| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
An ethical issue with the Best of Photojournalism contest
Alex Witkowicz, Photographer
 |
West Boylston | Ma | USA | Posted: 12:57 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> I've never posted on these forums before, because at the age of 23, I'm a relative minion compared to many of the senior members here. I have nothing but respect for the work done by many in this community, so I've purposefully kept my mouth shut on some issues, and have instead tried to soak up information from those that have come before me.
That said, I can't keep my mouth shut any longer.
I'll come right out and say it: there are winning images in the NPPA's Best of Photojournalism competition that BLATANTLY break the photojournalists code of ethics.
Don't get me wrong, a vast majority of the winning images are fine, but there are a handful that break the rules. And to me, that's unacceptable.
Maybe it's because I grew up with computers and can spot a manipulated image a mile away, but I am truly surprised by the amount of manipulation that is considered not just acceptable, but award worthy.
Members of this board have been called out because of image manipulation. Some have had their reputations publicly tarnished. Staffers have lost jobs because of it. Yet it continues.
Furthermore, there was a heated thread here a few weeks ago about a professor's comments on a student's portfolio. The professor chastised the student for having incomplete and insufficient caption information. Some members chimed in: "The caption is just as important as the photo."
I agree, yet it seems we do not practice what we preach. The BOP has awarded prizes to images whose captions are incomplete, contain no context and worst of all: contain grammatical and spelling errors. There is one winning image that contains FIVE misspelled words.
Let me reiterate: I do not wish for this thread to devalue the vast majority of winning images that broke no rules, and are truly worthy of the "Best of Photojournalism" title. Rather, I wish to do the opposite. I wish to expose the fact that manipulated images and careless captioning devalue the work of photojournalists that strive to make honest pictures. |
|
Rich Cruse, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 1:31 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Alex:
Okay, I appreciate your comments about the NPPA contest winners, but you have not cited one image/technique that was used that breaks their standards. I am not saying that it isn't there, but can you be specific? I looked at a number of images and other than some excessive burning and dodging, I did not see anything over the top.
As a photojournalist, my goal is to capture images that look as close to reality as possible. I never want to be part of the story and I do not think PhotoShop should be used in place of talent. |
|
Armando Solares, Photographer
|
Englewood | FL | USA | Posted: 1:54 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> "As a photojournalist, my goal is to capture images that look as close to reality as possible,"
As a photojournalist you should be capturing reality. Not something that looks like reality. Anything can be made to look as close to reality as possible. |
|
Alex Witkowicz, Photographer
|
West Boylston | Ma | USA | Posted: 2:05 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Rich,
I don't want to give specific names or images, because I do not want this thread to destroy someone's reputation. These are public forums, after all. I'd rather give people the benefit of the doubt. I hope other members respect this and follow suit.
That said, you answered your own question. Excessive dodging and burning IS manipulation. I have nothing against burning down the highlights of an image a little bit or bringing up the shadows a touch, but when an image has it's edges and corners burned pitch black, it's unethical. It removes information. It changes the impact of the photo.
A heavily burned image may have been what the photographer saw in their head, or it may be their artistic rendition of what was going on, but it's not what the camera captured and it's not photojournalism.
There are also winning images that were manipulated by selective desaturation and that are excessively high or low contrast. |
|
Rich Cruse, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 2:18 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Perhaps I chose the wrong words. "As a photojournalist, my goal is to capture images that ARE as close to reality as possible." How's that?
Apparently the judges feel that the dodging and burning was okay. I agree with you, but it is not like they made a composite or something. Dodging and burning is old school and it is time to retire it in my opinion. |
|
Rich Cruse, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 2:22 PM on 03.25.09 |
| ->> On dodging and burning- It is okay on features and editorial, but not news. |
|
Thomas Meredith, Photographer, Assistant
|
Austin | TX | | Posted: 2:28 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Alex don't worry, you're not alone, but you maybe fighting a losing battle...
If you didn't catch this last summer, Jim Merithew stated:
"Judges everywhere are ready and willing to overlook just about anything for a little snap made in nice light, with a moment and some thoughtful composition."
and that sometimes
"photographs didn't win because of the burnt corners or any other Photoshop technique.
They won despite it."
in that case he is referring to specific set of photos, but as the first quote illustrates - its seems to be standard industry assumption at this point -- judges will overlook it.
