Critique the Community
Hot Lights
Submit your best image taken with a constant light for your chance to win a free Fstoppers tutorial
Congratulations to the winners!
An unfortunate turn of events when filming makes this episode of Critique the Community one of the most concise we've filmed. Despite that, do you think the comments Lee and Patrick made are fair?
Congratulations to our two winners. Chase Wilson submitted the highest average community rated image and Eric Dany submitted the image that was randomly chosen to win. I will be in touch with both of you to claim your prize.
If you would like to partcipate in the next episode of Critique the Community, we will be having a special guest on the show. Submit your wedding images HERE within the next two days to participate
Rules & Prizes
Some photographers claim to shoot only natural light while others depend largely on their strobes. This episode of Critique the Community is for those images shot only with constant light.
Between now and May 1st, we will accept up to two images that were shot with only hot lights to be critiqued. We will be choosing a total of 20 submissions to provide feedback to and two of the entrants will win a free Fstoppers tutorial. The first winner will be based on the image that gets the highest averaged community rating and the second will be chosen at random.
Once you've uploaded your images, scroll through the rest of the submissions and provide some feedback of your own. Use your number and keypad to rate the images quickly. When you come across an image where you notice an area that could be improved, we encourage you to leave a positive and helpful comment.
A big thanks to Jason Vinson for providing this week's featured image.
Wed, 05/01/2019 - 23:45
This contest has ended.
377 people have cast a total of 22,339 votes on 311 entries from 201 participants
Contest Submissions
Click on the thumbnails below to comment and rate each image.
Click here to learn about the Fstoppers rating system and what each star value means.
89 Comments
I don’t think so. Color Grading is a story telling tool. It was a little strange to me that they picked it for a CTC, it’s akin to saying “Lighting”.
Cinematic means telling a story in a picture. Look at Crewdson, Olaf, Leibovitz. They’re not portraits - they’re not editorial, they’re telling a story.
Funny! I was just typing in to please consider minimalism or abstract or pano or high key or ... Something more significantly different than the previous.
I feel that a lot of the comments about Lee and Patrick were harsh in the last video. They judged fairly.
Chase was right.........rules don't apply anymore................Where was the hotlight...........??? Half of the images chosen don't adhere!!!.................Hell just ask for images, no themes, genres, topics or leitmotifs.
What counts under natural/hot light ??
Is it only sun, fire... Or can it be room ceiling lamp?? etc
I would like Chase to respond because for something like this each image has to be submitted with honestly.
Most of these images seem to be lit with hotlights (or lights other than strobes/flash). There are only a few that are suspect. Which ones do you think are lit with strobe?
After watching the last video, it’s clear that the rules are really only suggestions.
Count on seeing plenty of strobe, natural, hot, practical, flashlight and moon lighting. For some reason this quote comes to mind:
“Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads.” -Dr.Emmet Brown
My comment was not about Mr Wilson's image but the selections of the images...........After viewing several of your critiques I find that quite a few images that do not meet the themes presented are selected which I find .......annoying.
I've submitted very few images to your critiques only because........I don't have anything to submit that would qualify.
Don't misunderstand my post. I enjoy the contests and will rate them as best I am able but I rate them based on the theme presented will not rate anything but "1" that does come close to meeting those themes. Fstoppers does't seem to follow their owe rules........why should I.
Respectfully submitted.
In my defense, the one light I did use was the modeling lamp. But yes most of the photos submitted didn’t use hot lights.
Most people in photography don’t purchase constant lights. It’s really a video production tool. But in all intent and purpose they’re functionally just super weak strobes (like the modeling lamps).
To answer you question directly, the modeling lamp was used for a rim-light on the subject. It was the model lamp because the color and power matched the ambient light/practices in the room. A strobe burst was too strong and cool.
Look at the subjects left arm for a shadow cast by her shirt.
Like Patrick said, I see these as being governed by the honor system. My (in poor taste) joke about the rules not mattering, was in regards to the seamless challenge, where the rules said shot on seamless; and Patrick said he interpreted that as “save to replace the background” or “shot on a simple background”. And I was making a quip about how the rules were open for a more broad interpretation.
Usually a 'hot light' refers to constant lights. That's what I read it as...
