AP NEWS

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

Seems fair enough to me. It may or may not have been "major" but it was against the rules. What else were they supposed to do?

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

All very sad and not nice.

But the new "winner" basically leaves me cold.

Sorry, that's the best landscape from all the rest? Really?

I will look with interest when the exhibition is on next week.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

Yes. The photographer is at fault for submitting a photograph into a specific category without reading the rules.

I say 'at fault' not 'to blame'.

The blame for this mess must fall onto the judges heads. Surly if there was any doubt that this picture had been overly manipulated, and to anyone with half a photographic brain, it had, then the offending picture should never have reached the final stages of judging but should have been eliminated straightaway. David Byrne is probably suffering embarrasment through the judges decisions, not his.

Also put yourself in David's position having to tell the wife that new fitted kitchen has got to wait until next year..!!

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

I've already commented in the other thread, but I have a simple question. Is there or is there not a tick box on the application saying something along the lines of "I have read and agree to be bound by competition rules and terms and conditions"?? That would surely answer the question of whether he knowingly broke the rules or falsely ticked a box.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

There was supposed to be a feature about this competition in this week's AP - anybody got their copy yet?
Some interesting names in the list of judges (scroll to the bottom).

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

Wasn't this already a controversial choice, for other reasons...?

see here

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

Yes, but does not appear to have factored in the removal of title.

One would assum that Mr Clark's shot is straight? ie not or very little post processing.

He explain workflow here:

http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2011/12/featured-photographer-peter-clark/

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

Oi, watch it!!

You are right though, it should have been picked up the judges.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

Was it 2010 that we had the Wildlife POTY shambles...

I am not a judge, but without before/after images how does one determine the amount/degree of manipulation? Beats me how/why HDR manip is permitted, which invariably gives a misrepresentation of the actual scene at the time anyway.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

He submitted a montage rather than an actual photograph.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

While I tend to agree an entrant is responsible, surely the 'organisation' is more than part to blame. They have allowed manipulated entries in previous years. Was not a recent winner, taken on Skye, a 'joiner' with various other adjustments?

They should have highlighted the rule change.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

I'll stick my oar in then. He broke the rules, whether one agrees with the rules or not and whether it is reasonable to expect the rules to be studied or not.

Photographically, it is a great image I think. I have no idea and care even less if the actual scene is like that. The great masters painted landscapes and took poetic licence and no one condemns them do they?

If some photographers wish to base their hobby upon creating accurate representations of what they see then great. But my motto is "the camera is just the beginning" in the same way as a blank canvas is. So I am pleased that there are some competitions where manipulated images are welcome. Both sides should be happy.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

They do allow manipulated images, but are stricter for the 'Classic View' category:

When you have selected your pictures, digital adjustments, including High Dynamic Range (HDR) imaging techniques and the joining together of multiple frames, are allowed in all categories. However, for images entered in Classic view, Living the view and Urban view, the integrity of the subject must be maintained and the making of physical changes to the landscape is not permitted (removing fences, moving trees, stripping in sky from another image etc). The judges will allow more latitude in the ‘Your view’ category, which aims to encourage originality and conceptual thinking.

And this is explained on the 'how to enter' page, under 'Step 1: Selecting your images', so it's not as if it was buried away in the small print! I think it's the equivalent of RTFM.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

I still stand by what I said originally, it's still a great image. I do have to side with the "rules is rules" crowd, and it's one of the reasons I never enter competitions I am too worried I might fall foul of some minor rule or guideline and waste my time and entry fee.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

I've got a "very similar but un-manipulated image" here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chubbster/5946104539/ do you think I can claim the £10,000?

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

It was actually shot on a camera I won in an AP competition. So I should get bonus marks

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

As soon as I saw that picture I knew it was too good too be true! I have been there when the lighting is good but to get everything right as the picture suggests is to good to be true.....but what a fantastic job the photographer has done on this image it really is a good picture so well done David.....its just a pity that the rules were not read before he entered I feel so sorry for the photographer and he was the first to admit to what he had done and his crime was not reading the rules before he entered, I have seen other pictures by him and they are good really good, end of story...Have you seen the one that did win this section...........oh dear never mind! ......Every photo magazine is hell bent on teaching photographers how to take and print pictures like Dave's I just wish I could produce work like that, even after 50yrs I am still trying watch this space...and yes this weeks AP is full of the now disqualified entry.

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

I really liked this photo by David Byrne and found it a worthy winner. I, of course, didn't know the rules had been broken at the time and neither did the judges or David himself. I'm not saying that he shouldn't have his winners medal stripped of him but the picture is a great one and it shouldn't be thought of in any other way.

I wonder how the new winner feels about his prize? Delighted I'm sure but is there a tinge of guilt alongside it in some way or another?

 

Re: Photographer loses £10,000 title; claims editing 'not major

Why guilt? We have no reason to believe he cheated as well...