Jim's article: http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/2006
thread about article, pros/cons varying opinions ect.
http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=29839 |
|
Vincent Johnson, Photographer
 |
Chicago | IL | USA | Posted: 2:46 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> "but when an image has it's edges and corners burned pitch black, it's unethical. It removes information."
Alex, get in line.
I've been posting about this for at least 2 years now and it just seems like most people don't want to touch it with a 10 foot pole.
I've heard everything from "it's prime lenses", to "excessive dodging and burning doesn't change the content of the image".
But the fact of the matter is no matter how many times people repeat these line, it doesn't make them true, nor are these people willing to show RAW files.
Now in defense of photographers who burn corners & over saturate color, I'm all for it. Personally it makes photos look better and I do it all them time for my "Commercial" clients.
My single biggest issue is with Editors & Contests that won't condemn these types of submitted images, but would place wording in their freelance contracts or contest rules forbidding such things.
So which is it? Would be nice to see the NPPA and other contests really put a foot down instead of balancing on the fence. Maybe next year we can all submit an HDR image or two. |
|
Andrew Dolph, Photographer
|
Medina | OH | USA | Posted: 2:51 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Seriously? With all due respect, because I've never met any of you in person, do you really want to start another ethics thread that is based in part upon misguided opinions about images that you personally did not make, much less tone for production (no matter the source)?
Sean D. Elliot's post from a recent thread on ethics conveys much of what I feel in reading this current thread:
(http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=29027)
"I always find the ethics discussions on this forum troublesome because of the mix of serious photojournalists and commercial photographers."
Alex, I would HIGHLY encourage you to read some of the past posts regarding ethics. There exist some seriously heated discussions. Read those threads. Then, read them again. Then, seriously consider the consequences of calling out other professional photojournalists without validated citations and proof.
Finally, take this from someone who's stuck his foot in his mouth so many times that he knows the taste of every single pair of shoes he's ever owned, save the rhetoric for this bars: "I wish to expose the fact that manipulated images and careless captioning devalue the work of photojournalists that strive to make honest pictures." Seriously? Look around you, man. A lot of us are a bit more concerned with the devaluation of work (photojournalism) because of LAYOFFS etc ... and oh, I don't know, the newspaper industry collapsing (among others).
Off to produce multimedia.
Respectfully,
— Andrew |
|
Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 2:56 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> So, Alex, you're not willing to call-out anyone individually ... and yet you are the arbiter of what is good and moral:
"Maybe it's because I grew up with computers and can spot a manipulated image a mile away, but I am truly surprised by the amount of manipulation that is considered not just acceptable, but award worthy."
If you're going to start the pissing match you better be ready to back it up. I have not looked at every winning image so far, and clearly because I didn't start using computers until I was in high school in 1984 I cannot see what you are seeing.
I for one fully agree that we need to apply our ethics to our contest images. The contest entry form requires those who entry to swear that they adhere to the NPPA's code of ethics. The problem then arises, is it the job of the judges to be able to tell so cut and dried what does and what does not meet that standard. Perhaps they should hire you to be the screener for all images?
I've seen things that looked pretty manipulated that simply turned out to be optical illusions. I've seen really funky lighting situations that I couldn't believe were real and yet turned-out to be.
You want to question an image's validity but you don't want to do it publicly, contact the contest's chairs. Ask questions. Heck, demand an answer and if you don't get one then make a public stink, but to do so as you have simply tells me you want to make a public stink. |
|
Dave Doonan, Photographer
|
Kingston | TN | USA | Posted: 3:01 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> A 23 year old kid calling out seasoned pros because "Maybe it's because I grew up with computers and can spot a manipulated image a mile away"
really? |
|
Louis Lopez, Photographer
|
Fontana | CA | USA | Posted: 3:21 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> it's a contest. Too many people let it go to their heads.
The Awards and certificates you get sit on the shelf on your wall, but they won't pay the mortgage.
you have merely pointed out why so many don't bother to enter these contests. |
|
Dave Doonan, Photographer
|
Kingston | TN | USA | Posted: 3:22 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Alex,
CAN you spot a manipulated image from a distance of 5280 feet?
in a literal sense.... |
|
Mike Brice, Photographer
|
Toledo | OH | USA | Posted: 3:28 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> The workings of the mind of a 23-year-old are important. Not understanding it, and its generation, is the reason that so many papers are going under.
Papers can't do the same things day after day and expect the results to change.
