Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
The Best Photographers on Flickr
flickrsbestphotographers.blogs… — This photo slide-show is amazingly awesome. It features the best photographers on Flickr and presents their best work. Sit back and enjoy, I think I can safely say you will not be disappointed.
zack12349- 2482 diggs
- digg it
- zack12349, on 10/12/2007, -38/+16I am glad you liked it. All these photographers are really the best in the world. Here they have presented their best work. If you click any photo in the slide show it will take you to their individual photo stream were you will also be amazed.
If you like their work feel free to email them on their Flickr mail, or leave a comment on some of their photos. They would appreciate it.
I am also on Flickr, but ineligible to be part of the group, because I help judge what photos are allowed in this slide-show. If you want to see my work you can find it here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lynchburgvirginia/- sokz, on 10/12/2007, -13/+49Best in the world? Please..
- knightblade2oo4, on 10/12/2007, -13/+32some of these are mediocre at best.
- TheWorm, on 10/12/2007, -6/+24You can't argue that these are incredible photos. These people have true talent and an eye for the perfect shot. Not to mention a 2000 dollar camera, but that means nothing if you can't take a good picture.
- theOster, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2OOH OOH OOH!!! SPAM!!!!
ME ME ME
http://www.flickr.com/photos/the-o-ster/
(of course no one likes my phots :) - kippie, on 10/12/2007, -14/+9seriously high quality stock photography.
and nothing more - mwosh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Photography is all relative anyway. One person might LOVE a photo while the other uses it for toilet paper. While it's clear these guys have talent, to say these guys are the best is extremely shortsighted, as you can see from the reaction of those folks above me.
- patc6, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1TheWorm,
Please, now-a-day's anyone is a good/great photographer. There are only two tools a person needs; 1) Digital Camera and 2) Photoshop to be good/great and that is it. Take a look at the image with the guy with Spokes ears and the Earth in the glasses; PHOTOSHOPPED! And thats the worlds best? Once again...Please.
- cyberdork, on 10/12/2007, -5/+106Serious blog spam.
This is the actual link to the flickr pool:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/25_percent_magic_monkey_solution/pool/- exobyte, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11I rarely say this, but I wish I could double-digg parent. Please digg him.
- Etheo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Thanks, that even came with some photo's not in the slideshow, awesome!
- zack12349, on 10/12/2007, -26/+12Hi Cyberdork, this is not blog spam at all. Using the slide show in blogger format, allows the members of MagicDonkey to know the number of visitors their pictures are generating. Something they would not know if you visit the link you show. These are some of the best photographers and they do like to know that their photos are being appreciated.
- Etheo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Actually, the slideshow even provided extra informations on the photos, so I dont' really think of it as spam.
- Brahma, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4@zack..Seriously great link. I really enjoyed it. As for people who call this spam or think they are better than others; just ignore them.
- fboosman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Flickr provides statistics on picture viewing. You don't need to break out the slide show into a separate site to do so. Blog spam it is.
- dlennis, on 10/12/2007, -21/+6Some of the most beautiful images you will see on the net live on this site...very cool!
- haigMeister, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5why's he getting dugg down for that? O.o
- mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Because it's (a) a useless comment, (b) it's written like spam, and (c) obviously one of this blogger's friends spamming the faux love all over the comments.
- spotty, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18I love flickr
- tuuky, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2I think it's fair to say they are excellent photographers. I'm not up to par with the best of the best in photography, but photography is a calculated art.
Saying that they are the best, if indeed they are, is not subjective at all.
It's like any other artist... we can all agree that Da Vinci or Mozart were among the best in their class, even if you don't like their work.
Personally, I would have to agree with DalekoProvidek on this one.
Sorry, replied to the wrong post... this was meant for deltaandroid below.
- tuuky, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2I think it's fair to say they are excellent photographers. I'm not up to par with the best of the best in photography, but photography is a calculated art.
- deltaandroid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Too bad photography is too subjective a art, for you to say "The Best Photographers on Flickr". but the pics are quite good, but they wont be everyones cup of tea...
- championchap, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7isnt art almost entirely subjective?
i mean, there are pleanty of "amazing" anime artists out there, but to be honest.. nothing bores me more than anime art. Besides maybe those vecors with the blacked our foreground and super trippy-bright backgrounds.
Technically speaking these photographs are very impressive, the bird flying through the broken window i liked especially.
- championchap, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7isnt art almost entirely subjective?
- cubejockey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Just curious if there is a link to how these are selected, and if you can nominate people. It sounds kind of like a contest from what I can tell, just curious, not debating the quality of the pics.
- electricpeak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Each photo must be invited by another member of this group, And have at least been invited to 4 other invite only groups, and one of those invites must be from the QUALITY group or Bravo group.
Before you can post an image here it has to be invited to at least 4 invited groups, and one of those has to be either the The Best of Bravo, or Quality. AND IT MUST BE INVITED BY ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE GROUP!
