Posted by Brian Sugden on January 20, 2010 at 7:18 AM
What happens now. Apart from the exhibition a book has been released featuring this image?
However of equal concern in my mind is the quality of the re-productions at the NHM exhibition. I went there yesterday and was disappointed with many of the images. The re-productions are too large and many images appear soft and lack impact, which is a pity as the photographers put a lot of effort into producing these pictures. They also have a large display screen showing entries from previous years and have enlarged various parts of the images, which are shown side by side. So you can have a portrait image with a small section enlarged to panoramic. The quality is horrendous, especially as you have to sit so close to the screen.
It would be interesting to compare the quality of the re-productions with that of images taken with film from a few years ago.
Posted by Mark Davies on January 20, 2010 at 8:13 AM
how much damage will this cause and bringing the genre into disrepute .
so what wins it now?
This must be a nightmare for the organisers and I really dont envy them. Do they now reconvene the judging panel and select a new overall winner from the category winners? If so, then do they have to reprint the Portfolio books and all the publicity materials? I'm certainly glad it's not my problem.
Interestingly, I see from the statement that the photographer still denies the allegations. Does that mean he will be able to appeal / take legal action?
I don't quite follow why it would be unfair to choose from the ...... "already known category winners"....... I would have thought that the runner up from the Portrait category (if that is the category the wolf image won) would become category winner and then all category winners be judged again. I cannot see any reason why that would be unfair. I can certainly see that it would cause a deal of work but surely in the long run it would be better for the competition.
The reason is that the judging process is 'blind', all the way through, so when making the final decision the judges have no idea who the photographer is.... the official line...
'As the photographers are now known, as well as all the details about the images, it would be impossible to make an objective choice of an overall winner and it would be unfair to all the photographers who entered the competition'
If the guy is innocent, then I feel for him. He is/was a pro I thought ? I guess he'll be looking for another vocation in life now, or a name change
I echo Mark's thoughts about disrepute, and it will be interesting to see how this gets reported by the press.
Posted by Andy Astbury on January 20, 2010 at 9:37 AM
Well, if anyone remembers my original query over the image then they'll know I doubted the validity of the image from the get-go; especially once Phil informed me that the image was taken on a different camera setup than the near-identical one in Wild Wonders.
Ask yourself this - if a wild wolf had jumped a gate and been half blinded by flash, would it have come back and tried the same anytime soon??
The thing that upsets me most is one of the category winners was virtually in a dead heat with the wolf right up to the last minute - how's he feeling right now
I perfectly understand why there is now no overall winner - but I have to wonder, where was the judges common sense and brains - afterall I wasn't the only one who had the image down as a fraud, and the judges were aware of all if not more facts than we were, and earlier.
Phil, I know you say the judges are in a blind process, but are you trying to say that not one of them saw the WW version and no alarm bells started ringing?
Posted by Adam Seward on January 20, 2010 at 9:46 AM
Very sad indeed. What a nightmare for the competition organisers.
I am replying to this thread as an individual and just passed on information that is out there to clarify the situation re the winners, I cannot be drawn into a discussion here as I am sure you will be aware, I will reply by PM but that must remain Private.
I'm surprised this isn't up on the BBC site as yet. Because of this mess I think greater questions will be asked of honest, hardworking photographers. Let's hope joe public doesn't start branding the best natural images as an 'Iberian Wolf'
Posted by Matt Cole on January 20, 2010 at 10:15 AM
I also found it very odd from the word go that 2 totally different camera set-ups captured the same wolf performing exactly the same jump. That did seem fishy. I was also a little surprised that this image was chosen as the overall winner given its fairly high profile after the Wild Wonders competition.
But, I agree this is an unenviable position for the judges/organisers to find themselves in. Let's hope the competition bounces back bigger and better this year.
Matt
Posted by Danny Green on January 20, 2010 at 11:16 AM
When this story first broke out I was gutted and was hoping this was not going to turn out to be true, I was hoping it was just a mis-understanding and that everything would be how it should be. I was one of those Category winners on the night and was secretly hoping that this was it, this was the year and this was the time that my hard work would be regonised on a world stage, who amongst us wouldn't. There was 12 of us in that room on the night and we must have had all the same thoughts. Then the winner was announced and I was dissappointed but accepted it and just reminded myself of how well I had done in the first place. So to say this has tarred the event is an understatement. It is sad for the Competition, sad for the people that work so hard on it behind the scenes, sad for the judges, sad for all the photographers that entered it and sad for the people who have brought the book, products, etc, etc. The photographer in question has made a huge mistake and will regret this for the rest of his life, but it is only a mistake and I hope he is not hounded to death over this. The competition will bounce back that I am sure and will just get bigger and better as the years go by. If one good thing will come of this, that wolf shot will be very famous for years to come and I sincerely hope that it highlights the plight of the Iberian Wolf and changes this animals fortunes around.
