Deepa Krishnan brings both a scientist's knowledge of marine ecosystems and a technical understanding of the profound optical challenges of underwater photography — the light absorption, colour shift, and backscatter that make every good underwater image a minor technical triumph. She has contributed to Light & Composition since 2019.

The underwater world follows different physical laws. Light is stolen by water — red disappears at five metres, orange by ten, yellow by twenty. The underwater photographer is working in a world that actively removes colour. Every image that has warmth and clarity below the surface has fought for it. I respect that fight, and I can tell when the photographer understands the physics of what they are doing.

Julian Rowe has spent years pushing the boundaries of what a photograph is allowed to be — working with intentional camera movement, multiple exposure, in-camera compositing, and alternative processes including cyanotype and lumen printing. He has contributed to Light & Composition since 2016 and consistently challenges the panel's assumptions about sharpness, clarity, and conventional photographic virtue. He believes the most interesting photographs are made by photographers who have understood the rules and then deliberately broken them.

Sharpness is a choice, not a virtue. The technically perfect photograph is the most conservative possible use of a camera. The photographer who understands what a blur means — who chooses imprecision as a form of precision — is doing something far more interesting than the one who merely maximises resolution.

Amara Diallo came to photography criticism through a deep conviction that every portrait is an act of storytelling — a conviction rooted in the oral traditions of West Africa, where the story is the record. He has contributed to Light & Composition since 2014. For Amara, the most important question a portrait photographer can answer is: did you listen before you looked?

Before the shutter, there must be a conversation — even if it is silent. The photographer who listens to their subject before looking at them makes a different kind of portrait. You can see it in the eyes. You can feel it in the frame.

Dmitri Kasakov has contributed to Light & Composition since 2010 and remains its most philosophically demanding voice — the critic most likely to cite Heidegger in a review of a beach photograph. For Dmitri, every photograph is a moral act: the choice of what to light and what to leave in darkness is never merely aesthetic.

Shadow is not the absence of light. Shadow is where the image thinks. The photographer who controls darkness controls meaning. A photograph that is afraid of its own shadows is a photograph that has nothing to say.

Sophie Delacroix approaches photography criticism through the lens of perceptual psychology. She has been with Light & Composition since 2013. Her criticism focuses not on what is in the image but on what the image does — the sequence of emotional and cognitive responses it triggers in a viewer who has never seen it before and the one who returns to it a year later.

The photograph is not the thing in the frame. The photograph is what happens in the body of the person looking at it. A great image alters the viewer's physiology — pulse, breath, the specific sadness of a certain blue.

Rafael Ortega approaches the single frame with the same rigour he gives to a sequence, and brings a filmmaker's obsession with time, rhythm, and the weight of a single held image to every review. He has been reviewing for Light & Composition since 2014.

A great photograph is a film that refused to move. Everything you need is in that one frame — the before, the after, the cut that never came. The question is whether the photographer understood what they were holding when the shutter closed.

Thomas Hargreaves brings a landscape practitioner's uncompromising standards to photography criticism. He has contributed to Light & Composition since 2010 and is the panel's most demanding voice on the subject of craft — specifically the craft of waiting, of returning to the same place in different weather, of earning the photograph rather than finding it. His dry wit has made him the panel's most quoted critic and occasionally its most feared.

The best photographs are expensive. They cost the photographer time, patience, and physical discomfort. I can usually tell from the image whether someone paid full price.

Lena Brandstrom brings deep scientific knowledge of optics to photography criticism — the behaviour of light through glass, the biology of what the human retina can and cannot resolve, the precise moment where a lens's maximum resolution meets the subject's finest detail. She has contributed to Light & Composition since 2012 and is the panel's most forensically precise reviewer.

The photograph reveals what the eye cannot hold. The lens resolves beyond the limits of human vision. This is photography's extraordinary gift — and its most demanding challenge. Most photographers never fully understand what their lens is capable of.

Eleanor Voss has contributed to Light & Composition since 2011. A committed formalist, she believes that a photograph's enduring power lies almost entirely in the rigour of its visual architecture — the placement of mass, the tension of negative space, the discipline of the frame. She has little patience for sentiment without structure.

A photograph earns its place through formal rigour alone. Emotion without structure is noise. The frame either holds or it doesn't.

Nadia Osei is one of the most respected — and challenging — voices in photography criticism. She has contributed to Light & Composition since 2016 and has never allowed a photograph to rest comfortably in its own assumptions. Her reviews ask questions that other critics are afraid to pose.

Every photograph is an act of looking. And looking is never neutral. Who is the photographer? Who is the subject? What does the frame include, and what does it exclude, and why? These are not political questions — they are photographic ones.

Priya Sharma, whose thinking is grounded in East Asian aesthetics and Japanese visual philosophy, has contributed to Light & Composition since 2012. Her criticism draws on the Japanese concept of Ma — the meaningful pause, the productive emptiness — and she is perhaps the only critic on the panel who considers what a photograph leaves out to be as important as what it includes.

Restraint is the hardest discipline in photography. Anyone can fill a frame. The photographer who can empty one — who can trust the silence — is rare. Ma: the pause that holds more than words.

Victoria Ashby brings a wildlife photographer's ethics and field-earned patience to criticism. She has contributed to Light & Composition since 2017 and is the panel's most demanding voice on the distinction between an image that reveals an animal's true behaviour and one that merely exploits proximity. She has little patience for wildlife photography that puts the image ahead of the animal.

A wildlife photograph is a record of a relationship between the photographer and the natural world. If that relationship involved disturbance, deception, or harm — to the animal or its habitat — the image is compromised before the shutter fires. Patience is not a technique. It is an ethical position.

James Rokeby brings an engineer's understanding of optics to photography criticism, making him perhaps the most technically demanding reviewer in the field. He has contributed to Light & Composition since 2013. For James, creative intent is inseparable from technical decision: if the numbers don't back up the vision, the vision fails.

Every creative decision leaves a trace in the EXIF data. Aperture, shutter, ISO — these are not settings, they are arguments. Bad technical choices cannot be rescued by good subjects.

Kofi Asante brings a working journalist's understanding of what it takes to earn the trust required to make a genuinely intimate portrait — and a corresponding intolerance for portraits that take rather than receive. He has contributed to Light & Composition since 2018.

The best portrait is a gift, not a capture. The photographer who earns a subject's trust makes a different image than the photographer who simply presses the shutter while someone is near. You can see the difference. It lives in the eyes. It lives in the hands.

Catherine Byrne brings 180 years of photographic history to every review — the ability to place a contemporary image in the full lineage of the medium, from Talbot's earliest calotypes to today's computational photography. Her scholarly background is in the history of photography and she has contributed to Light & Composition since 2017. She is the panel's most historically demanding voice.

Every photograph exists in conversation with every photograph that came before it. Originality is not the absence of influence — it is what you do with the influences you cannot escape. I ask of every image: where does this sit in the long conversation? What does it say that has not been said before, and what does it say better?