He didn't call anyone out - he just said that he doesn't understand the double standard.
Hey, maybe the loss of ethics in journalism is what is leading to its untimely demise. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 3:31 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> What Sean said +1
Now I'm just going to stare at the monitor and shake my head. |
|
Rich Cruse, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 3:32 PM on 03.25.09 |
| ->> Right on Mike. Still I am glad Alex expressed his opinion. Ethics are an important topic and should be discussed here more often. |
|
Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 4:11 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> just to clarify, don't take my sarcasm for Alex's post as some tacit approval. I recently, at the urging of an NPPA member who posted on the NPPA message boards, asked the NPPA's still clips chair to look at a questionable contest entry. I believe that contests have their purpose in defining a certain level of quality and as such should most definitely be held to as high an ethical standard as an aesthetic one.
But unless you have the strength of your convictions to call someone out in public (and I don't know as I would unless I was there and saw the original situation myself) then keep it quiet on the off chance that you might be wrong.
It's not difficult to find the names of the contest chairs and the judges. It's not hard to find the e-mail for the NPPA staffer who coordinates the contest. Take that path before you start a virtual lynch mob. |
|
Thomas Meredith, Photographer, Assistant
|
Austin | TX | | Posted: 5:02 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> What about the caption issue:
Alex said: "The BOP has awarded prizes to images whose captions are incomplete, contain no context and worst of all: contain grammatical and spelling errors. There is one winning image that contains FIVE misspelled words."
Sean, do you have an answer to that? |
|
Armando Solares, Photographer
|
Englewood | FL | USA | Posted: 5:39 PM on 03.25.09 |
| ->> I have a solution - enter only the RAW images. And I don't mean the picture format. Untouched, as they were captured by the camera, along with the "interpreted version." |
|
Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 5:40 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Once again, if you're going to go calling-out, then name names. Any chance the captions in question are on entries from non-english speaking (or at least not as native speakers) photographers?
Beyond that, Alex cited a discussion on this very forum as the standard for the importance of the caption. I do not actually know if the BOP rules state that an entry's caption must be perfect in grammar and spelling. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 6:12 PM on 03.25.09 |
| ->> Here we go again......... |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa Bay Area | FL | USA | Posted: 9:58 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Dave,
I have to ask you, what does Alex's age have to do with ANYTHING? Does a 23 year-old not have the right to voice an opinion and start a thread that leads (hopefully) to a productive discussion among professionals?
I personally thought he brought up some good points, and I don't believe he has to name names. In fact I thought it was quite professional of him NOT to name names in this particular instance. We've all seen heavy handed Photoshop techniques in contests before, though I'm not picking on any particular contest but, come on, really, we've seen what he's referring to.
And while I too believe that photographers should take their cutlines on their contest entries seriously, I think Sean brings up a valid point about shooters' entries from non-english speaking countries. Sean's was a point that I had never considered until this thread, so Alex's post has already been useful. Also, it just simply wouldn't be practical for the judges to read, in great detail, every cutline of every image. Judging would last 4 months if that were the case. If you've never witnessed judging at this level then I can tell you it's fast but quite fair. They just don't have time to call out the grammar police.
For the record (and I'm not trying to be a rude here) I'm one of the people who marked your post "inappropriate". While it wasn't grossly offensive, I thought it was kind of a bully statement and therefore I believe it was inappropriate. While I would have normally emailed you privately, I chose to post here because I wanted Alex (and the other 23 year-olds) to know that some of us value the opinions of younger shooters who wish to contribute to an appropriate exchange.... now back to the discussion. |
|
Kristopher Wilson, Photographer
|
Virginia Beach | VA | USA | Posted: 11:00 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> Re: "Look around you, man. A lot of us are a bit more concerned with the devaluation of work (photojournalism) because of LAYOFFS etc ... and oh, I don't know, the newspaper industry collapsing (among others)."
A crumbling newspaper industry isn't justification for turning a blind eye to ethics in photojournalism.
As far as Alex being 23, who cares? Young, old, it doesn't matter. We all learn from each other. It's just like out here in the Navy - sometimes the Chief learns from the Seaman.