Danny
Posted by Mark Davies on January 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM
I'm sure I'm not alone in sympathising with the other runners for the title .My heart felt commiseration.
sad times .
Mr Rodrigez is still in denial ,so I understand.We will never know the truth,I think, despite the reported evidence saying otherwise .A burdening label of cheat will be a heavy one .
As a positive though maybe, just maybe, it'll make some think twice about trying to pull a similar stunt .
Consideration to other Spanish photographers, especially those who initiated the investigation .
I do hope this announcement drives all who narrowly missed out onto bigger and better things . I certainly believe they can .
Heres to our burgeoning genre and no more ''story book'' images .
I think it's much more than a mistake. It's lying and cheating and personally I hope he never works again. This will obviously cast doubt in peoples minds about a all wildlife photography. It's real shame one will have got that award. I thought Danny's pictures should have been the winner anyway.
Posted by eric weight on January 20, 2010 at 12:59 PM
Can I just say Danny that your reply does you credit from the first letter to the last. It's all such a shame.
Eric
Posted by Paul Inglis on January 20, 2010 at 1:22 PM
When this story first broke out I was gutted and was hoping this was not going to turn out to be true, I was hoping it was just a mis-understanding and that everything would be how it should be. I was one of those Category winners on the night and was secretly hoping that this was it, this was the year and this was the time that my hard work would be regonised on a world stage, who amongst us wouldn't. There was 12 of us in that room on the night and we must have had all the same thoughts. Then the winner was announced and I was dissappointed but accepted it and just reminded myself of how well I had done in the first place. So to say this has tarred the event is an understatement. It is sad for the Competition, sad for the people that work so hard on it behind the scenes, sad for the judges, sad for all the photographers that entered it and sad for the people who have brought the book, products, etc, etc. The photographer in question has made a huge mistake and will regret this for the rest of his life, but it is only a mistake and I hope he is not hounded to death over this. The competition will bounce back that I am sure and will just get bigger and better as the years go by. If one good thing will come of this, that wolf shot will be very famous for years to come and I sincerely hope that it highlights the plight of the Iberian Wolf and changes this animals fortunes around.
Danny
Very well said Danny! Couldn't agree more.
Posted by Ian Mason on January 20, 2010 at 1:30 PM
Can I firstly echo Eric's observation about Danny's comment - good on you mate.
For me, this issue will never be properly resolved while the photographer seems to protesting his innocence. Presumably this could (should?) rumble around the legal establishment for a while now?
I am not in a position to argue the authenticity of the image or to doubt the judges. However, I once had someone express the view (publicly) that one of my low level reflection shots was digitally created, when it wasn't - so while he protests his innocence, I am left with a niggling doubt - a most uncomfortable position.
There can't be too many trees that look like that. If you think it's a shame or just a mistake think about the fact that he has basically robbed someone of 10,000 pounds. If that was me or probably anyone else they would take someone to the site where the pictures was taken, job done and no confusion.
This may shed light on the process that the competition went through, the photographer has received a life time ban... plus he never received the big prize money.
Wolves look like pretty dangerous creatures – how much would you risk to get the best shot?
Now I have 3 sons, so I can’t do it so much anymore, but when I was young I used to do really stupid things to get a nice picture!
Do you encourage your children to take photographs?
Yes, I’m trying to teach my 3 sons. The youngest one is 7 and really loves it. He asks for my camera all the time, he runs around taking pictures – he’s really good. He says to me ‘stay away Dad, you don’t know how to do it!”
The word the springs to mind for me over this issue is 'integrity'. Whatever the circumstances surrounding this unfortunate situation, it serves as a warning to us all about being honest about the information we provide with our images and the images themselves. Unfortunately, I could point out a number of shots on well known picture agency websites that do not disclose a featured subject as being captive, even though there is a very good chance they are! Of course, this is a matter for the photographers and their integrity and nothing to do with me.
The real surprise is that this issue doesn't revolve around digital manipulation - how long before a winning competition entry is exposed as a 'fake'? There is no doubt that the authenticity of images is far easier to call into question with the advent of digital technology.
I echo John Mac's sentiments and I can't help feeling that living with the burden of these circumstances will be very hard - or at least it would be for me.
Cheers,
Chris
Posted by John Robinson on January 20, 2010 at 7:01 PM
The whole thing has done more damage to the "image " of nature photography and photographers in general in my opinion.
But- having said that, are the BBC or any other wildlife film producing company squeaky clean ? You can put a nature programme on telly ,and really, there are no rules . They don't have to declare how the footage was obtained. If people only knew how some of the stuff was done. Remember the old OSF days ?
