Discussion: Bridges of the World July 2026

A magical and miraculous bridge appears above the gloom of dreary Bobigny.

I steer clear of competing with Attila 😄

Hi Michael, My long comment just disappeared again 😠 😠 😠 — it’s becoming impossible to write more than three words without hieroglyphics showing up. Basically, I was saying I love this kind of moody sky in photos—just in photos, though 😉—

But this photo really deserved a 16:9 aspect ratio instead of 4:3. Oh well, that’s just my opinion. Everyone does their own thing, after all. It really bothered me visually during the last landscape contest to see most of them in 4:3. 16:9 is so much nicer to look at for landscapes... and more logical too...

The Pont de pierre in Bordeaux in 16/9.



I’m trying to picture the same shot in 4/3...

So, 4:6 or 16:9?

And 4:6 is less bad than 4:3 for a landscape... It's just my opinion and my personal taste.

Plus, my example is poorly chosen because here the foreground is pleasant to look at...

And yet, my example is poorly chosen because here the foreground is pleasant to look at...

Absolutely, that’s exactly what I was going to say. I’m more of a "Aunt Ginette" level when it comes to photography, and there are always details I don’t notice at first glance to optimize a shot. And it’s true that the 16/9 aspect ratio makes a lot of photos more aesthetic. But I’ve also found that it’s not always the case: the foreground sometimes adds depth (and I’ve noticed that’s often what I’m looking for when taking a picture). And sometimes, it’s also pretty and enhances the whole composition. I get that it really depends on the effect you’re going for.

For your gorgeous photo of the Bordeaux bridge, it’s clear that the 16/9 ratio is perfect for highlighting its length.

For the photos I posted here, I didn’t take the time to really crop them because, since they’re not great, I just put them in the discussion.

Stone Bridge in Bordeaux on 16/9.



I’m trying to picture the same shot in 4/3...

You’re right, Jean Marie—here, 4/3 won’t add much. The subject is the lit-up bridge, and the river beside it complements the composition. For me, the framing is perfect.

For the photos I posted there, I didn't take the time to really crop them because since they're not great, I put them in the discussion.

That's what I understood. I wasn't just talking about this photo, but in general. My point wasn't to "criticize" here, but instead of saying nothing here for fear of offending someone, why not share a few little tips along the way?

I avoid competing with Attila 😄

True, the footbridge is more prominent in Agnès’s photo, but yours has real potential. The sky is gorgeous—your shot adds value to it, so definitely don’t crop it out. A 16:9 ratio could work if you trim the foreground, but not the sky 😊

A 16/9 ratio, sure, why not by cropping the foreground but not the sky 😄

Yes, that’s exactly how I meant it—especially for this photo, which isn’t really part of the contest. You could assume the goal is to highlight not the footbridge but Mont Saint-Michel. The footbridge just becomes an accessory to "emphasize" the background (Mont Saint-Michel), like Pagal suggested about the foreground in a photo.

That said, I really love your photo in case you didn’t catch that ;)

So, 4/6 or 16/9?

And 4/6 is less bad than 4/3 for a landscape... That's just my opinion and my personal taste.

Plus, my example is poorly chosen because the foreground here is pleasant to look at...

Hi Jean-Marie,

If you want to highlight the bridge, I think the second one works better by cropping out a bit of the river. But if the subject had been "reflections," it wouldn’t be as clear-cut. As you pointed out, the water is nice to look at. You could also try a square crop by cutting out the entire right side and a bit of the river ;) The options are almost endless and can completely change the perception...

If you want to highlight the bridge, I think the second one is better, by removing a bit of the river. But if the subject had been "reflections," it’s not as obvious. As you point out, the water is pleasant to look at. You could also try a square format by cropping out the entire right side and a bit of the river 😉 The options are almost endless and can completely change the perception...

Thanks for your message... I just wanted to "show" how a photo’s format changes the perception and the viewer’s perspective. In my opinion, yes, the 16:9 one is "better." The photos I’m posting here won’t be entered in the contest.