Keep asking questions, Alex. That's what we're all here for. |
|
Marc F. Henning, Photographer
|
Bentonville | AR | USA | Posted: 11:39 PM on 03.25.09 |
->> i'd like to know how a sports action photo from a rodeo qualifies as an "enterprise photo."
http://tinyurl.com/cwl8ve
it's a good photo, but not a photo from a "found situation."
marc |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 11:42 PM on 03.25.09 |
| ->> As someone who has been involved in contest judging in the past....and someone who has dealt with ethical violations in the past...let me add this...about cutlines...many times judges get irritated when there is incomplete cutline information....many times they don't. sometimes they argue the point. "why didn't they (the photographer) get better information?" often it slides past. Alex, you are very young, I admire you for questioning the "powers that be" but what you must remember, first and foremost (GEEZUZ I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR YEARS) It's a CONTEST!! doesn't matter what level, whose judging, whatever. Yes, many of the posters here are right, unless the governing body of said contest agrees to follow ethical digital manipulation rules and ENFORCE them contest results in some instances are bullshit. But may I bring a dose of reality to those of you who put "weight" into these contests....I have a room full of plaques in my house. Some really big awards, some that I have emotional investment in that means only something to ME. The bottom line is these awards mean NOTHING in the greater scheme of things in our business right now. Let's keep focused. Fight the fight to keep images pure as to our guidelines, but let's not make it sound as though we are pissed off because someone else won an award even though they couldn't spell write. |
|
Andrew Dolph, Photographer
|
Medina | OH | USA | Posted: 12:02 AM on 03.26.09 |
->> @Kristopher
You read way too far into my post, man.
There are over a hundred posts on ethics from the SportsShooter archives, where it seems that the similar issues are rehashed in different ways, by photographers from a vast array of backgrounds.
I'm not turning a blind eye to anything. Just a little more concerned with the future of our industry rather than someone voicing concerns over ethics stemming from annual contest judging. Perhaps a better way of addressing a concern over ethics would have been to contact all parties involved, this includes NPPA members who oversee judging, privately.
At this point, I feel that there are more important things to focus our attention upon than contests, such as how some of us are going to pay the bills and put food on the table. |
|
Kristopher Wilson, Photographer
|
Virginia Beach | VA | USA | Posted: 1:06 AM on 03.26.09 |
->> Sorry Andrew, didn't mean to nuke your comment. I certainly understand and share yours and everyone else's concerns about the current and future state of our industry, and yes you are right - especially in these times, job security is a far more important issue than any contest.
I didn't mean for my comment to come off sounding quite so accusatory, so please take no offense. I simply meant to point out that even in these unsure times, ethics is still a relevant and important slightly-less-than-well-defined code we must all vigilantly defend despite all the upheaval around us.
Also, I know that the whole ethics thing, especially in contests, is a topic that's been beaten into oblivion on this board and everywhere else. I still think it's a relevant issue. It just seems like every year, there are more and more people dancing in that ethical gray area, be it contest or no. I only wonder what will be the straw that breaks the camel's back, and how hard will the resulting push in the opposite direction be.
Again Andrew, sorry for reading too much into your comment. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 11:49 AM on 03.26.09 |
->> Kristopher, the sad fact is there is no straw. The camel's (contest) back will never be broken. What end's up happening is the photographer that breaks the rules usually is empowered by the judge's "okaying" their manipulation. The feeling they have been "rewarded" makes them push the envelope a little farther....then one day they go too far and end up being a pariah to the industry. And the sad thing is many times they go "What did I do wrong? I mean it won an award!" Just once I would have loved to hear a judge say "That photo is over imaged- OUT!"
Instead of "Well, harumphhh! This photo has some heavy handed photoshop work on it but I'm saying let's keep it in". What's hilarious about judging is the judges will HAMMER someone with limited photoshop skills and out their photo in the blink of an eye...but they continue year in and year out to reward over imaged photos. I truly don't think it's going to ever change. |
|
Kristopher Wilson, Photographer
|
Virginia Beach | VA | USA | Posted: 6:08 PM on 03.26.09 |
->> Re: Just once I would have loved to hear a judge say "That photo is over imaged- OUT!"
Chuck, I can't tell you how much I wish I could be at the contest where a judge says that. I'd probably even stand up and clap. I swear I'd sound like Dr. Perry Cox way back in the peanut gallery - "Oh bravo, sir. BRA-vo!" |
|
Joe Cavaretta, Photographer
|
Ft Lauderdale | FL | USA | Posted: 6:35 PM on 03.26.09 |
->> Hows this for an ethical dilemma? The winner in BOP for news single got laid off this week at the Houston Chron.
