Almost every photographer should have an image that fits this weeks theme for Critique the Community. Submit your best photos featuring water below.
Although our featured image is a landscape shot from Elia Locardi's tutorial, your entry can be from any photography genre as long as it somehow incorporates water in the image. Of all the submissions, we will be selecting 20 images to provide feedback to. If your image ends up as the highest rated image by the community, we will send you a free Fstoppers original tutorial. We will also be selecting one random entry to win a second free tutorial.
Even if you're not uploading an image to the contest, we encourage you to take some time to browse through the submissions and offer some valuable feedback of your own. Please rate the photos fairly and make any comments helpful and encouraging. It's easy to scroll through each submission using your keyboard's arrows and numpad.
Thats what she said
You didn't ask for it?
You may want to go back and critically look at your initial comment to me.
But sure, you didn't ask for it at all.
By all means, you keep defending your honour.
I called you out on your unnecessary, nonconstructive comment, I didn't make any personal attack and I certainly didn't ask for an argument...
Everyone involved in this discussion and the multiple threads on this page, it ends here. Enough with the bickering, no more replies.
William, for the record you never responded directly to any of my statements about why it is so simple and easy to differentiate between "wild photoshoppery", ...and simple color-correction, or bracketing exposures to account for too much contrast.
It is clear that you're ignoring lines of discussion that are too boring and plain for you, and are entertaining yourself by pushing everyone's buttons. Fair enough, if that's what entertains you.
But, one last time: it is all truly simple- Every edit you perform is either an attempt at relative accuracy, or an intentional departure from it. You simply cannot name a type or style of editing, that can't be neatly categorized.
It is therefore the intention of the photographer/artist that matters, for all intents and purposes. Because that is what either causes artists to be receptive and helpful to others who ask questions, in which case this whole discussion is purely academic because nobody's feelings are hurt, ...or it causes artists to be secretive, vindictive, and/or downright aggressive and spiteful when someone asks "was that photoshopped?"
If your camera can't handle a scene's dynamic range, you bracket, because you know that maybe some day a camera WILL exist that can capture the whole scene with a single click. (Or because you own an old Canon camera, and should have bought a Nikon D850 / Sony A7Riii, lol) The point is, even advanced in-the-field techniques fall into one of the two categories. Either you're trying to capture what you saw with as much accuracy as possible, or you're simply doing whatever your creative inspiration leads you to do.
Just because every photograph has an element of BOTH in it, doesn't mean that some photographs qualify as "a photograph" more than others, some which ought to just be called "digital artwork" at some point.
And the B&W photography argument is a false argument, because it ignores one of the most obvious things about viewing a photograph: Human eyes don't see the world in black and white, so when they view a B&W image there is always the full understanding that the image was converted from color to B&W. Viewers may not understand exactly what a red or yellow filter does, and there are probably very, very few human beings left alive who fully understand the depth of the wizardry that Ansel Adams did with negative development and printmaking. However, the viewer still knows that there is an artistic process involved. With a color image, there is always going to be ambiguity and interpretation.
You're quite correct, and your attitude has absolutely guarenteed that this is the last time I will respond to you.
But just so we are abundantly clear, I was initially ignoring you because you were all over my comments, starting your own comments with 'I'm not sure whether you were taking to me' (despite the fact that responses are notified, and labelled). I'm sorry, but you're either simple, or needy, or both; and I really have no time for either.
But that aside, when you decided to join in with that other guy, who was desperate to attack me...
So, go bother someone else.
Oh, the irony. Look closely at the comment thread. Your comment is a sub-comment of mine, in a comment sub-chain in which Pedro did not reply at all. So how you managed to reply to him in that place is beyond me, but it /was/ a reply to my comment. Again, look at the comment threads.
Good luck "not having time" for this type of "bothering". I was attempting to have a productive discussion, and it was you who was trolling and arguing randomly. You basically admitted that you enjoy goading...
The even more ironic thing is that I didn't even disagree with your original assertion. I agreed with it, and I disagreed with "that other guy".
Managing to ignore/reverse that inside your own head is truly the definition of trolling.
Go away, needy simpleton.
Isn't there enough drama and bullshit in life without having to go out of your way to create it on an internet forum?
