UKBouldering.com

LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified (Read 5803 times)

SA Chris

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 29220
  • Karma: +630/-11
    • http://groups.msn.com/ChrisClix

fried

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1892
  • Karma: +60/-3
#1 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 09:01:43 am
I thought it was because it was a copy of a previous photo.

slackline

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 18863
  • Karma: +633/-26
    • Sheffield Boulder
#2 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 09:34:23 am
I'd say...

Quote
If something’s not tied down, it’s fair game for removal. For this shot, this included some boats in the harbour which drew the eye away from the main subject.

I also added the clouds, as the sky was quite bland. I’d love to stay for the week waiting for perfect sky, but I have a day job and this was my one and only chance.

...is too much for me.

Part of the value of great photos is that time and patience, repeat visits etc. have been endured to get that "perfect sky" without the "boats in the harbour".


Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11437
  • Karma: +690/-22
#3 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 10:54:21 am
Fairly old news this. Copying someone else's photo is not against the rules, but wholesale swapping of skies and removal of elements is.

I agree there needs to be some rules on what is acceptable, otherwise you are into a CGI competition, not photography. Having said that the whole competition has a credibility problem that needs addressing, made all the more marked by the continuing high standards of the wildlife competition it apes.

dave

  • Guest
#4 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 11:31:47 am
I thought it was disqualified cos there were no dogs, trains, or circus wolves in it?

One of the problems with the digital era of photography is this dubious notion that anything goes. Not helped by magazines regularly running articles about how to swap skies for idiots. Like it or not photography has a degree of entrenched cultural baggage that demands at least a "fair" of not true rendition of a scene, unless explicitly stated otherwise. People wouldn't have a problem with altering skies as long as every caption of a photo with altered skies stated that fact clearly - which of course nobody would do as the viewer would immediately think it was shit.

Lets be fair, at the end of the day snapping a shutter is piss compared to getting out a canvas and painting, or being a sculptor - which is why everyone does it. The terribly inconvenient parts of photography like having to be at the right place at the right time after multiple attempts (or walking miles to get a shot, knowing the light, searching out a subject which matches your lighting, knowing your gear and working within its limitations, learning from painful failures etc etc) is a photographers craft, our equivalent to learning how to use oils or learning how to make blows with a chisel on a piece of stone turn into something beautiful. Once you decide these things are too much trouble to bother with you're left with no craft, and no art, so photography becomes worthless.

cofe

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5796
  • Karma: +187/-5
#5 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 12:26:19 pm
I thought the problem was that there's no rock in the foreground.

slackline

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 18863
  • Karma: +633/-26
    • Sheffield Boulder
#6 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 06:39:15 pm
People wouldn't have a problem with altering skies as long as every caption of a photo with altered skies stated that fact clearly - which of course nobody would do as the viewer would immediately think it was shit.

Strong (slightly tangential) parallels with some of the other topics discussed within these pages.

Lets be fair, at the end of the day snapping a shutter is piss compared to getting out a canvas and painting, or being a sculptor - which is why everyone does it. The terribly inconvenient parts of photography like having to be at the right place at the right time after multiple attempts (or walking miles to get a shot, knowing the light, searching out a subject which matches your lighting, knowing your gear and working within its limitations, learning from painful failures etc etc) is a photographers craft, our equivalent to learning how to use oils or learning how to make blows with a chisel on a piece of stone turn into something beautiful. Once you decide these things are too much trouble to bother with you're left with no craft, and no art, so photography becomes worthless.

What dave said.

SA Chris

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 29220
  • Karma: +630/-11
    • http://groups.msn.com/ChrisClix
#7 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 09:45:00 pm
magazines regularly running articles about how to swap skies for idiots.

I think not enough idiots are included in landscapes so found them useful.

Sorry if it s old news to you JB I don't keep up to date with the hotbed of competitive photography, but though it was interesting.

Otherwise, what dave said.

petejh

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5776
  • Karma: +621/-36
#8 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 09:54:46 pm
 :lol:


Maybe a before and after would help people judge what's 'going too far'.

dave

  • Guest
#9 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 10:15:10 pm
I haven't seen a before/after, but there's a rundown on here of stuff in general, including a sky/background swap by the same guy on another image in the competition, and a comparison of the winning shot with one taken on the same day/location a few minutes apart.

http://www.alexnail.com/blog/news-updates/lpoty-2012/

petejh

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5776
  • Karma: +621/-36
#10 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 29, 2012, 11:29:53 pm
Good stuff. Got to say I find Peter Clark's image far more pleasing.
I think asking to see the original  RAW file of potential competition winners makes sense if the organisers want to encourage old-fashioned craft over post-processing craft. Then again there's probably ways to blag that too.

Paul B

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 9626
  • Karma: +264/-4
#11 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 30, 2012, 12:51:46 pm
...is too much for me.

Me too (and obviously the competition rules) but I do wonder what people are 'ok' with (in climbing images for example), certainly it varies a LOT.

I've used multi-layered images to remove people/baggage from the bottom of a crag, I've also removed top-ropes in the background and the odd, half draw hanging in shot.

dave

  • Guest
#12 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 30, 2012, 04:25:57 pm
The rule I go for is if you wouldn't be happy stating what you'd removed/altered in a caption alongside the shot when published then its too much.

cofe

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5796
  • Karma: +187/-5
#13 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 30, 2012, 05:37:05 pm
It would be one hell of a caption for that guy's 'photograph'.

Paul B

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 9626
  • Karma: +264/-4
#14 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
December 31, 2012, 03:33:08 pm
I might stick a few up in a week or so with before and after and see if people feel the clone tool has been abused. Certainly, intelligent cloning makes it very easy to remove items quick-fast!

andy_e

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 8836
  • Karma: +275/-42
#15 Re: LPOTY 2012 winner disqualified
January 22, 2013, 02:28:36 pm
I've also removed top-ropes from the routes I'm climbing

 ;)

 

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal