Is Master Shots on LFI Gallery a closed country club?

[BjarniM]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've tried many times to submit photos for Master Shots on the LFI Gallery but not a single one has been chosen yet.

 

Meanwhile many other photographers have had several photos chosen for the Master Shots, and i have more than once been thinking why some photos are justified being chosen.

 

It seems to me that some photographers have a premium membership, because every time they upload a picture it's like all of them are chosen automatically, regardless of the quality.

 

Is the LFI Gallery Master Shots only a closed country club for a chosen few, while the rest of the photographers are subject to automatic exclusion?

 

Sorry about my provocative post, but i just don't understand the whole logic when it's a public gallery and it over and over looks as it's only an inner circle of people that gets their photos chosen, despite other photographers are uploading better pictures that will not be chosen.

Edited February 6, 2016 by BjarniM

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Herr Barnack]

I have often wondered what defines a "Leica Master" and how we non-Leica Masters would become one.  If anyone can enlighten us regarding those issues, please do so.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Carlos Danger

[otto.f]

It 's a jury sport. I sometimes don't understand classifications with Olympic jury sports either

[BjarniM]

Yes, i know there isn't any definitive answer that defines what a good photo is, but i must admit i don't understand the selection process from time to time on the LFI Gallery.

[wattsy]

Best to do your own thing. I haven't looked at the LFI gallery for a number of years but I suspect it will be dominated by certain popular genres and 'looks'. Much of the photography will indeed be excellent but I'm not really sure if there is any point trying to emulate it if that simply means producing more of the same.

[andybarton]

I used to have quite a few "Master" shots on that gallery. 

 

But, they were shot with my R8/DMR, and it would appear that they are no longer welcome and have been removed.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

it would appear that they are no longer welcome and have been removed.

 

 

I can't say I'm altogether surprised. LFI, being the unofficial PR mouthpiece of Leica, probably sees the gallery's primary role as helping to push sales of the current products.

Edited February 10, 2016 by wattsy

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[andybarton]

Don't forget that LFI is now owned by Leica again

[wattsy]

I didn't know that.

[otto.f]

If LFI would be independent or not, there will always be a dominance of the actual Vogue or Wave in style. Look how this works in the models scene, this is not about beauty, but about the message around the beauty. 

In the LFI magazine you can recognize this in the way the Monochrome and the new S were introduced, sometimes it seems a competition about who can bring the most harsh and raw style of imaging with a certain flavor of poverty, down and out ness, captured with THE most expensive camera's. Wow, what a thrill. Going to Afghanistan with the newest S. 

[keithlaban.co.uk]

My wife likes some of my images and dislikes others.

 

LFI likes some of my images and dislikes others.

 

Such is life.

[Giulio Zanni]

I am also confused. I uploaded an album of minimalist landscape shots from Hokkaido Japan and one album from the carnival in Venice. I thought it was something different from the thousands of portraits of wired people in the street but no feedback. The same pictures got hundreds of likes in non Leica related forums. I am not sure what they are thinking.

 

Giulio Zanni

 

www.giuliozanni.com

Edited February 17, 2016 by giulioz

[Dan Bachmann]

Just before I got into Leica, I appreciated the gallery and the magazine. I still appreciate the magazine, but I have noticed the patterns in the gallery selection and have found the quality of some Flickr groups better than the gallery selection. I stopped respecting or looking at the on-line LFI galleries for a few years.

 

But I have also noticed some shifts in my own style and feeling. I used to be impressed every year by major photographic exhibits, like at the National Portrait Gallery. This year, I've felt like they were worth my time, but not very inspiring and with fabricated or little emotion behind the images. I get more out of some of the best shots posted on this forum.

[ferdhart]

I don't believe so.

Hello guest!
Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.
Hallo Gast!
Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[DezFoto]

LFI's Master shots are curated, so it's to the particular taste of those doing the curating, whomever they may be. 

Based on what I've seen in the gallery, I have some tips for what the curators seem to like:

 

1) People from "exotic" locals (read non-european/white looking)

2) People in abject poverty (especially if they are non-european/white)

3) Landscapes that are either HDR'd or have the clarity slider turned up to 100

4) Close B&W portraits of older people with clarity cranked up

5) Random "street" photos

 

There definitely is a a slant towards street photography and exotification. I also find the overall feel of the gallery tends to be that of a privileged wealthy person cataloguing the poor and beleaguered, especially of 3rd world countries. And to be honest, I'm a little disturbed by the notion of wealthy people running around with their expensive boutique camera equipment taking photos of impoverished people on skid row or in 3rd world countries. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Herr Barnack]

LFI's Master shots are curated, so it's to the particular taste of those doing the curating, whomever they may be. 

Based on what I've seen in the gallery, I have some tips for what the curators seem to like:

 

1) People from "exotic" locals (read non-european/white looking)

2) People in abject poverty (especially if they are non-european/white)

3) Landscapes that are either HDR'd or have the clarity slider turned up to 100

4) Close B&W portraits of older people with clarity cranked up

5) Random "street" photos

 

There definitely is a a slant towards street photography and exotification. I also find the overall feel of the gallery tends to be that of a privileged wealthy person cataloguing the poor and beleaguered, especially of 3rd world countries. And to be honest, I'm a little disturbed by the notion of wealthy people running around with their expensive boutique camera equipment taking photos of impoverished people on skid row or in 3rd world countries. 

Do those criteria not also describe a majority of other photo contest awardees and/or non-nature/landscape oriented photo magazine cover and feature articles? 

 

With regard to "wealthy people" and "impoverished people," that distinction is made contingent upon perspective.  Take any one of us as an example.  From  some people's perspective, we would be considered wealthy; from the perspective of others, we are impoverished. 

 

To be honest, I find photographs of wealthy people boring, pointless and banal (sorry, paparazzi).  Same thing with people of my own economic strata and culture; I have no desire to photograph fraternity functions, mall shoppers, family portraits, people's children and/or weddings.  The world does not need more shallow photos of shallow people leading shallow lives, resplendent in the latest styles from the GAP, American Eagle and Eddie Bauer.  Just saying.

 

If we are to be barred on ethical  grounds from photographing non-european, non-caucasian, non-affluent, non-middle class and non-youthful people, we will be reduced to either not photographing humans at all or producing images that are utterly hopeless exercises in futility.

Edited April 3, 2016 by Carlos Danger

[Joshua Lowe]

Most of that stuff is closed club and politicized.

 

Don't even get me started on the poverty tourism angle.

 

[Jan1985]

All what is written here is that what i think too. What i see is that especially classic photography with the aspects on composition, light, timing etc. is not existing there on the gallery. and this was the core which made them popular. For me it looks like a try to come away from this identity with all methods allowed.

 

results are selections with images of minor quality. nothing very attractive for the eye.

[Agnes K]

In February 2019, one person got 50 photos chosen by LFI Gallery and February is not yet ending... 50 master shots, wow... 

[pedaes]

Welcome Agnes. If you are talking about Eduardo Marques I do not see how he can be that prolific. All very strange.