Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item

SportsShooter.com: The Online Resource for Sports Photography

Contents:
 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Bookshelf
 my.SportsShooter
 Classified Ads
 Workshop
Contests:
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Rules/Info
Newsletter:
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
Members:
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
 Join
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions


Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.

Name:



Password:







||
SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board

World Press Photo disqualifies photographer
Michael Ivanin, Photographer
Oakville | On | Canada | Posted: 1:02 PM on 03.03.10
->> http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=873604
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 1:20 PM on 03.03.10
->> "After requesting RAW-files of the series from him, it became clear that an element had been removed from one of the original photographs."
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (1) |   Definitions

Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 2:11 PM on 03.03.10
->> so useful if we can't see the actual image in question ...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Brian Dowling, Photographer
Philadelphia | PA | USA | Posted: 2:20 PM on 03.03.10
->> http://www.en.rian.ru/photolents/20100215/157888668_4.html
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Chip Litherland, Photographer
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 9:28 PM on 03.03.10
->> Before and afters:

http://www.petapixel.com/2010/03/03/world-press-photo-disqualifies-winner/?...:%20PetaPixel%20(PetaPixel)
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Nick Adams, Photographer
Lynchburg | VA | | Posted: 9:32 PM on 03.03.10
->> The before photo shows no matter much talent you lack and how crappy the original is. If you crop and tone your heart out. You could be a winner...
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dominick Reuter, Photographer, Assistant
Boston | MA | USA | Posted: 9:56 PM on 03.03.10
->> I second Nick.

This contest sh*t is starting to really piss me off.

There's no reason this photo should have ever made it to the point where the judges would have to redact their award.

They, and the judges that keep endorsing this over-processing (and then taking it back), are starting to look like real idiots for confusing this aesthetic with talent.

They say their priorities are on real pictures and real stories, but time and time again they pick the ones that look like some Chase Jarvis or Zoriah fanboy crap.

They don't seem to have learned from when they got punked by those French kids that posed a story on college kids prostituting themselves out for tuition that the CONTENT OF THE PICTURE MATTERS, not how "gritty" it appears.

I understand when Bridezilla wants her digital wedding photos to look like they were cross processed on ektachrome, but these judges are hastening the quality decline of photojournalism faster than any other culprit.

I want to see a contest where the only thing you can do to a photo is crop it. Man, that would be a refreshing change.
 This post is:  Informative (7) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Ginn, Photographer
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 10:20 PM on 03.03.10
->> In the link Chip posted, Rudik writes "... it is clear that I haven’t made any significant alternation [sic] nor removed any important informative detail."

I would argue that the toning alone is significant, but he's right insofar as the detail removed wasn't important, and its removal doesn't change the meaning of the photograph.

So why did he do it?

It seems to me that it was done to make the photographer look like a better photographer.

I'm sure we've all made images where we think "it's a great photo except for that foot/pole/wire/etc." And maybe it would be amazing but it's NOT, because of that foot/pole/wire/etc.

Apparently you are allowed to tone the heck out of the image to turn ordinary, flat light into something dark and dramatic. How does that not change the meaning of the story?? I mean, it's one thing to adjust your contrast A BIT, or convert to b&w, but geez.

As I've said before, Photoshop is to images as drugs are to sport--for making the photographer/athlete seem better than they actually are.

Rudik says "I believe this explanation is important for my reputation and good name as a reportage photographer."

He's right again: the explanation confirms that WPP was right to disqualify you, and it has an important effect on your (formerly) good name.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Peters, Photographer
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 11:00 PM on 03.03.10
->> Why bother cloning the shoe out - he could have just burned it into oblivion like everything else on the periphery, and they would have let it pass.
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dave Prelosky, Photographer
Lower Burrell | Pa | US | Posted: 11:06 PM on 03.03.10
->> Perhaps this is the kind of stuff one would pick up in ZoirahLand?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (1) | Huh? (1) | Off Topic (1) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Eulitt, Photographer
Kansas City | MO | USA | Posted: 11:21 PM on 03.03.10
->> That's a lot of toning.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Thomas B. Shea, Photographer
Pearland/Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 11:40 PM on 03.03.10
->> I agree with Nick.

Also while I was watching POYI judging, the judges don't seem to care about the caption information until the end. The caption information should be just as important as the photograph itself.