Sad, Sad sh*t happening these days. |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 3:05 PM on 03.27.09 |
| ->> Agreed, Joe. At least one HM winner was from the Rocky Mountain News, which doesn't even exist any more. |
|
Joe Cavaretta, Photographer
|
Ft Lauderdale | FL | USA | Posted: 4:44 PM on 03.27.09 |
| ->> the small markets winner BOP photog of the year works for a newspaper in Tucson that will most likely go out of business very soon. |
|
Barbara Perenic, Photographer
|
Springfield | OH | USA | Posted: 5:06 PM on 03.27.09 |
->> Sometime in the past year, I sent a comment to a SportsShooter member that (in my opinion), the images on his/her member page looked extremely overworked, "hand of God" style. In particular, the shadows had been lightened considerably. Like, 50% with the shadow/highlight tool.
Now, you may ask, what qualifies me to make such a judgment? Well, coincidentally, I had worked at the same venue, shooting the same team at the same time of year under the same weather conditions and my raw images looked nothing like the finished products on this member's page. I phrased my concern as gently as possibly, saying that it was of course an opinion but that maybe he/she should leave things a little more "natural."
The answer?
Essentially, this photographer told me that he/she has won over 50 awards in his/her career and that I should mind my own F*****G business.
Obviously, wisdom comes with age and experience. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 5:55 PM on 03.27.09 |
->> Just 50? Amateur.
Okay, for the humor impaired that was a joke. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 6:14 PM on 03.27.09 |
->> Alex,
By naming nobody, you accused everybody.
--Mark |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
|
Roswell | GA | USA | Posted: 7:23 PM on 03.27.09 |
->> Whenever ethics has been discussed on this board the opinions are diverse. Some splitting hairs and then some quite distant opinions.
We all know ethics is often approached within a community through discussion and hopefully in the end the discussion makes us all think and come closer as a community around some core values.
Since these discussions bring about a lot of emotions at time and seldom a true consensus on this board, I wonder what the audience for our work thinks of our ethics.
Is there any possibility our slippery slope of ethics has contributed to the eroding of our audience?
One thing is for sure, all through history we have had unethical behavior in this industry. Is it any worse now than before?
Frankly it is good we have these discussions if it leads us to standards we hold as a community. |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 7:31 PM on 03.27.09 |
->> Alex - I have to agree with Mark L here. In your original post, you say:
"I do not wish for this thread to devalue the vast majority of winning images that broke no rules, and are truly worthy of the 'Best of Photojournalism' title. Rather, I wish to do the opposite. I wish to expose the fact that manipulated images and careless captioning devalue the work of photojournalists that strive to make honest pictures."
But how do you NOT devalue the "vast majority" by not indicating what, exactly, is in the minority? Additionally, how are you exposing ANYTHING by naming nobody? |
|
Dave Amorde, Photographer
|
Lake Forest | CA | USA | Posted: 8:30 PM on 03.27.09 |
->> "how are you exposing ANYTHING by naming nobody?"
How does "hmmm...maybe I'll go back and re-examine the winning entries with a more critical eye towards the winners as well as my own photography." work for you?
Frankly, I'm glad this DIDN'T start out as a "look what so-and-so did!" thread. Such threads are all to frequently followed by "Oops! Mea Culpa!" threads.
And yes, the issue has been discussed ad nauseum in the past. However, standards and ethics change over time; members come and go; priorities change. For these and many other reasons it is good to dust these topics off on a regular basis. Otherwise, why not just lock down the message board and treat it like an encyclopedia or dictionary? Oh wait; encyclopedias and dictionaries get revised, too. |
|
Trent Nelson, Photographer
|
Salt Lake City | UT | USA | Posted: 4:01 PM on 03.30.09 |
->> Here is an ethics question about a BOP winner. Andrea Bruce's essay on female circumcision, which clearly identifies a 7 year old girl by name and face.
People are saying this is a victim of abuse and should never have been identified.
http://tinyurl.com/cjkolu |
|
Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 4:34 PM on 03.30.09 |
->> Trent, you're not allowed to hijack someone's thread with a serious issue, please revert to the current petty indignation over hand of god retouching ...
Having just looked at Andrea's photos for the first time today I have to say I found them ... disturbing.
I also have to say it did not occur to me the complaints that are raised on those blogs.