Link: http://www.flickr.com/groups/magicdonkey/
- electricpeak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Each photo must be invited by another member of this group, And have at least been invited to 4 other invite only groups, and one of those invites must be from the QUALITY group or Bravo group.
- jettloe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Pretty, but calendar art. At worst, anodyne. Says nothing.
- mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Birds and flowers...more like my grandma's favourite photographers.
- martin77, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17the term " best " is very subjective.
- grahamhutch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I have to agree with jettloe - the whole invite-only, must be afriend of a friend blah blah leaves me cold. The most enjoyable part of Flickr is the community vibe. IMHO this is not a community thing.
- mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Sounds like how Digg articles are best promoted. It's all whomever you "friend," despite pretending otherwise.
- helodudes, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5These pictures are better than many professional pictures you might see in places such as nation geographics.
Simply Magnificent.- DalekoProvidek, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9...and how many of them are photoshopped or otherwise enhanced? I'm not sure National Geographic allows for alterations; I know most journalistic enterprises don't.
- grahamhutch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"I'm not sure National Geographic allows for alterations; I know most journalistic enterprises don't."
I think this is impossible to police. A huge proportion of professional photographers shot digitally. Many will use the RAW format which will need processed before submitting to a newsdesk etc. At the very least some brightening/sharpening/saturation work will go on, maybe the removal of some distraction in the shot, changing the crop - where do you draw the line? - mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Well, there's a few HDR images in there, which should nullify everything. 2006 was the year that HDR became the new hotness and the most overused hack cliché within mere months.
- DalekoProvidek, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9...and how many of them are photoshopped or otherwise enhanced? I'm not sure National Geographic allows for alterations; I know most journalistic enterprises don't.
- merc22, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5I'm not great, but check out my stuff if you feel like it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mkaufman/sets/- electricpeak, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2You've got some nice shots there. I like the Trek too.
- DalekoProvidek, on 10/12/2007, -11/+6The best photos have bare breasts in them.
- Buga, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I think "best photographers" should be replaced with "some great photographers". Some would not agree with these images contributing to the "best" photographer when photography is an art seen through a persons eye and they're the judge of what they like.
- zzzzbest, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Um, there aren't any portraits in here. How can they be the best if they can't take a decent portrait.
- ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3What about the clown?
- theXenon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5I agree with jettloe and grahamhutch. Some of those photos were very pretty, but they aren't the best photos on flickr by a long shot.
Interestingness is cool, but it's not perfect. The thing I love most about flickr is the community aspect. I would even rather see a slideshow of Highly Competitive (http://www.flickr.com/groups/best100only/) simply because the flickr users themselves choose which photos are "the best" by a democratic open vote to move photos in and out of the pool instead of the exclusivist clique of "be invited but only if you're also invited to blah, blah, blah, insert witty comment and circle-jerk to this ass-kissing name-dropping and we might let you into our Donkey Nuts Group".
Not sure if you noticed, but a lot of the photos are by the same people, and some of the photos are highly post-processed and photoshopped manipulations. There's nothing wrong with that in general, I guess I just expect great photos to be more about the composition in-camera rather than in-photoshop.
The more I write this mini-rant, the more pissed off I get at the temerity of the author to claim these are the best photos on Flickr.
I generally digg anything promoting Flickr, but this time you're getting dugg down for inaccuracy and for ruining my evening read.
PS: You can view my Flickr stream here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cultkid- CZzyzx41, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I agree. If you actually look at the flickr sites for these photographers, the photographs included in this set aren't even the best pictures taken by these photographers.
- jbhalper, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Some of these are really exceptional shots, but some of them are just well-trodden but well-exposed, and many of them are just alright. Few of them tell much of a story, and there's too much HDR in there for me.
It's also a relatively tricky to get put through to that group, relying on invite from people who are already there (and likely got there because they share opinions about what makes a photograph work).
There are some nice shots, but this is nothing groundbreaking. It looks like the kind of groupwhoring that is in my opinion something of a plague to Flickr.- theXenon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Amen! Groupwhoring indeed.
- avatarpalin, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Damn I am not on there...! Keep trying I guess *grin*
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewkneebone/ - Smeed, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Some of these are good, others not so good. Im a sucker for HDR. Dugg.
- convergent, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0Those are really beautiful work of art. As a little photographer myself, I have to say that this man is one of the most talented photographer's I've seen.
- bigellow, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I'd love to see some of these pictures submitted to the StareClips site [ by the original copyright owners, of course;) ]
- moonwell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2not bad, but it doesn't worth a digg
- alpine77, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1boo none of mine got in there lol
http://www.flickr.com/photos/craigchislett/
there are some nice photos all the same though. - ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3ah what the hell. I was gonna make fun of everyone spamming their photostream, but who am I kidding?
My "Most Popular" photoset)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ahawks/sets/72157594356409993/ - bmson, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Great pictures.
She is the most popular photographer on flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/ - kucing, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I really enjoy the trophy group. It has a collection of the finest photographs on Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/trophy/ - Wolfbeta, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2So far the pattern shows that it's wrong for photogs to share their photos in a photo related thread.
