Comments on: Gorgeous Photography By Javier Gil

By: Javier Gil

Javier Gil — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 22:57:00 +0000

Thanks M, I had no clue what was going to be posted on here. I would have chosen my newest work instead. But that wasn’t up to me. Thanks for all the feedback on the above comments.

By: planedoc

planedoc — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 19:52:00 +0000

He accused the person featured in the article of paying to have the feature done. That goes WAY beyond “thinks the images could be better”.
But I’m totally new here. Maybe such negativity runs rampant here, which is why it’s apparently so well tolerated. Now I know why I’m not a regular here.

By: Albi Kl

Albi Kl — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 02:11:00 +0000

I think I see where you’re coming from now. Perhaps readers could offer a constructive critique for the benefit of other readers. This may also assist editors in understanding specifically what their readership dislikes about the selected works and the types of photos they’d prefer to see.

By: M

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 06:07:00 +0000

These make your old images look like shit. They should have posted these in all honestly, bravo man.

By: M

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 06:06:00 +0000

Marc…. hahahah you really crack me up buddy.

Are you sure that image wasn’t featured here as a header last week?

By: M

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 06:04:00 +0000

Whether you like the art or not, don’t EVER insult the models. Or get off of here.

By: M

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 05:57:00 +0000

Sorry everyone, I just had to repost this entire comment.

QFFT.

Here’s
the thing. These photos that Fstoppers have been featuring on the site
suck. They’re all processed in the same way (desaturated, split toned,
vignetted) and the processing is so heavy that the photos aren’t even
about the subject. Hell, some of the photos featured don’t have a
subject (like that one guy who was just photographing bushes and random
items in his house).

Anyone here who has any sort of taste and can recognize when someone
just goes out and buys a Canon with a 50 f/1.8 and shoots without
knowing what the hell they’re doing (focus is off, image quality is bad,
processing is overdone, composition is questionable) gets bashed by all
the other everyone-gets-a-gold-star readers.

“You’re just jealous. Can you do better? Why all the negativity? I think these photos are great!”

I’m not jealous. I can do better. The negativity comes from a place
that has great contempt for where art is going–where everyone gets
credit just for showing up and making a half-assed effort. The photos
aren’t great, they’re horrible.

The editorial team at Fstoppers, if one exists, should really
consider how this sort of stuff is bringing down the overall quality of
the site. I mean, some of those images up there look like they were
low-res thumbnails that were enlarged! If everything else about the
photo is going to suck, at least have a high-res file!

By: M

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 05:56:00 +0000

Maybe he just thinks the images could be better, based on his opinions of Fstoppers’ quality, which is fine.

By: M

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 05:54:00 +0000

”What makes you an authority on the subject? ”

The fact that he’s a reader on the site, and has just as much a freedom to critique the posts as you do his.

What makes you an authority on David’s opinions? Accept everyone’s opinions to help make your art better, he’s not trying to be a dick, he’s just expressing his opinion.

If you expect everyone on this planet to love your art, you’re fighting a lost cause.

And Javier, if you would seriously contend that these images aren’t heavily photoshopped, I’d like to see your originals ;P.

And as far as his issues with focus go, the one with the lovely woman on the path IS out of focus, I’m about 90% sure the focus is about two-three feet ahead of her on the ground; the rest are from formatting.

By: M

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 05:48:00 +0000

But, ‘Albi Ki’ , this site is not = to a random person’s personal site.

This is Fstoppers, which used to be synonymous with high quality. Most of these…

…are incredibly underwhelming, to be blunt…