The International Landscape Photographer Of The year

www.internationallandscapephotographer.com/

Tim

Great link. Some pretty awe inspiring shots in there.

Indeed. Should provide inspiration for people here...

Tim

a lot of drone shots now. need a good $50k gear to shoot some of those shots.

Amazing photos!!

Fwiw, Vieri Bottazzini, not in your linked article, is my favourite landscape photographer.

www.vieribottazzini.com/

No problem.

I find his images thought provoking and very inspiring.

There were some great winning shots in this competition, amongst the majority that were so over processed, that they became cartoonish and unreal. In fact I found some of them quite horrible.

Hmmmm......that's interesting.

"Over processed" compared to what reference point? - boring documentary type images?

What matters is was the intended final image achieved. If yes, then the amount of editing required to achieve that desired result is largely irrelevant to me.

Those types of images obviously are not everyone's cup of tea but many people like them.

Just like with just about every image (even overly distorted cartoonish architectural images for example), some will like it, some won't like it and some will have mixed feelings towards it.

Some of these pictures are so over processed, that they look ridiculous, to anybody who has ever seen and experienced an actual landscape, and who has some critical powers to evaluate how light, tone and colour look in the the real world. For me the worst of these are not photographs any more, but commercial chocolate box illustrations.

A skilled landscape photographer can make exciting landscape pictures, without resorting to the horrible over processing i see in some of these shots.

There were some good shots amongst the winners, but anybody with a minimal understanding of the art of photography, will find the the over processed shots pictures atrocious.

That's fine. You're entitled to an opinion just like everyone is.

We'll just have to disagree on this one 😊

I have to agree. I found it kind of weird that they would have those processed shots in amongst the other stunning shots that stood up on their own. It immediately lowered my perception of the site and competition - but hey, they are selling books - gotta have some candy to get the punters to open their wallets...

I liked the firefly shot in the forest, as it had a lot of mystery. The fallen tree in the swamp was nicely seen too, as were a couple of dune shots.

I suspect the lighting strikes in a couple are courtesy if Photoshop or AI, and I hate the way all atmospheric haze has been removed in a lot of the shots, giving a strange artificial impression to the shots.

I must admit I detest this sort of hyper overmanipulated photography. I would be curious to see the original Raw files, of some of these shots.

I haven't seen the criteria or rules they used for judging purposes.

For me, stunning landscape images do not have to be documentary representations.

They can be artistic or some combination of documentary and artistic.

It's a matter of taste and preferences, just like some people don't like overly distorted, unrealistic photos of buildings and similar structures. The same applies to all genres of photography.

There is no right or wrong answer, just a variety of opinions based on individual preferences.

This phrase really nails the aesthetic of most if not all of these pictures: "hygienic and excessively polished".

You are right. You will see much more genuine and interesting landscape shots on our weekly threads.

I cannot see the point of manipulating and post processing picture so heavily, that it loses all contact with reality. Do not tell BS, like me it mirrors what you felt at the time.