Posted by Jim Erhardt on October 30, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Some familiar names in there - thanks for the link!
Posted by Richard Hahn on October 30, 2008 at 8:30 PM
Good evening. Some very incredible pictures. While I do not mean to offend anyone, how does a person get photographer of the year with a picture taken from an unmanned camera? Get picture yes, get subject yes, but there was no one at the camera to take the picture.
This is just my opinion.
Posted by Cliff Beittel on October 30, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Richard,
Would your opinion change if the photographer were 50 yards away with an electronic release? If so, why? The camera didn't take the image--focused as it was, the exposure set as it was, the photo composed as it was, and the shutter tripped when it was--all by itself. The photographer did all those things. Plus, he didn't just follow Ralph Waldo Emerson's well worn path to Bosque or Florida, he seems to have made a path of his own and spent many months at it, getting pictures that few if any have. I can't judge the winning picture--or any of the images--from a small JPEG, but I see nothing wrong with the judges breaking a new trail.
P.S. I don't know the photographer and have never made a single image with a remote set-up.
Posted by Richard Hahn on October 30, 2008 at 10:46 PM
Cliff,
Good evening. No my opinion would not change if the photographers was fifty yards away with an electronic release. I am not judging the picture, I am commenting on the method of how it was taken. The camera took the picture, not the photographer. Yes the photographer set the camera to the settings, but he was not there to take the picture.
I give the photographer credit for enduring the weather that he did and I am honestly glad that he did get the picture that he was after. I also give him a tremendous amount of credit for advising everyone about how the picture was taken.
This is why I said it was my opinion. To me taking a photograph is just that. You go out to the woods, beach, wherever and you hold the camera and take a picture (s) of the subject in their nature environment. You then down load it to the computer, crop it or resize it to the requirements if you are sending it to a contest, web site, etc.
I also do not think it is a true photograph of the subject in its natural environment if you change it using one of the software programs, clone things out, put things in, etc.
There is nothing wrong with the judges breaking a new trail, but in my opinion it should be a separate category and not the same as the person holding the camera and actually taking the picture. Thank you for your comments.
ps - Even if you new the photographer and / or have used unmanned cameras, that would not change the right that you have to express your opinion.
Posted by Cliff Beittel on October 31, 2008 at 8:51 AM
Richard,
Many, many people will rationalize anything they personally have done. That's why I mentioned I have no personal interest in infared-beam (or whatever the technology is now) photography.
Another factor in my respect for the Snow Leopard images, though, is a little (very little, as you'll see) personal experience with cat photography. In 2000, I spent something like 120 days on a South Texas ranch that has a healthy population of Ocelots. I was there for the Valley Land Fund photo contest, where doing well requires a diverse portfolio of varied subjects. An ocelot would have been nice, but it wasn't essential to me, and I hadn't spent the $1000 then needed to buy two remote triggers. Almost everytime scientists had come out to radio-collar an Ocelot on the ranch, they were able to do so using traps with live chickens. But in 120 days, I never caught sight of an Ocelot. That's hardly surprising, because Ocelots are so nocturnal and so stealthy that in 25 years, none of the many people living and working on the ranch had ever seen one--apart from the ones caught by the scientists. I suspect Snow Leopards aren't quite as hard to photograph (they seem not to be strictly nocturnal, for example), but I still respect the WPOTY judge's willingness to recognize the effort. It's fine that many winning images require little more than sitting in a hired safari vehicle, but it's also nice to see something new. And with so many great "regular" images entered, it isn't surprising the judges might be drawn to something out of the ordinary
Posted by Kent Staubus on October 31, 2008 at 5:24 PM
My thinking is it took great skill to get the shot. I take tons of photos at night myself and know how difficult it is. You really have to understand how light works to pull it off. The guy knew where to set the camera, how to set exposure, and most of all made the effort. While I have not tried the remote/.automatic camera release stuff yet, I am sure there are a LOT of difficulties to it.
Kent in SD
Posted by Richard Hahn on November 5, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Cliff & Kent,
Good evening. Apparently I am not the only one who has a similar OPINION as mine. Please go to the following for opinions both ways:
http://birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php?p=164005#post164005
Posted by Cliff Beittel on November 6, 2008 at 9:25 AM
". . . Apparently I am not the only one who has a similar OPINION as mine. . . . "
Richard,
Never said you were, nor would I form my own opinion "democratically." I just don't find the "anti" arguments very convincing, nor the energy expended very useful. A separate category for camera-trapped images? How about a separate category for auto-focused images? Camera-trapped images OK for magazines, but they aren't "art"? The contest is about wildlife photography, and the Snow Leopard images are clearly that; do the rules even mention art? You have to be there in the mud to get the perfect head turn? Or does your 10-fps camera just record all the head positions, and you pick the perfect one later? Image has to look exactly as it did through the viewfinder? You mean it has to include all the AF sensor symbols, exposure data, etc.?
