He’s one of the more unique and recognizable photographers on YT, at least of those I’ve seen / followed. Plus his video style is easy to watch, entertaining and somewhat self-deprecating.
That said, it’s not a style I have an interest in doing, for myself. But it’s interesting nonetheless.
Then again maybe I should try to do it myself, just for the drill…
His website is too slow to open for me now. Did this thread create an accidental ddos attack?
Trying to imitate his style, I quickly learned it’s not just about blown-out skies or reduced clarity—it’s about choosing a composition that suits that look. In a recent playraw edit, I matched his tone, contrast, and color treatment closely, but the photo still felt off because the composition wasn’t aligned with his approach.
Still, his style and analog photography influence me a lot. There’s value in reducing dynamic range. While many editing guides warn against clipping highlights or crushing blacks, preserving everything can leave images feeling flat and indecisive. Choosing what to discard adds focus and emotion—it’s the artist saying, “This is what matters.”
Growing up surrounded by digital HDR—especially with phones doing it by default—I feel a strange nostalgia for a time I never lived through. A time when photographers had to work within the limits of lower dynamic range from film and early digital cameras. Maybe that’s part of why the analog trend feels so appealing now.
I get your broader point about there not being a singular subject (he talks about having main and supporting subjects, which I like as a frame). However, my understanding of the new topographics was of blank stare, largely peopleless landscape/architectural themes.
Popsys seems to me much more of a humanist landscape artist. He often has (singular) human figures or references to human activity in his landscapes. His book is called Human Nature, so he’s explicit in this. In this sense he’s quite small-c conservative in style. He obviously seeks beauty and proportion in even mundane subjects. The obvious reference is the romantic sublime, stereotypically Caspar David Friedrich’s Wanderer Above the Sea of Clouds.
This is from Wikipedia’s New Topographics entry:
… documented built and natural landscapes in America, often capturing the tension between natural scenery and the mundane structures of post-war America: parking lots, suburban homes, crumbling coal mines. The photographs, stark and documentary, are often devoid of human presence. Jenkins described the images as “neutral” in style, “reduced to an essentially topographic state, conveying substantial amounts of visual information but eschewing entirely the aspects of beauty, emotion, and opinion”
Incidentally, I did a bit of a theory-heavy evening course on the meaning of photography or suchlike at the local photo gallery in which the tutor gave us an excerpt from Lucy (Luc) Sante’s Evidence to read. The book is based around a series of New York police evidence photos from the early 20th century and the similarity of some of the emotionally flat images of empty spaces to the new topographics is quite striking. (The fact that these are crime scenes, so often sites of extreme human drama, adds a strange tension*.)
The second image in this article is a good example:
There’s also a bit of Walker Evans’s depression era photos of interiors in the police snaps but with all of the empathetic humanism (perhaps literally) ripped from the scenes.
Another rambling post…
*I think Letizia Battaglia’s “best” photo actually takes this tension and turns it into a powerful anti-mafia protest/accusation that may have been instrumental in helping to mobilise public resistance to their reign of terror. Another of her photos was used more directly as evidence in a successful mafia/political criminal trial.
That does appear to be the case. He’s allowing a little bit of pale color and texture into his negative space.
I’ve always enjoyed James’s channel. When he shows his process in the field, he’s very clear about it. He’s humorous and doesn’t take himself too seriously. He’s an absolute master at using things like utility poles and wires as frames and leading lines…what are distractions in most people’s photos he turns into compositional aids.
But about the time that he started totally blowing out his skies, I drifted away from watching his videos. His photos continued to be impeccably composed, but the subject matter of the shots was often humdrum, and the high key treatment of a boring scene just doubles the boredom. I welcome his re-introduction of a little something to the sky.
Thanks for the rambling!
Art is so many-faceted that there are always new (to me) directions to learn more about. I enjoyed the ride - and the side roads it led me to. 