I see the competition this year will not allow captive images. That's fair enough, but what about an insect in the early morning still not warmed up - being rmoved from its roost and placed on a "conveinient "flower or twig? Is that "Captive"
I think this whole issue will make a lot of people think very carefully in the future.
Is a frog placed on a nice lily leaf "captive "
Or a hedgehog "arranged" in a nice place ?
In my mind it might as well be.
Is a flower in a studio "captive "?
Hi Everyone
It is a Sad, very sad story indeed. But this has raised a question in my mind. How many people on THIS forum, photograph captive birds or mammals and called them wild?
Best wishes everyone
Frederic Desmette
Posted by Edwin kats on January 21, 2010 at 3:51 AM
Well said Danny.
That guy made a huge mistake and will pay the price.
Edwin Kats
Posted by Lewis Thomson on January 21, 2010 at 5:38 AM
A very sad state of affairs. I totally agree with Chris O'Reilly. Lets also not forget going on from JRs point that even though most captive birds of prey shots etc are labelled as such in image libraries, this does not extend to most magazines and books in which the images are eventually published. How many members of the public think these shots are of wild species when they are seen in these publications? From my experience, about 90%
Lets hope somehow this situation can be turned into some positive steps for wildlife photography in the long run.
Lewis.
Posted by Lewis Thomson on January 21, 2010 at 6:03 AM
I was talking generally Julian, not about one specific magazine.
Posted by Mike Smith on January 21, 2010 at 6:05 AM
A sad end for what was an intriguing and well executed image whether or not the subject was captive. There was sufficient photographic skill behind the image to be recognised as something different from the norm, its just a shame that greed or whatever was also involved as the author's energies could have utilised to photograph a truly wild subject.
I have been confused for many years now on the basis for awarding the Title. In recent years the overall winner has varied from a gorilla in Berlin zoo, a family of elephants (taken on a safari tour), a picture of starling flock from a park in Rome. In theory this is a competition to find the best wildlife photographer, not the best wildlife image.
OK the images are judged without knowing who the photographer is, but surely subject matter and technical difficulty should be the main criteria for a "first cut" then a judgement of the images after that. It is very hard to understand how an image taken in a zoo or public park can have been taken by a better wildlife photographer than someone who paddles 5 miles out to sea in a canoe and then photographs humpback whale feeding behaviour. The former two for me are simply observational photography of a nature subject by a photographer who understands "composition and form" to generate a good image, the latter requires intimate knowledge of the subject and great dedication to get the image - the essence of the wildlife photographer. (hence why last years image won, compositionally it was poor, but the events leading up to the image was pure wildlife photography)
I don't envy the task of the judges, the world of nature photography has now moved on and is light years away from when the competition first started. The availability of phototourism ( lets face it where it is relatively easy to obtain a stunning image) now competes happily against the tradional wildlife photographer who develops their own sites/hide work etc - how do you differentiate the two when judging? You have to rely upon honesty, but really the value of the competition has been severely eroded. It is equally difficult to take seriously some of the junior category winners that have used equipment they cannot even lift (a multitude of 500mm and 600mm F4 lenses have always figured in the categories), although this year this crop of images does seem to have been weeded out fairly well and the camera techs are more in keeping with what an aspiring young nature photographer can actually use unaided.
Don't get me wrong, for me the Competition remains inspiring, but really only for the composition and final images, I am increasingly leaving the competition exhibition wondering if the best true wildlife photographer has won!
It is a good point you raise about BBC Wildlife Magazine and their very recent decision to label photos as captive – let’s face it, it was the intelligent thing to do in light of the mag's part ownership of the WPOY competition.
I can't help wondering if this new development will impact on what images photographers supply to the magazine from now on. The use of captive animals in 'wildlife' images is not well received in some quarters and therefore, photographers with 'captive' next to their copyright credit may feel they will lose some kudos - we'll have to wait and see. Personally, I agree with Mark Carwardine's comment about not being against the use of captive subjects per se.
Interestingly, BBC Wildlife Magazine promotes a preference for 'wild subject' images, yet in this months issue the inclusion of captive subjects in preference to some equally good wild alternatives (from well respected pros) suggests that there are a number of other criteria involved in image selection for this and other publications. The issues around 'captive' and 'wild' will rumble on but good images will always be in demand regardless.
Cheers,
Chris
Posted by Peter Barritt on January 22, 2010 at 11:53 AM
There is a lot to be said for using captive animals for commercial photography IMHO. It can allow wild animals to go about their business undisturbed. certainly some of the scenes in safari hotspots can get ridiculous for example. It only becomes a problem if people lie about using captive animals in their shots. The shame in this case(as with doping in sport) is that it castes a shadow over wildlife photography and brings it into disrepute in the eyes of the public.