Just goes to show you where my mind-set it doesn't it? I'm so deeply ingrained in the culture of my profession ...
There is no doubt in my mind that the editors at the Washington Post had some form of this discussion. Hopefully someone will be able to bring them into the discussion in some way.
It's not out of the norm in photojournalism for the question "should these be published?" to be drowned out by the strong belief that we have the legal right to publish them. In the daily newsroom world it comes-up with every fatal fire/car accident/drowning we cover?
Would Andrea's pictures have the same impact had they been shot or edited in such a way as to preserve the anonymity of the child? For me, the most powerful images are those where we see her face; the fear, the anxiety, the pain. |
|
Trent Nelson, Photographer
|
Salt Lake City | UT | USA | Posted: 7:09 PM on 03.30.09 |
->> Hey, didn't Stormi Greener cover some child abuse situations back in the early 90's? I seem to remember she was doing an in-depth story on poverty and there was a photo of a child getting hit or about to get hit. If I remember right, Stormi made the photo and then stepped in. My apologies if my memory is off on that, but I remember the photo pretty clearly.
Sorry Sean, I don't mean to be trying to engage in serious conversation here... |
|
Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 7:42 PM on 03.30.09 |
| ->> there was no shortage of talk on similar fronts when Donna Ferrato first published her domestic violence work "Living with the Enemy". |
|
Scott Strazzante, Photographer
|
Chicago | IL | USA | Posted: 9:34 AM on 03.31.09 |
->> I don't believe that it is a photo contest judge's job to interpret a particular contest's rules.
In fact, I have never been given a contest's rules to read before starting a judging.
If a contest has specific toning rules, it is the contest coordinators obligation to enforce the rules before the images get in front of a judge's eyes.
Once a contest starts, a judge should be able to assume that all photos are award eligible.
Photos can be discounted for poor captions but figuring out what toning has or has not been done without a bit of context is a very difficult job. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 10:16 AM on 03.31.09 |
| ->> Scott is correct. And another factor to consider. Should the contest co-ordinator actually have to go through every single entry then decide whether someone had violated the ethics rules? The problem is as journalists we all rely on one another and our integrity. This goes with many things, writing captions that aren't misleading and visually reporting the scene as it was, not as we WANT it to be are probably the two most important. That said, we all know there are "bad apples" in every facet of our society. That means as much as we want to think everyone is ethical and truthful it is not always the case. I think the only way these problems (in contests) are ever going to be truly addressed is for the judge's themselves of the various contests to have the intestinal fortitude to just "out" a questionable image. In most cases if something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck. Maybe then the folks who want that extra "edge" will stop over imaging their entries. But truthfully I don't see this happening. It takes someone getting busted and ostracized before they usually learn their lesson. |
|
Grant Blankenship, Photographer
|
Macon | GA | USA | Posted: 1:46 PM on 03.31.09 |
->> One year when I ran the Southern Short Course contest, we had some images that won big time that were later outed as being toned with a heavy hand in another contest.
I was cognizant of the risks of "toned for contest" images the next year, but the idea that I was supposed to use my questionable photoshop skills to assess each entry was laughable.
So Chuck is right. Community wide policing and a healthy fear of ostracism are the ways to keep this stuff in check.
But we are suckers for a punchy picture, yeah? Face it, contests don't reward the images that readers find meaningful, they reward the images that other shooters wish they had made. As such, we are always going to trend toward all kinds of extremes when we make ready our contest images.
If you choose to compete or pay attention to the contests, best suck it up and accept that some folks are going to bend the rules and ethics as far as they can. |
|
Andy Mead, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 7:49 PM on 03.31.09 |
->> Mark L,
Maybe "accusing everybody" isn't such a bad thing.
When we, as a community, stay silent about ethics and behavior within the photojournalist industry, it's rather difficult to get outraged later as the general public loses its trust in the honest-ness of news photography.
I've seen previous threads around here where names are mentioned. They usually turn into witchhunts. Sometimes called for, sometimes not. But they definitely don't turn into general discussions of the issue - like some of the discussion in this thread.
Let's not miss the forest (ethical issues raised) for the trees (specific photographers). |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 1:33 AM on 04.01.09 |
->> Andy,
Since there is no way to formulate ethical principles that cover every situation, it's only the specific transgressors that can indicate where the line is.
Aren't we supposed to be journalists? Where are the facts?
--Mark |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|