Thanks so much! And Jean-Marie, I’m definitely not offended—I’m all for tips like the one you gave me! I was just explaining why I wanted to keep that photo exactly as it is in this particular case.

Thanks so much! And Jean-Marie, I’m absolutely not offended and I’m happy to take tips like the one you gave me! I was just explaining why I wanted to keep this photo as-is in this particular case.

Apparently, I’m not being clear or precise enough. I wasn’t talking about you specifically at all. I was just sharing with those who enjoy exchanging ideas when we talk about photography in a friendly, modest, and respectful way—just like Kate did in her opinion. I really appreciate this kind of exchange and sharing. It helps us move forward. I’m not Uncle Gaston, Aunt Ginette’s husband—well, I don’t think so—but I’m far from being a pro, so I wouldn’t dream of criticizing other people’s photos.

I'm more of a "Aunt Ginette" level and there are always details I don't notice at first glance to optimize the photo

You don’t need to be a great photographer to give your opinion on a photo! An "Aunt Ginette" perspective can be valuable, as it often reflects the first impression most people will have when they see the photo. I agree with you and Marien: exchanging and giving feedback—when it’s constructive and kind—really helps us improve (as long as the photographer is open to it).

I avoid competing with Attila 😄

True, the footbridge is more prominent in Agnès’s photo, but yours has great potential. The sky is gorgeous—your photo really highlights it, so don’t crop it out! A 16:9 ratio could work if you trim the foreground, but definitely keep the sky 😊

I agree with you. When you’ve got a beautiful sky, you keep it! That said, (Pagal, if you’re reading this ;)) the horizon’s a bit tilted, and that’s what bothers me a little.

I’ll realign it then 😄

I’ll admit that on top of going during the Covid/curfew period, we were there early to arrive for the spring tide.

I thought the footbridge would ruin the place.

But not at all!

It’s way better than the old dyke and all the cars that used to park right at the foot of the peninsula.

Okay, on the other hand, the new parking lot is scary! Even almost empty...

I think I snapped a ton of photos of the footbridge and the mount that day...

Still, (Pagal if you're reading this 😉) the horizon is tilted and that bothers me a bit.

😏 I didn’t dare say it... I’m a bit picky about crooked or even slightly tilted horizons. Yet, it still happens to me sometimes—either from carelessness and lack of attention if I’m too focused on my main subject, or because my eyesight’s playing tricks on me as I get older...

Same here, I usually watch the horizon line, but this time it slipped by me. It's better now (edited again):

It’s way better than the previous dyke and all the cars that used to park right at the foot of the peninsula.

Okay, but the new parking lot is scary! Even when it’s almost empty...

Ah! Those terrifying parking lots at super touristy spots in India or Thailand! I don’t remember where, but on my last trip to Thailand, when I saw the parking lot—full—I told the driver: let’s get out of here! He didn’t understand me at all.😏

Still, (Pagal if you're reading this 😉) the horizon is tilted and that bothers me a bit.

😏 I didn’t dare say it... I’m a bit picky about crooked or even slightly tilted horizons. Yet, it still happens to me sometimes—either from carelessness and lack of attention if I’m too focused on my main subject, or because my eyesight’s playing tricks on me as I get older...

😂 😂 There are three of us—I also struggle with tilted horizons... I always keep the level in my camera’s viewfinder, even if the horizon can be fixed later 😊

Same here, I usually watch the horizon line, but this time it slipped by me. It's better now (re-edited):

It's almost there...😉 😏 I'm nitpicking for fun. It's still leaning just a tiny bit to the right. Or maybe it's my eyes...😉

I always leave the level in the camera viewfinder even if the horizon can be corrected later 😊

I’ve been doing this for 50 years and now it annoys me—it distracts me...