Look who bought a new toy…will be interesting to see if this changes anything or leads to some new types of photos from him…
LMAO all this dude does it run thru really expensive gear. He must have some sort of special rate with MPB, as I’ve found they give terrible prices when you’re selling stuff to them 
That’s hilarious considering how much he’s been saying recently that he’s happy with his Sony because it just does the job he wants without getting in the way.
I look forward to the video in 6 months time when he says how much loves the GFX but he just wants something smaller, lighter, more lens choice, and he doesn’t need 100 MP, etc…
This will be the next one…
The 524th GAMECHANGER camera 
Good one
Sensor: CMOS sensor
Aperture and focal length: F./1.6~ 2.8 f:3.45mm~10.5mm
Equivalent focal length in 35mm: 25.4mm-76.3mm
He seems to go the other direction in the “crop factor” scale though …
I shoot exclusively with vintage Yashica lens I find it really misleading and annoying this branding trend further more here with very low spec product being sold as high quality from reputable vintage brand…
@ these specs and price range this is really and incredible choice to sell such a product in the smartphone era
I really likes Popsy’s subjects and style though I can’t wait to get back to editing again to try my hand at replicating his style!
Well at least he finally said it out loud this video:
Artistically frustrated = need new gear
Artistialy fluid = why would i change my gear?
But ah! He’s an xpan crop man now. I can get behind that. Unlike him, I think 100mpix is great 
And you’ll note no intentionally blown out skies in his xpan shots! A new era, indeed.
That rings very true to me. When on a cool trip, I never think about gear. It’s only at home, bored, when the GAS kicks in.
James Popsys recently posted a video where he explains a lot of his post-processing style:
I can replicate pretty much anything in Darktable (color shifts: color equalizer, mystical & glow: diffuse and sharpen, especially with blend modes or masking the shadows), I am still working on “matte”, it is not simply desaturation. [advice is appreciated]
TBH I initially found the various “make stuff orange” styles punchy (incl the classic “orange and teal”, but also variants like bright blue “shadows”, de-emphasized green tints, etc), but now I find them tiresome because once I know about it I see it everywhere, and I know that I can make crappy photos of mine “punchy” in two seconds using color calibration or the color equalizer so it has lost it charm for me.
Likewise, I see strong diffusion filters everywhere now. Particularly in video. There’s an example here with Steven Soderbergh’s latest movie. The video is about his editing and camera movement but it’s hard to get past the relentless glow once you notice it.
I find the same thing as well, these over the top styles on photos means I get bored of that frame quickly. The motion in “motion picture” seems to mean you can get away with some outrageous color grading that I just feel doesn’t hold up in a still frame.
I found this part deeply funny. No wonder so many people complain about darktable when in a more approachable software you have a tool called “mystical” with three sliders, and in darktable you are hit with diffuse and sharpen with 10 obtuse sliders I still prefer D&S but it was a funny thing
Same with old lenses. I was watching Silo and sometimes the barrel distortion coupled with huge softness and strange field curvature just wrecked the image. I get what they were going for given the topic of the show, but it was just too much. I love when old lenses are used properly, like in Wong Kar-wai’s Fallen Angels, it’s just perfect and elevates the mood a lot. On Silo it’s just a big miss imo.
EDIT: Apparently Silo used new anamorphic lenses, Caldwell “Chameleons”, but the criticism still stands, the problems are exactly the same.
Regarding blown out highlights/sky: I like to watch Paul Ingbretson’s (painter) youtube channel. He has a video about “overlooked” american painters which featured a work by Daniel Ridgway Knight entitled Hailing the Ferryman. I am unsure that the effect is not an artefact of compression, but my first thought was “man, he blew out the exposure on that one!”
Interestingly, the bright unstructured sky is something I notice in old paintings more and more. I assume it is because of my exposure (no pun intended) to Popsys. Like when you buy a new-to-you car and only then notice just how many of them are running around on the roads.
Anyway. I thought these tidbits might be of interest to some in the thread.