These winners write good precise captions:

http://www.poyi.org/67/POYFA/second_30.php

http://www.poyi.org/67/19/ae02_01.php


Nice photo: But come on give more than a caption than this.

http://www.poyi.org/67/07/03.php
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (1) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Thomas B. Shea, Photographer
Pearland/Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 11:51 PM on 03.03.10
->> I wouldn't even thought the original raw image would have been about street fighting Kiev. I think with the digital age if you are going to enter a photojournalism contest the raw image should be the only image that is entered. Lets see how a photograph fills the frame. Anyone can crop tight, turn, the photo into a black and white image and with unreasonable toning make the image looks good. The photojournalist images should be judge on content and how the photographer composed the shot in the CAMERA and how he used artificial lighting, natural or the lack of lighting to compose their image.

NOT ON HOW GOOD HE CAN CROP AND MANIPULATE THE IMAGE IN PHOTOSHOP.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ken Blaze, Photographer
Cleveland | OH | USA | Posted: 12:02 AM on 03.04.10
->> so should he have been disqualified. yep.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Andrew Nelles, Photographer
Chicago | IL | usa | Posted: 12:27 AM on 03.04.10
->> Jeeze, the foot is only the tip of the iceberg with that image. I don't know where to begin.

Wow...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Justin Edmonds, Student/Intern, Photographer
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 2:42 AM on 03.04.10
->> This is why I don't enter contests.
 This post is:  Informative (4) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Harpe, Photographer
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 7:55 AM on 03.04.10
->> When you look at the photo, it's pretty easy to call it an illustration and not a photo...even without the foot removal.

The image has an aesthetic. I can see where some would like it. But really, it's an image created with photographic source material. It is not a "photograph" in it of itself. It would fit perfectly in a graphic design contest.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael L. Palmieri, Photographer
Barnegat | NJ | USA | Posted: 7:57 AM on 03.04.10
->> That photograph is so toned that when I saw the un-cropped color versions I thought I was looking at an entirely different image. The thing is, it seems that with many of these "big time" photo contests, images like this seem to win far too frequently. I agree with Thomas -- RAW files should be submitted, but a cropped version should be allowed to be submitted as well (and judged), as that is an acceptable practice in our trade.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Steve Ueckert, Photographer
Houston | TX | | Posted: 8:23 AM on 03.04.10
->> I will still give props to World Press for at least demanding the original RAW file as part of the program, as well as ultimately rejecting this image. Hopefully someday judges will be brought in that have a sense of aesthetics such that over toned images won't make it out of the first round.

I'll add my voice to the chorus that once a photograph is taken this far it becomes an illustration. I'm old enough to recall the mid-70's when I first saw hand-of-god burning and when poorly done, radioactive subjects that glowed with a white halo. This isn't just a phenomenon of the the Photo Shop digital era.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Scott Strazzante, Photographer
Chicago | IL | USA | Posted: 8:35 AM on 03.04.10
->> Thomas, I agree with your point that it is unfair to only read captions when it gets down to the final round of a photo contest.
I was one of those POYi judges this year who didn't, as you say, "seem to care about the caption information until the end".
What is your solution?
In the feature picture single category this year there were 2149 entries. It took us 6 hours to go through them twice and then decide the winners.
If we would have had all 2149 captions read, we still would be judging the contest.
The fact is that contests are unfair. The images are not judged on an even playing field. The well-toned and even over-toned images are the ones that jump out. But, for me, when it gets down to the end content wins out.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Manning, Photographer
Athens | GA | | Posted: 10:02 AM on 03.04.10
->> Strazz,

I watched online some of the judging & i thought you guys did an excellent job.

It was a good insight on how it all works.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kevin Seale, Photographer
Crawfordsville | IN | United States | Posted: 10:04 AM on 03.04.10
->> From looking at the image, what would have tipped them off that something might have been removed from it?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Russell, Photographer
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 11:04 AM on 03.04.10
->> Wow.

So if my fancy digital camera gets a clean shot with great detail and decent color, but I want it to look gritty and tough I can just Photoshop the bejesus out of an image and win prizes.