Oh well, here's mine, digg me down kiddies:).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wolfbeta/
Leave some degrading comments too ;).- mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1OK, here's my degrading comment: all you people vainly spamming your mediocre Flickr links could have at least put it in one goddamn thread.
- critic, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0My favorite is Merkel???
San Fran Figure and Haight Ashburry scenester.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/merkley/
Yes, they are "shopped". That's the whole point.
Critic - cozamonkey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0man this stuff is beautiful. i think now that I'm taking photography I am starting to be able to appreciate a good photograph. good stuff
- critic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0My favorite is Merkley???
San Fran Photog of Figure and Haight Ashburry scenester.
Warning - Eat your shrooms before clicking on link.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/merkley/
Yes, they are "shopped". That's the whole point.
Critic - blinking8s, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2some wonderful images, no doubt about that. But like the debate rolls throughout on the discussion...I bet this list could change 400 times over with the amount of photographic content on flickr. Def not he best 100 out there in this list.
- Falldog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Over all they are pretty good, but a couple are either shopped too much or lame content (like the bench).
- tagawa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hmm, I personally think it's hard to beat the 'Featured Pictures' on Wikimedia:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Featured_pictures
They are all contributed freely, you don't have to belong to a group, they are from all eras of photography, they include just about every category of shot imaginable, the quality of many of them is astounding.
A feast for the eyes. - Subcide, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Some of these are technically really good photos, but so much of the stuff on www.altphotos.com is so much better. (im in no way affiliated with them btw, it just has some fantastic photographers on it)
- digger_twit, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Thomas Hawk's photos better be on there. In my opinion he is one of the best photographers out there.
http://digg.com/users/thomashawk
http://flickr.com/photos/thomashawk- robdazomba, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I don't think that's a real person. He's part of some "delete me" photo group on the site where all the people are fake accounts. I was doing the flickr thing a year ago and I don't think it's a real person. I think his photos are just taken from other sources and stock photos. That's what that group does, sets up fake personalities and makes them look very real and convincing and then causes troulbe on flickr. Funny at first then got boring . If you check that account is a member of the group.
- DjDimitrious, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2more like a "who can photoshop their mediocre compositions with vibrant colors best" collection.
Okay, yeah, some of them weren't that bad, but highly highly subjective. - Aerophire, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1GOOD photography really just depends on what you personally like and want to see.
I, personally, do not give a sh*t for beach sunsets and ladybugs because they are so cliched and dull. - scd73, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Another good word for Thomas Hawks stuff, he is on Zoomr too.
http://beta.zooomr.com/photos/thomashawk
Since everyone else is doing it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seandavis/ - wisie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Its a pity some shots had crooked horizons but even though some were not my style they definately had some fantastic composition.
IMHO Very good shots - joebrent, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1http://flickr.com/photos/rimbaudian
Not just a magician with the usual tricks of the trade -- look closer, there's some pretty heavy subtext going on in every one of his shots. - becknell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Been looking for something like this. Outstanding. Thanks.
- rovertly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3crap
- gloom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is it me, or are these photographs really cheesy?
- zaretos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Jeezus these are good.
- fatbeaver, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm glad most of digg users have a sense of art. No digg!
- bigvics, on 10/12/2007, -2/+299 percent of those photos have been digitally manipulated in post.
Title should read "Best Photoshoppers on Flickr"
no digg- CZzyzx41, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You're right because of course any respectable photographer never does any post-processing. Post-processing = cheating = fake = bad.
[/sarcasm] - bigvics, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1the good ones dont need to.
- ssundberg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A professional photographer will tell you that, even without Photoshop, they will always do some manipulation of an image in the dark room. Photoshop just makes it much easier to do what was once a time-consuming process. The Ansel Adams-types, i.e. photographers who can reproduce a negative without any darkroom manipulation, are few and far between.
- CZzyzx41, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You're right because of course any respectable photographer never does any post-processing. Post-processing = cheating = fake = bad.
- msjacoby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There are a LOT better photogs on Flickr. You could go through some individual photographers' streams and get a more consitently great set than these.
- thedavis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Where did it ever say these were the best photographers in the world. The guy wanted to link to what someone considered to be the best on Flickr, not the world. Flickr is a free hosting site where you are unlikely to find the best photographers in the world anyways. Give the guy a break. The link gets almost 1500 diggs and yet 90% of the people making comments here think it is horrible? Very odd.
- cecret, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1There is some excellent photography in here.
- techobo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Is it bad that I recognized a few of those photos from my stock photography archive at work? Some of them are over 10 years old. I guess either people are being massive posers, or the original photographers are deciding to share their work.
- FortEphemera, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@techobo, could you identify which of the photos are in your stock photography archive at work and provide someway for us to verify that? Insinuating that people stole these photos or even claiming they are ten years old is a pretty bold charge, maybe you should back up your bombastic claims?
-
Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by