Same here, I usually watch the horizon line, but this time it slipped by me. It's better now (re-edited):

Yeah, it's better 😊 If I may, I’d crop a bit more from the foreground and bring out the sky. Here’s a suggestion—what do you think? The file manipulation made the quality drop again, but it’s just for the idea.

Oh yeah!

Same here, I usually pay attention to the horizon line, but this time it slipped by me. It's better now (edited again):

Yes, it's better 😊 If I may, I’d crop a bit more from the foreground and highlight the sky. Here’s a suggestion—what do you think? With the file manipulation, the quality took another hit, but it’s just for the idea.



As the Little Prince said, "It’s exactly how I wanted it." I also thought a slightly dramatized sky would create a nice effect, even with the risk of a little deterioration... I had picked a photo with that kind of "dramatized" sky but gave up on it for the contest precisely because of that deterioration.

With this framing, the sky took on its full power—it’s what draws your eye to Mont Saint-Michel. The texture is there, but by just intensifying the whites and blacks, the dark clouds guide your gaze toward the white clouds and thus the subject 😊. The eye always goes to the brightest point, so you just need to lighten the subject and darken the rest.

The bike version

The bike version



Oh, that’s awesome! I like this one better than the one you picked now that I see it.

Château Bridge...

This one’s a smartphone photo. It’s a lot less sharp.

Don’t always have time to take a photo with the "proper" camera on the spot.

The same—Pont Château—at Chenonceau, spanning the Cher River, seen from the other side...!!



(Nicknamed the "Château of the Ladies").

...

Hello,

Two "Genoese bridges" in Corsica:

- Near Ota/Porto, a classic single-arch Genoese bridge:

.

.

- Between Corte and Aléria, on the Tavignano River, the so-called Genoese Bridge of Altiani (3 arches).



Puma2A

New York...

Bridges at night,







during the day,





up close.

You make me laugh—you remind me of myself, so proud to share my photos and show them off elsewhere (except mine are so much less beautiful and spectacular). We’re always proud of our work, of our talent (I wouldn’t dare call it talent in my case), when we know it’s real and justified. The greatest artists are happy to give their all for their audience.

At first, it annoyed me that you posted your photos. I thought: Shouldn’t the contest organizer observe a kind of “duty of restraint”? Stay a little in the background, like a judge who can’t be both judge and participant? Then I wondered: Are you jealous because she takes better photos than you? And then I analyzed what was going on in my head. No, it wasn’t jealousy—it’s just that I didn’t dare post mine after seeing yours.

And now, seeing these stunning photos, I understand your pride in your work and your desire to show it off, to share it. And you’re absolutely right to treat us to them. It’s a feast for the eyes. So I’m telling you: keep showing us your magnificent bridge images...

You make me laugh—you remind me of myself, so proud to share my photos and show them off... elsewhere... (except mine are so much less beautiful and spectacular). We’re always proud of our work, of our talent (I don’t dare call it talent in my case), when we know it’s real and justified. The greatest artists are happy to give their all for their audience. At first, it annoyed me that you posted your photos... I thought: Shouldn’t the contest organizer observe a "duty of restraint"? Stay a little in the background, like a judge who can’t be both judge and participant? Then I wondered: Are you jealous because she takes better photos than you? And then I analyzed what was going on in my head. No, it wasn’t jealousy—it’s that I didn’t dare post mine after seeing yours. And now, seeing these stunning photos, I understand your pride in your work and your desire to show it, to share it... And you’re absolutely right to treat us to them. It’s a feast for the eyes. And I’m telling you: keep showing us your magnificent bridge images...

Hi Jean Marie, I’m actually a little embarrassed by this message. Thank you so much for appreciating my photos 😊. The truth is, I post my photos on VF because it gives me a way to "do something with them." For a few years now, I’ve been passionate about photography and try to take photos that I feel are somewhat successful. The problem is, I don’t show them because I’m never completely satisfied with the result. I’m barely on social media—just a Facebook with a few friends. I don’t enter photo contests or do exhibitions, so all these photos stay tucked away on my hard drives. I’ve really struggled with the idea of participating on the forum. Every month, I ask myself whether to show my photos, and (yes, probably out of pride) I post a few, never knowing how they’ll be received.