This situation is almost as depressing as the photography industry itself.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Chuck Liddy, Photographer
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 12:46 PM on 03.04.10
->> I have to agree with many of the comments here. The old adage "contests are great when you win and suck when you lose" doesn't even fit anymore. I looked through the WP winners a couple of weeks ago ago and just had to say a majority of them wouldn't have passed the "over processing" meter some contests try to adhere to. I also just don't get some of the winners (which I will admit is quite often the case). I guess I'm "un-schooled" in what a great photo is. I mean I was always told that "if a photo is great it will speak for itself. you don't need a long caption or explanation to guide what your eyes and heart tell you". One of the judges from the contest had a THREE minute video speaking to the winner of the spot news category...if you have to take three minutes to explain why a photo is great I think you made the opposite point. That said the whole manipulation problem is getting almost impossible to police. Some photos are allowed to move through a contest when they are obviously over saturated and toned. It's been happening for years. It's going to happen more and more. I've been suggesting to shooters for years to shoot for themselves. The days of getting bonuses and "rewards" for winning contests are over. Winning contests won't even save your job any longer. I know of three NC former POY winners who have been laid off. In my humble opinion you're better off keeping hold of your ethics and self respect than winning any photo contest. It's just not worth it.
 This post is:  Informative (6) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ray Anderson, Photographer
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 6:11 PM on 03.04.10
->> I can see the guy being shut out of the contest because of the rules.
But while it is a pretty generic subject athlete having his hand wrapped I kind of like the photographers attitude towards vision seems like he might have wanted to have something look more classic he could have kept with the color and contrast for the first image rotated the image , cropped it and do an acceptable amount of photo shop to having the foot removed.

I have seen many a beautiful artistic sports photo that was over sharp over saturated but still not altering the subject message.
It would be nice if we were all like Donald Miralle with a fine art major and some of the other greats and have the equipment vison and ability to get the art into the story.
This photographer just took his vision skills in another direction and this is what he wants.
Keep the vision going I say and learn from this experience happy shooting.
I keep my polarizar in the bag if I ever want to enter a sports photo contes.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dominick Reuter, Photographer, Assistant
Boston | MA | USA | Posted: 6:28 PM on 03.04.10
->> I would just like to clarify and redact some of my looser language in my earlier post.

I used the word idiots, which was bad.

The judges who do this work are some of the best picture people in the business.

I appreciate Strazzante explaining more of the jury process, about which I should have researched more. The task they undertake is not easy, and the results are pretty outstanding nearly all of the time. They give new life and a platform to images that might otherwise be lost in the rush of the news cycle.

I also did not consider that this was one picture in a series of probably strong images of fighters. In that respect, finding and outing an improper retouching job in a supporting detail shot is actually pretty impressive.

My only point, and this episode was an all-too-easy vent for it, is that when a picture shows up in any portfolio with that kind of extreme aesthetic, I hope it is raising more red flags, and that fewer of them will make it to the late rounds of judging.

And no, I do not stand by my claim that contests are to blame for declining photojournalism. Hopefully rules like this and public tar-and-featherings like Rudik and others have had will drive home the point that truth in pictures is not subjective.

I still would find it refreshing to see a contest where the only adjustment allowed is a crop.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Andrew Nelles, Photographer
Chicago | IL | usa | Posted: 12:24 AM on 03.05.10
->> There is an interesting observation about the SportsShooter clip contest in the comments section of the petapixel article linked above. Not sure how I feel about that clip entry.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Craig Mitchelldyer, Photographer, Assistant
Portland & Orange County | OR and CA | USA | Posted: 1:39 AM on 03.05.10
->> Wow. Shoe or no shoe that is not the same photo! Good lord. Really anybody can be a photographer as long as you know how to Photoshop the bejesus out of any image.

As for the ss image, or any image I see that I like at first but later find out it's all Photoshop, it's ruined for me. But the main difference is the ss contest does not prohibit this kind of thing as world press (and every other pj contest) does.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Thomas Boyd, Photographer
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 1:59 AM on 03.05.10
->> Craig's right. There is no rule against creating fictional images and winning with them in the sportsshooter contest.

Two of this month's winners are probably the most egregious fictional creations I've seen win in this contest and no one seems to have a problem with it.

Not only has anyone commented on them, a bunch of people voted for them.

I believe, as I have stated in the past, that the sportsshooter contest should adopt similar ethical guidelines that the POYi, WPP, and NPPA use.

I think it's important to have some kind of ethical standards and uniformity among contests that feature photojournalism with news and sports action categories.
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Andrew Nelles, Photographer
Chicago | IL | usa | Posted: 3:50 AM on 03.05.10
->> I agree that the SS contest should adopt an ethical guideline for the clip entries similar to the other contests. However, with the image in question, a significant portion of the image was not shot during the stated month, as the comments author had pointed out. I guess that is a grey area for this entry.