Whoa........your submission needs no defense, at all............Your post on your image submitted was........"Seeing as how the rules don't matter anymore".
After following these themed contest and having images selected that do not even come close to matching have been frustrating. Hence my post.
Your image was and is solid. I apologize if you were lead to otherwise.
The point I was trying to make was that the images should match the themes or eliminate the themes. Either follow the rules or get rid of the rules. Otherwise hypocrisy abounds.........
I'm sorry, maybe it's just me. But it seems the guidelines for qualifying are pretty much any photograph you have that uses pretty much any lightsource (as long as it' not a strobe)? Is that about it??????
Pretty happy that my photo made it to the critique anyway. I shot the Audi at 25:00. Thanks for your advice.
+1 to that question.. ... I'm trying to find out the same...
Thanks George. I was confused when I saw the submissions and saw most of them using natural light. Thanks for clearing that up.
last 6/10 in the rating queue I saw were landscape shots..
Yes hotlights refer to constant light sources that are not ambient. Like not shooting outside or using a window. I wouldn’t consider interior lighting of a home or building either outside of stage lighting.
But even in that case it’s someone else doing your lighting for you.
Seems to come down to petit semantics most of the time, gets slightly annoying to skip through 60% of the photos, people need to 'just go with the rule' over cheap exposure uploading the same to every critique as it slightly meets it...somehow.
I was under the impression that it meant "not a flash". Sorry, my mistake, so I have pulled an image that used window light and replaced it with a more suitable one.
However, I will say that I would not have made a mistake if the explanation for the contest had said "no flash, no natural light"
"Hot Lights" is just a generic term for constant/continuous lighting. I have never heard it used for natural light from the sun or moon. =)
In my experience, usually when someone says "hot light" they specifically mean a constant light setup specifically for the sake of photo/video. Any other type of man-made constant lighting is usually just referred to as "ambient" or "available" lighting (excluding the sun or moon). However with that said, ambient light from lamps or architectural lighting should technically qualify as well since "constant/continuous" does not necessarily mean a photo/video specific lighting fixture.
Just my $.02
The sun is hot, so I guess that counts. 😁
Thanks Dave.
So photo taken under ''constant'' sun or moon, does not qualify?
Now I know less then on the begining... :/
https://fstoppers.com/bts/hotlights-versus-strobes-why-choose-one-over-o...
Sometimes phrases enter the vernacular made up of per-existing words such has "hot" and/or "light" and because these words have commonly understood literal meanings, if they are used together in a specific context, they can be confusing to those unfamiliar with the origins of the phrase.
Although technically, the sun or moon could accurately be called a constant light source in the literal sense, the term "hot light" was coined in the photo/movie/television industry to refer specifically to the high-powered tungsten lighting sources commonly used in production which are in fact dangerously "hot."
For decades as those industries matured, these were the primary artificial light sources commonly used in these industries until eventually other technologies that ran cooler (such as CFLs and now LEDs which serve the same purpose as "constant" lights) began to proliferate. Even though they are not technically as hot as the literally "hot" tungsten constant lights from which the phrase originates, old school industry people (and pretentious hipsters) may continue to use the term, and when they do, they literally are most likely referring to constant, man made, purpose built lighting.
In conclusion, it's just an internet contest that a few hundred people might view. Interpret how ya like. Let's all not stress out too much about it. We can all come to a consensus based on our votes. =)
Hot Lights: Its a constant light sourse thats man made.
I think the next few ones should be based on the tutorials fstoppers produces! To see how the community is doing in each genre!
Thanks for the critique and I feel guilty in all points :-) (But I still love the hand pose)
https://fstoppers.com/bts/hotlights-versus-strobes-why-choose-one-over-…
This is a critique contest right? I think people should explain why there votes are low for my photos. I would love to hear the feed back from the community on what i can change
Hey Guys, thanks for the review! My shot was the B&W shot at around 22:50 in the interesting "set", not only a review of the photography skills and editing, but my modeling ability ...blank stare (yeah it's a self portrait). My focus was on the room probably more so because of the history, relevance, location.... and being enamored by it, this was taken in West Hollywood at a motel room that has become a fan shrine to Jim Morrison of the Doors,it's so f'ing L.A. of that era (most graffiti on the walls has references to him). He stayed and lived here often when recording and hanging in the neighborhood, up the street from the Doors offices and down from the original Barney's Beanery (his hangout, drinking spot). I do like the crop idea, and bringing back the shadows. This has been one of my most awarded shots .... as a finalist in many competitions, so I'm happy it's garnered so much attention. As to the scores, I use to like Lee better, but now its Patrick! :) anyway Thanks! I enjoy the critiques no matter how bad you miss the mark. :)
I agree with your point, they should comment and share the acknowledge from everybody. I think also that some of them just put low stars on purpose.
