Quoted By:
Kek, here we go again... MFT autists going full retard, completely incapable of rational thought processes. It's all or nothing with you tards, isn't it?
The final point I made (in defense of myself over autists calling me jelly and saying "he's a pro so all his shots are amazing") was that no, not all of them are. Some are filler material and shots that I delete. But that's because I don't have to fill quotas. I also said he knows which shots these are because he doesn't post large shots of them or sell them.
Once again:
>inb4 u jelly
Nope, just honest. I don't even have to make this point because we all know the OP in the other thread was just on extreme defense over MFT, not actually defending the photographer.
Anyway, here is an example of a filler shot that I personally would just delete. It's clearly a heavy crop because you can see the aliasing even at 800 pixels wide, on every blade of grass. There is too much dead space in the foreground, and the entire image is in focus because it was shot from much too far away (hence the need to crop). If you think this is an amazing award-winning shot, you have low standards. He has some excellent shots on that page, but also a handful of bad ones. These aren't shots that you should publish, in my opinion.
This image could have been taken with anything including FF. That's not the point and never was. The point is, even pros can take some really shitty shots.