I hate to call out any specific member or image, but I think this is worth discussing.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Chip Litherland, Photographer
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 10:51 AM on 03.05.10
->> Here's the deal with all of this.

I can understand that a photographer from the Ukraine might not have the same ethical background or training to know this isn't an accepted practice in our industry. He is working in our field and entering a contest held on neutral ground with rules that can be read by anyone. He broke one, and it was disqualified. He's owned up to it, presented the RAW and is being taken to task for it.

I have a problem with World Press Photo in this situation, because I argue the toning took just as much information away from the original image and content as cloning the foot did. The difference is the rule about cloning is stated rule; the toning is a gray area. In fact, WPP has been rewarding these kind of images for years now. There is a "look" to the images every year, and I can pick which photos were chosen by each contest if there were presented to me one-by-one. To be fair, most contests react to well-toned, or in this case, overly-toned images regardless of content. They just do.

I still love seeing the winning entries every year, even when I don't enter, just because I love photography and image making. It is inspiring, sometimes laughable, but either way it is a good measure of where our collective vision is.

The bottom line it is a contest, and it is all subjective and usually chosen by other photographers and editors. Not the public. The one thing it does, which bothers me most is set the bar for our industry and what we find successful or acceptable. Once we start departing from being photojournalists ethics, we just become photographers and there is something to that. Don't read into the "just" part. Being a photojournalist means something and when you enter a photojournalism contest with work purposely made to deceive judges into a win, I have a problem with that. It hurts all of us.

I don't think I should even up that can of worms with the Sportsshooter contest, but I will. I enter, and I've lost to Photoshop for years now. The difference between this contest and the others is that there is no rule against it, and if it bothers anyone who voted, they just shouldn't vote for it.

Full disclosure, one of my winning entries this last month was an overexposed image (in camera, btw), which I didn't submit for publication because I personally felt it was deceiving to newspaper readers. I didn't even tone that image. Straight from the camera. If it had ran, I would have felt dirty even though I didn't touch it. I file it under the "personal vision" envelope with photos made for myself. I entered it because I could.

Either way, I do have a problem with composite images and images made with layers of photos that are years old. There is a rule against that.

Slippery slope, eh?

Chip
 This post is:  Informative (5) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Keith Simonian, Photographer
Martinez | CA | USA | Posted: 10:54 AM on 03.05.10
->> I think the question for the SS contest becomes, can entries in the feature section combine images from different times and places and then be represented as a single capture.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Manning, Photographer
Athens | GA | | Posted: 10:55 AM on 03.05.10
->> I just like Chip's photos.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael L. Palmieri, Photographer
Barnegat | NJ | USA | Posted: 11:14 AM on 03.05.10
->> Chip -- I trust you are talking about the photo entitled "White Out" as being over exposed. Until I read your post, I didn't even realize that was a photo -- I actually thought that the file didn't load correctly and the black lines and red shape were part of a corrupt file or something.

That said, it is an interesting image. I also like your sprinkler winner too.

--MLP
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Ginn, Photographer
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 11:17 AM on 03.05.10
->> "I verify that this image was shot during the month of January, 2010"

That's "shot," not "made," "created," "fabricated," "developed," "composited," "Photoshopped," or "built."
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ken Blaze, Photographer
Cleveland | OH | USA | Posted: 11:36 AM on 03.05.10
->> has there been any talk about that winning SS photo from Jan? I hadn't seen it and wow. just wow.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

James Broome, Photographer
Tampa | FL | US | Posted: 11:45 AM on 03.05.10
->> SS Contest Rules:

1. Any SportsShooter.com member in good-standing can enter up to 6 images per month in any of four categories (Sports Action, Sports Feature, News, and Feature.) The images must have been shot or initially published sometime in the previous month. They don't need to be published. Only single images can be entered. No multiple image files please.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael McNamara, Photographer, Photo Editor
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 2:22 PM on 03.05.10
->> Here's the language from POY: Digital manipulation, manufactured photo illustrations, double exposures, added masks, borders, backgrounds, text, or other artistic effects are not allowed.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

James Broome, Photographer
Tampa | FL | US | Posted: 2:35 PM on 03.05.10
->> So either lots of people in this thread are wrong about SS not allowing composites or I completely misunderstand the phrase 'no multiple image files'.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael McNamara, Photographer, Photo Editor
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 2:48 PM on 03.05.10
->> James,

I understand "no multiple image files" as meaning to not put multiple images on a single canvas. Contests have these rules to prevent people from entering photo stories in a category designed for single images.