But what's most telling is that all nature photo forums are full of "Congrats to . . . " threads, in which forum members express group pride that "one of theirs" has achieved much deserved recognition. Would any participant in the various forums attack a winning photo by one of their own? And if not, why not? Because it would be bad manners? I say shoot what you want, the way you want. If it gets a prize, fine, but it won't make it a better photo, any more than the lack of a prize means it's a bad photo. What we like is highly subjective. What judges like is highly subjective. As Galen Rowell wrote, what we respond to in a photo is that someone else mentally organized reality in the same way we do (or that we'd like to). As you say, it's opinion. We all have 'em, but we don't need to rain on someone else's achievement.
Discussion
8 repliesGot in at 1.30am this morning after the awards, back to the museum for 7.30am, just got back from the Media preview....
So here are the results....
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/onlineGallery.do
All the best
Phil
This is just my opinion.
Would your opinion change if the photographer were 50 yards away with an electronic release? If so, why? The camera didn't take the image--focused as it was, the exposure set as it was, the photo composed as it was, and the shutter tripped when it was--all by itself. The photographer did all those things. Plus, he didn't just follow Ralph Waldo Emerson's well worn path to Bosque or Florida, he seems to have made a path of his own and spent many months at it, getting pictures that few if any have. I can't judge the winning picture--or any of the images--from a small JPEG, but I see nothing wrong with the judges breaking a new trail.
P.S. I don't know the photographer and have never made a single image with a remote set-up.
Good evening. No my opinion would not change if the photographers was fifty yards away with an electronic release. I am not judging the picture, I am commenting on the method of how it was taken. The camera took the picture, not the photographer. Yes the photographer set the camera to the settings, but he was not there to take the picture.
I give the photographer credit for enduring the weather that he did and I am honestly glad that he did get the picture that he was after. I also give him a tremendous amount of credit for advising everyone about how the picture was taken.
This is why I said it was my opinion. To me taking a photograph is just that. You go out to the woods, beach, wherever and you hold the camera and take a picture (s) of the subject in their nature environment. You then down load it to the computer, crop it or resize it to the requirements if you are sending it to a contest, web site, etc.
I also do not think it is a true photograph of the subject in its natural environment if you change it using one of the software programs, clone things out, put things in, etc.
There is nothing wrong with the judges breaking a new trail, but in my opinion it should be a separate category and not the same as the person holding the camera and actually taking the picture. Thank you for your comments.
ps - Even if you new the photographer and / or have used unmanned cameras, that would not change the right that you have to express your opinion.
Many, many people will rationalize anything they personally have done. That's why I mentioned I have no personal interest in infared-beam (or whatever the technology is now) photography.
Another factor in my respect for the Snow Leopard images, though, is a little (very little, as you'll see) personal experience with cat photography. In 2000, I spent something like 120 days on a South Texas ranch that has a healthy population of Ocelots. I was there for the Valley Land Fund photo contest, where doing well requires a diverse portfolio of varied subjects. An ocelot would have been nice, but it wasn't essential to me, and I hadn't spent the $1000 then needed to buy two remote triggers. Almost everytime scientists had come out to radio-collar an Ocelot on the ranch, they were able to do so using traps with live chickens. But in 120 days, I never caught sight of an Ocelot. That's hardly surprising, because Ocelots are so nocturnal and so stealthy that in 25 years, none of the many people living and working on the ranch had ever seen one--apart from the ones caught by the scientists. I suspect Snow Leopards aren't quite as hard to photograph (they seem not to be strictly nocturnal, for example), but I still respect the WPOTY judge's willingness to recognize the effort. It's fine that many winning images require little more than sitting in a hired safari vehicle, but it's also nice to see something new. And with so many great "regular" images entered, it isn't surprising the judges might be drawn to something out of the ordinary
Kent in SD
Good evening. Apparently I am not the only one who has a similar OPINION as mine. Please go to the following for opinions both ways:
http://birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php?p=164005#post164005
Richard,
Never said you were, nor would I form my own opinion "democratically." I just don't find the "anti" arguments very convincing, nor the energy expended very useful. A separate category for camera-trapped images? How about a separate category for auto-focused images? Camera-trapped images OK for magazines, but they aren't "art"? The contest is about wildlife photography, and the Snow Leopard images are clearly that; do the rules even mention art? You have to be there in the mud to get the perfect head turn? Or does your 10-fps camera just record all the head positions, and you pick the perfect one later? Image has to look exactly as it did through the viewfinder? You mean it has to include all the AF sensor symbols, exposure data, etc.?
But what's most telling is that all nature photo forums are full of "Congrats to . . . " threads, in which forum members express group pride that "one of theirs" has achieved much deserved recognition. Would any participant in the various forums attack a winning photo by one of their own? And if not, why not? Because it would be bad manners? I say shoot what you want, the way you want. If it gets a prize, fine, but it won't make it a better photo, any more than the lack of a prize means it's a bad photo. What we like is highly subjective. What judges like is highly subjective. As Galen Rowell wrote, what we respond to in a photo is that someone else mentally organized reality in the same way we do (or that we'd like to). As you say, it's opinion. We all have 'em, but we don't need to rain on someone else's achievement.