It's always helpful to receive feedback that is constructive...not so much when it's vague--i.e. just some stars. Speaking of which, I think the concept of the FStoppers rating scale is fine, but while applying the scale to images is entirely subjective and dependent on the viewers perspective, I'm often puzzled by it's application. Rather than measuring the qualities of an image it often seems to be used as a measuring stick that is relative to other images. I'm not saying that's the wrong application, but it seems to set the tone of the critique. An image that is good or great, isn't, simply because we've seen it before or the lighting isn't perfect, the subject would look more interesting if the photographer had added an element that wasn't even there? I understand wanting to set a high standard, but sometimes it seems to go beyond setting a high standard, and leans more towards elitism.
Agreed. I joined this community because I wanted to get some meaningful feedback. I think it can be hard to rate images with fresh eyes once seeing so many amazing images. However, it is something we should all try our best to do, along with trying to provide feedback.
As for when people tell you what you should do to improve the photo, that's all subjective and should always be taken with a grain of salt, even when given to you by a pro. That's why when I give feedback I'm very open about the fact that "hey, this is just some guy behind his computer, with no idea about the location or conditions giving his opinion"
I've been pretty open regarding my opinion of the rating system, especially for the contests. HOWEVER, I do at some point have to turn it on us as users. Fstoppers have given us a venue with which to communicate, share, and give feedback. If some of us decide to turn that into meaningless ratings with no feedback and hate filled comments, that's on us, not them. I'll never hold any of the negative parts against Fstoppers, I'm grateful for the opportunity they've given us and I'll continue trying my best to make it worthwhile for others to log in or join, as a user.
At some point we have to stop pointing the finger at "the system" and look in the mirror. Not all of us, but some of us.
As an aside, I did a little test by putting up an image which non-photographers really like, as it is vibrant and dramatic (I used this as my instinctive aesthetic measure - one person I specifically asked for feedback on that image, runs a Facebook page that shares landscape photography, which has tens of thousands of followers). It is sharp, and the composition is technically perfect, with lead lines running to the main subject, which is placed off center. Fully 1/3 of raters gave it 1 star.
Interestingly, that image replaced another image, which is technically not as good, and not as dramatic, but was rated a full 1 star higher.
I was willing to entertain the notion that I suck, until I went and rated 600 or so photos so I could see whether the issue was systemic (it is).
So, here's my issue, I think that I'm at least OK at what I do, and I am constantly seeking to improve. But still there is the voice in my head telling me that I have no place showing my work along side all of these other people, who are clearly quite brilliant (imposter syndrome). And in that light, this place isn't particularly healthy, as it will simply inform me that my work is garbage and that I should give up.
William, Impostor Syndrome is only in your head. Comparing yourself with others is your own notion. Judging quality of your work by others ratings is your choice. There is nothing "healthy" or "unhealthy" about those CTC or any others social media sharing platforms or rating systems. It's our own choice how we perceive them and what we do with them. :)
As with every comment on here this is just my opinion:
I think you may be overreacting. There are way too many variables to take these votes seriously. One variable being that not everyone voting on your images knows what makes a technically perfect image. The same goes for any community based competition VS a judged open call.
If you take a look through the entries you might notice something, images that are not even close to technically perfect but contain an unusual subject or perspective are voted higher than an image we've all seen before which might be closer to perfection. You could take the most technically perfect image of a dumpster but in the end it's just a dumpster. Someone could take a snapshot of that same dumpster with their phone, no processing, but in a way that would be unusual and change the way you look at a dumpster from then on.
The majority of photographer's pay far too much attention to the technical side. I'm not saying that it doesn't matter, of course it does, but the artful side of photography is about creating emotion. Emotion is far more important in my opinion since the vast majority of people outside of this website that view your images know nothing about photography. Those people will have the biggest influence on whether you're a 'successful' photographer.
Since I believe that many are not judging your photos on technical ability you should take the votes as a critique on your perspective and the emotions you create. Something to focus on in the future.
Bottom line, this competition is really just in good fun. Don't take it seriously.
I took a look through your gallery and you definitely have some great photographs. Two thumbs up!
You make some very reasonable points, and in no way detracting from what you are saying, that is why I used non-photographers as a baseline.
In any case, I'll just keep doing what I'm doing.
Thanks again :)
Any way you can turn off notifications for comments? Getting bored now!
How often do these run? I thought they were weekly but it's been two weeks since the last one and over a week since submissions closed on this one. Not complaining, just honestly curious because I joined here because I recently ran across and liked the Critique the Community videos on YouTube. Thanks!
We try to get the video releases out every week and a half or two. We are a little slow on this latest contest as we've had a few projects in the works and just launched our new video tutorial. We'll try to get this one filmed and out to you guys in the next few days.
Can anyone say when the critique will happen, i love these youtube videos
When will this critique come?