tweaking the description that I used to get exactly what I was looking for. I wish I saved the exact wording I used, but it was something along the lines of “photorealistic landscape with spectacular sunset on a lake surrounded by mountains. Small broken down boat on the water with abandoned buildings in the distance.” I tweeked it a bunch and generated several hundred images before I found this one, which I really liked. I cloned out some weird things that it put around the boat and one of the mountain peaks, then crafted a random story and submitted!
So basically lying about your submission to keep the fact its an ai image a secret.
Not cool
Heres the tree in the sun issue.... When anyone presents an image like that it screams " Look what I did ! " Problem is.. you didn't do it !! It looks great , but...........
I understand. Yeah it split the difference between being full on artistic expression (the heavy red hues), and a realistic portrayal of the location in a way that definitely makes it seem like exactly what you said.
The reason it ended up that way was purely the circumstances; I'd planned for this shot, got there after months of planning, only to find out it was impossible with my equipment. I am adamant and stand by the fact this can be done in one shot. So... in a few years, I'll rent the gear and go get this shot. But I had two choices that morning; either stick with the plan, or make up a new one with the eclipse already underway. I chose to be safe and at least get A shot, one good shot like I wanted (or the elements to create it) rather than screw around and end up with nothing, except a 23 year wait to the next eclipse in my corner of the world. I went safe, and while it didn't win this competition, this eclipse photo is now an album cover for a band out of Texas, is soon to be in a local gallery, and is hanging on several people's walls as sold prints so I can't be too mad. While photographers seem to care a lot about composites, customers sure don't seem to :) and in the end, what pays is what is optimal. We all gotta eat. Plus, it's not a horrible picture, even if it is a composite.
My nieces dad called me while I was typing this to ask me what a composite is and why everyone is so angry about it, if that tells you anything about the average art viewer 😂
@@Lemonpopz Hey cool to conect with you. First I do believe that image is indeed possible. Planning, waiting and circumstances in combination make for high stakes. The sun image by its self is great. I am a purist as far as what an image represents. I am wondering though , of those who bought your image how many know it's a composite. Do you disclose that up front or only if someone asks?? How many folks will buy that album believing that is an out of camera image?? My guess is nearly everyone who sees it for the first time 5 years from now will take for granted its legit. I hope this does not sound harsh but I would have a hard time hanging it on my wall printed on a 20 dollar poster from Wal-Mart if I knew it was a composite. Real things impress me the most. I hope circumstances allow you to get this image for real someday and I hope I get to see it. Peace...
@bock1965 I do disclose it up front to everyone, and explain what it means :) I told the gallery, every Facebook group I posted it in, even here I said it right at the top (you can see on fstoppers contest page, look for highest rated images from this one) its a composite. I think one of the struggle points is it looks just real enough that people think I'm trying to play it off as natural; in reality I owned up to it fully. It sucked. I was heartbroken I couldn't do it in one, because I knew this type of blowback would come. I knew if I couldn't do it in one shot people would be upset. I got hate mail in Facebook for it, people bombarding me, calling me a fake, telling me to take it down. Hundreds of comments of people outraged I even call myself a photographer. Saying I should quit. A LOT of hate, seriously hundreds of people in just 2-3 weeks, kicking me over this. And really, I'm kicking myself hardest. I wanted it in one, so bad, so this wouldn't happen. So when I couldn't, I absolutely was up front about my failures, even to people who purchased prints. I get the purist mindset, but I also factor in the first photographic composite was less than a year after photography was invented. And I remember that it took 100 years for people to even call photography art. Nowadays we take it for granted that photography is art, but many refuse to believe in editing. Ansel Adam's heavily edited his photos. He was also a fan of compositing. Things like this made me realize that while there is a place for purist photography, there is equally a place for art photography. What we've failed to define thus far in history is where to separate them, so when someone watches a critique like this they know what type of photography to expect, or to submit. I would never submit this and try to pass it as a single shot, but given the winners photo was a 4 shot composite with a possible fake sky, I also question even the purists dedication to pure photography. Is it the illusion of pure, SOOC shots that they like, or the actual? Because also.. astrophotography. There is zero way to do it without editing and have anyone find it appealing. So if milky way skies are OK, and night sky is filled with stars, it's ok to replace or remove or add stars. But not our star? It's such a fuzzy line. Not to self promote but I'll probably upload a video if I ever get that single shot eclipse shot, just look out for me :) I want to go to the middle east in a few years and catch the next one
10:14 foot tripper has a better by a mile than this. 2* 29:45 fake sky😂can’t freeze water and soft sky at the same time😂
How about a contest where the rules are No composites. Of any kind. All images can only be adjusted in the following ways. Sharpness. Lighting , Color , Contrast. And the only content change can be by way of content removal , because adding content would be compositing. Also not rearranging content within the frame. In essence a REAL PHOTOGRAHY contest. Not an art assembly contest.
You're assuming people wouldn't just lie about it not being a composite? And sure, you could request a raw file from EVERY single entry, but that would take forever to double check everyone's homework. That sounds like a ton of work to be giving away prizes to people.
@@waynedennyphoto I agree those are difficulties and pitfalls of my idealistic fantasy contest. Vetting the images could be a near impossible task. At some point though we are going to have to abandon the idea of a photo contest and just call them image creation contests. If you you use a camera as part of the process , ok. If you don't , ok. Someday if not already a person will just go out and snap shots of a fence , a field , several cows , a barn , some bales of hay , some hills and clouds and then plug those into an AI to composite those into a super nice image. After which they will post that image and say look what I did. That's no longer photography. .... I will say it to my self , OK Boomer....
That doesn't interest me at all. We don't live in 1990s. That's like asking someone to produce music that was only performed with live instruments or film movies without scripts, edits, or special effects. While it can be done, and some people might appreciate it, why force everyone to go back in time and be confined to an old process? -P
@@FStoppers I get it , you guys are about being relevant in the current atmosphere of the photographic world. You are nurturing a climate of professional image creation. Unfortunately the lines between photography and digital image creation are being blurred so much the two are virtually indistinguishable. Maybe I am old and out of touch. Maybe my dslr already disqualifies me from going on about real photography. After all I do use affinity photo and it's in painting brush to remove unwanted elements. Maybe I am as dishonest as the rabid compositers and the hyper processors. I know there are others out there quietly nodding in agreement with me. Peace brothers... lol.... I do enjoy your critiques. The images in this one by and large were excellent. Maybe I will enter a portrait in the next one and then complain how unfair it is for those guys to have pretty models and I am stuck whom ever I can corner on the street... hahaha
@@FStoppers And by the way there are big followings for people producing music with only live instruments. Why do you think people flock to live performances?? There are a great many folks would love it if there favorite artists put out some albums recorded live.
Oh man, of all the photos of the fairy lake tree, this one is really lacklustre 😞
Its wild how pretentious photographers can be lol