At first, it annoyed me that you posted your photos... I thought: Shouldn’t the contest organizer observe a "duty of restraint"? Stay a little in the background, like a judge who can’t be both judge and participant?

On the contrary, for me, the organizer should inspire the contest, bring ideas to the discussion thread. Often, I think of certain photos when I see something similar in the contest or the discussion (like the undersides of bridges, for example 😉).

No, it wasn’t jealousy—it’s that I didn’t dare post mine after seeing yours.

That’s something several people have hinted at, and it really bothers me. It’s one of the reasons I hesitate to keep participating in the contest. In fact, I don’t post photos in the contest when I’m organizing it because the chosen theme is inevitably in my favor.

I love taking photos—it’s become a real passion. I’ve done a lot of workshops and training to learn, always listened to feedback to improve, and I still have so much to learn. I don’t dare offer to help participants compose or enhance their photos. This is the first time I’ve shared my vision for the Mont Saint-Michel photo. I wouldn’t want to pretend to be better, but when I see photos with strong potential, I can’t help but want to improve them.

Have a great day, and don’t forget to post your photos! 😉

Hi Isabelle, You don’t (don’t you?) have to feel embarrassed. What I wrote, I truly mean it. As always, I don’t hold back. I first got into photography when I was very young, back when I was a teacher. I joined my high school’s photography club—developing, printing, and all that. It really started to interest me when my first daughter was born, 55 years ago already. Back then, it was only black and white.

Over the years, I’ve accumulated hundreds of thousands of photos. I’ve lost or thrown away most of the ones from before the 80s, but I must still have around 150,000 or 200,000 left on my hard drives. For a long time, I protected them with copyrights and other ways to keep them from being stolen when computers and electronics started becoming a thing. But now, at the end of my long life’s journey, with whatever time I have left, I’m not going to bother with those little details anymore. And since people have often told me I take beautiful photos, like you, I decided to show them instead of leaving them stupidly stored on a hard drive. I couldn’t care less if someone steals them.

That’s why I opened an account on YouPic, where I explain my approach to sharing photos. I’m happy to show them, and it satisfies me while satisfying others. And I’m not chasing “likes” like you see on social media, especially Instagram.

I’m not a professional. I’ve never taken a class or done a workshop—just the tinkering from my younger years. And I know my photos often have flaws. I like it when people point them out, as long as it’s done kindly and tactfully. But I do get silly about it depending on how the criticism is delivered.

I’m treating this contest like a game, but just like in any game, the goal is to win, right? Just for fun, to enjoy myself. And also, mainly because it gives me a social connection.

I can’t decide on the three photos to submit for the contest. Initially, I had 153 selected, then narrowed it down to 53. And now I’m left with about fifteen that I can’t choose between.

P.S. For about a year now, I’ve gone back to black and white. I find it aesthetically enhances a photo, especially portraits. While I think post-processing is part of a photographer’s art and creativity (when it’s not ridiculous or in bad taste), I really dislike AI.

Hi everyone!

In the upper Var Valley near Guillaumes, there's an old bridge that used to carry a tramway:

Le Pont de la Mariée: (photos by an amateur).

.

.

Puma2A

...

The old pont de Brassac in the Tarn: spanning the Agout River.

.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

Puma2A

...

The old Brassac bridge in the Tarn: spanning the Agout.



I really love these old village and/or countryside/mountain bridges

I don’t dare offer to help participants compose or enhance their photos. This is the first time I’m sharing my vision for the Mont Saint-Michel photo.

Oh, no problem for me at all! As a near-total beginner, I can only benefit from advice from those with expertise—quite the opposite, in fact! Besides, instead of the contest thread just being a showcase of participants’ leftovers without real interaction, I think it’s way more fun and useful if it turns into debates, tips, and exchanges about photography.

