>>3825922I often wonder how judges reason out the winners of photography competitions. Both photos look quite good, but they're so different. They range from lots of details and action to cold minimalism. Both are landscapes, but they cater to completely opposite tastes.
>>3825928Did you learn how to write critiques like that in art school or did you come up with it all on your own?
>the one on the left is more clearly advertising propagandaYou don't know even know what that means. "Advertising propaganda" is an oxymoron. Propaganda is political misinformation. Advertising is paid for and transparent.
>with its over-the-top lighting (what the fuck kind of sun makes light like that?)Looks like golden hour light. Pretty normal for sunrises and sunsets. Happens twice a day, every day of the year. Maybe you should check it out sometime???
>while the one on the right does a much better job of both documenting a real event and giving the viewer a sense of place within the scene. This is pseudo-intellectual nonsense. There is NO event. It's some factory that is just operating normally. It probably looks the exact same for all 24 hours of the day. And even by your own logic, because the train passing by is an "event," that makes the train photo better. As for "a sense of place," that's complete nonsense and doesn't even apply here. The photo was taken at eye-level, which is the most boring perspective, and there are a bunch of ugly snowmobile tracks in the foreground that are distracting because they have no relation to the factory or and kind of visible action in the photo.
>(is the train photographer standing in the middle of a bush?)The plants in the foreground are essential to the composition because they connect the whole scene together, from the photographer's perch on the hill, down to the train, and off into the distance, to the beach and horizon.
