In these cases, I think that the technique is overshadowing any message that the actual image may hold. I don’t see the technique as part of the final product, but apart from it. Changing the color tone of an image does not, to me, actually say anything. And it’s all too common for people to use these techniques as tricks to cover up substandard work.

Not that I’m saying this is what’s happening here but take the third photo, the profile portrait. The subject’s eye is out of focus, but her hair is in focus. Maybe there is some irony I’m missing here, but it looks like a pretty basic error. The effects added afterward do distract from that, but once it’s noticed, it feels like they were added only to do just that. I feel like I’m trying to be hoodwinked.

Then again, I’m only one person, and it’s not like I put material out there that’s above criticism (far from, in fact). And seeing these young photographers showcased is inspiring, simply because they show so much promise.. But I don’t see much in these examples that’s fresh or that shows a vision beyond “it’s cool when I do this in photoshop”. As always it’s your blog, you post what you want, but putting these things in public also means you open yourself to being critiqued by that public. If you don’t like it, don’t allow comments on posts or delete comments you don’t appreciate. In any case, I wish Mike the best, it seems like he’s working on developing his vision which is the best any of us can do, and he has plenty of time ahead of him to do so. I’m sure he’ll go on to make an impressive mark.

You are always speaking about tecnique, but here we just look to the final image. I think if there are mistakes sometimes in much better than a “perfect” photos, but maybe without a soul. Maybe he liked this effect, and it’s what we like too.. If you don’t like this kind of style it’s ok, but i can’t understand when you comment those photos everytime with a tecnique-critic eye, and without looking to the final image and what he wanted to communicate.