When I rate, if the photos aren’t in line with the critique, I will give out 1s just for not reading the rules. So anything in this one using natural sun light gets a 1 no need to explain, follow the critique!
As a newbie here myself, it seems to me that there is a vast difference in the perception of a 2 and a 3. To have a photo worthy of a portfolio, it has to be one of your top 30 photos, out of potentially tens of thousands that you have. To get a 4 it needs to be something that the reviewer would think is beyond what he could do and a 5 is untouchable. A 1 is something that shows the barest hint of talent. So most scores are a 2 by default. 90% of photos are a 2. That, and the fact that when you enter a competition you are often competing where the subject is at the edges of your areas of competence gets lower marks.
I also think that this is a site for post processing more than it is for good in camera shots. A bad shot with good post will score well, whereas a good shot with bad post will not.
Not a criticism, it is a great site but it is what it is. Keep your chin up and do not take the low marks to heart.
I think that is perfectly put. A new category should be put for voting for people who didn't 'get' what the contest was about. Like the last contest where it was all about strength and people post pictures of trees.
And off topic and snap shots should be a 1. Too many off-topics are being voted on based on their quality - which in most cases is quite good - when they should either receive no votes or 1s.
This is exactly what I do, you could have a 5 and if it’s off topic I give a 1 (I might give a 2 and a comment if I really really feel a solid 5 of an off topic image)
You know the sad thing is that there are aware winning photos on this site, i.e. Martin Stranka, and they don't even get a 5 :(
I'll give you feedback, which ones are yours?
The one with the model vaping and graffiti in the background
I couldn't find it.
This is the worst contest for off topic submissions that I can remember. I don't really blame those submitting, at least not totally, as you would think that fs could just put in one sentence to define the topic as their brief description doesn't match their contest title. However, people could also look it up. The sample photo just compounds the confusion.
I don't think this topic means any photograph taken in any light without a strobe or flash. Natural light, I don't think, counts as a hot light. Hot lights are a form of artificial light set up to give constant light.
I don't even begin to know how to vote when over half the entries are off topic. If off topics get a 1, people complain about unethical voting. In reality, it could just be that the submission doesn't meet the theme.
Not sure what to do here.
agree. We need a new vote button that says 'off topic' or 'not applicable'.
The sample photo is super misleading, if you don't get their intended (I'm assuming) irony.
I'd like to see a contest focusing on skies.
For those questioning what hot lights are, fstoppers has an article about them. https://fstoppers.com/bts/hotlights-versus-strobes-why-choose-one-over-o...
Obviously all of the landscapes are off topic, most outdoor shots are too. Most sparks and flame too without supplemental lights (which is confusing based on the sample).
Since a 'critique site' implies a desire to learn, one might think that an effort would be made to figure this out and submit accordingly.
But sparks are so hot!! Hahaha...
I actually liked those photos, but you're correct, they're off topic.
I thought it was clever but apparently it has created confusion. And I agree the sparks stuff is awesome! Honestly though - you could just google "Hot Lights - Photography" and learn all about this topic.
My understanding is, picture needs to be taken under a light bulb (T.A. Edison), any other light soure (led , etc) doesn't count....
So, my next question is: does picture of a object sitting on the street, illuminated by a light bulb, qualifies for this critique ??
If this was a professional competition with an entry fee and prize structure, I would say no. But this is an informal, amatuer/pro board with a relatively token award for winning so here I would say any artificial, constant light could work I guess. Do I think a computer screen is ok? Not really. A street light? Not really. Candle? Not really. Will I vote on these? Probably but not sure yet. The category is not 'creative lighting' it is hot lights which are a thing. How's that for clear as mud!