Actually, I post my photos on VF because it allows me to "do something with them."

Exactly. I think (at everyone’s own level) that’s true for pretty much everyone here. And I’d even extend that thought to travel journals. In the end, we all publish these journals and photos to "do something" with our trips: make them last longer, give them a social dimension... To bring it full circle, it ties into Marien’s thoughts on social connection. That’s what’s been a bit lost on VF post-COVID, and it’s up to the members to bring it back to life.

I first started getting into photography when I was very young, back when I was a teacher. I joined my high school's photography club—developing, printing, and all that. It really started to interest me when my first daughter was born, 55 years ago already. Back then, it was only black and white.

For my part, I only really got into photography six years ago during the first lockdown, so at over 50 years old 😅. To make up for all those lost years, I took photography courses and workshops 😊.

...

The old pont de Brassac in the Tarn: which spans the Agout.

.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

Puma2A

Thanks, Alain, for all the photos you’ve shared in this thread 😊. We shouldn’t forget the contest either 😉.

I’m hesitant to offer help to participants with composing and enhancing their photos. This is the first time I’m sharing my vision for a photo of Mont Saint-Michel.

Oh, no problem for me at all! As a near-complete beginner, I can only benefit from advice from those with expertise—definitely not the opposite! Besides, rather than the contest thread just being an exhibition of leftover photos from participants without real interaction, I think it’s way more fun and useful if it turns into debates, tips, and exchanges about photography.

Got it, message received! 😊

Actually, I post my photos on VF because it allows me to "do something" with them.

Exactly. I think (at everyone’s level) that applies to pretty much everyone here. And I’d even extend this thought to travel journals. In the end, we all publish these journals and photos to "do something" with our trips: make them last longer, give them a social dimension... To wrap it up, it ties back to Marien’s thoughts on social connection. That’s what’s been a bit lost on VF post-COVID, and it’s up to the members to bring it back to life.

So, I’ll get back to posting travel journals with a few photos 😊

Hi everyone, here's a photo I'm sharing in this thread.



What interests me in this photo is the bridge's asymmetrical profile. It results from the geography of the area (one bank is higher than the other) and possibly the location of the river's main bed in the 11th century, when the bridge was built. I would’ve loved to submit it for the contest, but... under the main arch, you can see cars on the current road. That’s all I can see now... Since I don’t know anything about editing or retouching (aside from cropping and horizon alignment), I can’t "remove" those cars. What tools could I use to do that? And if I had been able to do it, would it be considered cheating?

Hi Michel, Yes, this bridge is unique, and you were right to share this photo 😊 Indeed, a photo of an 11th-century bridge deserves to be free of traces of modern civilization. Personally, I use Lightroom to edit my photos. It can remove anything distracting in a shot. In my opinion, these touch-ups aren’t cheating—they’re just aesthetic improvements. I think even back in the film days, people were already removing elements (Jean Marie could confirm this). Purists say no, but in wildlife photography, for FPF nature competitions, it’s strictly forbidden. If your photo is selected, you have to provide the RAW file, and you’ll be disqualified if any edits were made.

This was happening way before Jean Marie! 😉 I mentioned it in last month’s discussion. I said: "Stalin was erasing his enemies from official photos back in 1937 using double exposure, while Mumler was making 'ghosts' appear behind his clients—so people thought they were communicating with their deceased loved ones..."

This was happening way before Jean Marie! 😉 I mentioned it in last month’s discussion. I said: "Stalin erased his enemies from official photos in 1937 using double exposure, while Mumler made 'ghosts' appear behind his clients, so people thought they were communicating with their deceased loved ones..."

Yes Kate, I remember your post on this 👍 but double exposure and long exposure to create ghosts are done directly with the camera. I was thinking more about the photo development process, but since I don’t know much about the film era, I’d rather ask those who’ve actually done it 😄