(my full disclosure: this month is the first time I will have entered the clip contest since June 2008, and I haven't regularly entered since 2007)
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

James Broome, Photographer
Tampa | FL | US | Posted: 3:06 PM on 03.05.10
->> That's a reasonable explanation. Thanks Michael.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Derick Hingle, Photographer
Hammond | LA | USA | Posted: 1:07 PM on 03.06.10
->> I don't know how to do those massive changes to photos, so what you see is what you get with what I shoot. About the only thing I do is adjust contrast, brightness, and curves when I do that. I do the best I can to do almost nothing to an image and hand transmit a file that is retouched very little if at all.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Vasiliy Baziuk, Photographer
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 4:19 PM on 03.06.10
->> Well.... there never seems to be lack of opinion here. But let's face it.... winning is fun, and sometimes can be lucrative and everyone who enters a contest needs to know that their images need to fit a certain “unwritten criteria” of that contest be it SS or WPP in order to get votes and win. That's the unwritten rule.... love it or hate it but that's the way it is. If you overtone your image then questions arise... if you undertone them they looks boring and ordinary and no one votes for them.

So if you want to win a contest make and interesting picture to start with, then tone the photo so it looks almost surreal..... just don't overdue it or you'll get caught. It's like speeding.... if you deviate too much from the pack you'll get caught.

This was actually one of the first image that did not need much toning... I have no idea why it won but it did. I did not even put any though into it.... the birds were coming so fast that I had no time to switch lenses.... I just pointed and shot with the 17-35mm.

DSC_1893 is the winner... taken at 5:38pm on 1/23/10.

www.sportsshooter.com/vasiliy/fishing/

http://www.sportsshooter.com/contest/clip/winning_image.html?id=1114
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jody Gomez, Photographer
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 3:14 AM on 03.07.10
->> This entire conversation is exactly why I'm so glad I suck at Photoshop.

When I manage to get a good image and it gets acknowledged with from my editor or through licensing, I know that my work stood on its own merit and not my post processing skills.

If that puts me behind the curve in this business, so be it. I'd rather be behind the curve based on honest photography than out in front based on Photoshop.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

John Korduner, Photographer
Baton Rouge | LA | United States | Posted: 7:11 AM on 03.07.10
->> Well, I'm gonna take my first public flogging as a member...

Am I the only person who finds it a little strange to see people who didn't even enter the contest... criticizing how it was/should've been judged?

If you don't agree with the criteria or results of a photo contest...wouldn't it be more logical to create your own? as opposed to griping about somebody else's?

Admittedly, I'm unfamiliar with "the rules" of the contest, and am still learning what's acceptable and unacceptable in photo journalism. But, judging from that photo I find it extremely hard to believe that he was being "dishonest." We all immediately recognize that the pic was only made possible by Photoshop...and probably a couple of plugins too. I am also forced to believe there wasn't a single judge hasn't forgotten more about the art of photography than I have ever learned.

From a purely aesthetic standpoint, I commend the photo. His original pic was probably something he wouldn't even show his mother...but his final product is compelling and thought provoking.

I'm working on my third year as a camera owner, so I might be in outer space with this notion....is this Photoshop outcry similar to the gripes about color photos in the age of B&W, or digital in the age of film?
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (1) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jeff Martin, Photographer
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 11:42 AM on 03.07.10
->> John, there is a huge difference in photography and photojournalism. The first is a form of art (like the contest photo). Journalism is supposed to be a reported record of what actually happened. When things are deleted or added to a photo for artistic reasons it calls into question the credibility of every photo you see in the paper or a magazine. The contest photo creates an image of a scene that never was. It may help illustrate the story the photographer was trying to tell. But it never happened. The raw file brings to mind some kids having an unsanctioned boxing match one afternoon. The over grainy, burned downed image with cloning done causes a completely different emotional response, at least to me.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Add your comments...
If you'd like to add your comments to this thread, use this form. You need to be an active (paying) member of SportsShooter.com in order to post messages to the system.

NOTE: If you would like to report a problem you've found within the SportsShooter.com website, please let us know via the 'Contact Us' form, which alerts us immediately. It is not guaranteed that a member of the staff will see your message board post.
Thread Title: World Press Photo disqualifies photographer
Thread Started By: Michael Ivanin
Message:
Member Login:
Password:




Return to -->
Message Board Main Index
Wanna help kids? Ask SS member Darrell Miho about Project Blossom ::..