Peter
Posted by Ben Simmonds on January 23, 2010 at 3:12 PM
I am very sadened by this whole issue, my question to the judges would be why was it even allowed to get to this stage surely most people here will have had the same reaction to this picture as myself which was 'there is something definitely not quite right about it' and if there was any doubt they should have left the image out of the running all together. This also raises the question - what is captive? there are so many grey areas - birds we feed in the garden, geese at WWT locations, even a fox that relies on food from our bins or rubbish tips. i think they need to be a bit more clear on the dividing line, I think everyone would like to have a definite set of parameters to follow?
Discussion
34 replieshttp://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/statement.jsp
However of equal concern in my mind is the quality of the re-productions at the NHM exhibition. I went there yesterday and was disappointed with many of the images. The re-productions are too large and many images appear soft and lack impact, which is a pity as the photographers put a lot of effort into producing these pictures. They also have a large display screen showing entries from previous years and have enlarged various parts of the images, which are shown side by side. So you can have a portrait image with a small section enlarged to panoramic. The quality is horrendous, especially as you have to sit so close to the screen.
It would be interesting to compare the quality of the re-productions with that of images taken with film from a few years ago.
how much damage will this cause and bringing the genre into disrepute .
so what wins it now?
Interestingly, I see from the statement that the photographer still denies the allegations. Does that mean he will be able to appeal / take legal action?
I don't quite follow why it would be unfair to choose from the ...... "already known category winners"....... I would have thought that the runner up from the Portrait category (if that is the category the wolf image won) would become category winner and then all category winners be judged again. I cannot see any reason why that would be unfair. I can certainly see that it would cause a deal of work but surely in the long run it would be better for the competition.
The reason is that the judging process is 'blind', all the way through, so when making the final decision the judges have no idea who the photographer is.... the official line...
'As the photographers are now known, as well as all the details about the images, it would be impossible to make an objective choice of an overall winner and it would be unfair to all the photographers who entered the competition'
Hope this helps
Robert.
I echo Mark's thoughts about disrepute, and it will be interesting to see how this gets reported by the press.
Ask yourself this - if a wild wolf had jumped a gate and been half blinded by flash, would it have come back and tried the same anytime soon??
The thing that upsets me most is one of the category winners was virtually in a dead heat with the wolf right up to the last minute - how's he feeling right now
I perfectly understand why there is now no overall winner - but I have to wonder, where was the judges common sense and brains - afterall I wasn't the only one who had the image down as a fraud, and the judges were aware of all if not more facts than we were, and earlier.
Phil, I know you say the judges are in a blind process, but are you trying to say that not one of them saw the WW version and no alarm bells started ringing?
I am replying to this thread as an individual and just passed on information that is out there to clarify the situation re the winners, I cannot be drawn into a discussion here as I am sure you will be aware, I will reply by PM but that must remain Private.
Cheers
Phil
But, I agree this is an unenviable position for the judges/organisers to find themselves in. Let's hope the competition bounces back bigger and better this year.
Matt
Danny
sad times .
Mr Rodrigez is still in denial ,so I understand.We will never know the truth,I think, despite the reported evidence saying otherwise .A burdening label of cheat will be a heavy one .
As a positive though maybe, just maybe, it'll make some think twice about trying to pull a similar stunt .
Consideration to other Spanish photographers, especially those who initiated the investigation .
I do hope this announcement drives all who narrowly missed out onto bigger and better things . I certainly believe they can .
Heres to our burgeoning genre and no more ''story book'' images .
Eric
Very well said Danny! Couldn't agree more.
For me, this issue will never be properly resolved while the photographer seems to protesting his innocence. Presumably this could (should?) rumble around the legal establishment for a while now?
I am not in a position to argue the authenticity of the image or to doubt the judges. However, I once had someone express the view (publicly) that one of my low level reflection shots was digitally created, when it wasn't - so while he protests his innocence, I am left with a niggling doubt - a most uncomfortable position.
ttp://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations
There can't be too many trees that look like that. If you think it's a shame or just a mistake think about the fact that he has basically robbed someone of 10,000 pounds. If that was me or probably anyone else they would take someone to the site where the pictures was taken, job done and no confusion.
http://www.photoradar.com/news/story/wildlife-photographer-of-the-year-2010-%E2%80%9Cno-captive-animals-allowed
Again I stress that I cannot enter into discussion I can only post what is already out there and known.
Phil
From interview with Jose Luis Rodriguez:
Wolves look like pretty dangerous creatures – how much would you risk to get the best shot?
Now I have 3 sons, so I can’t do it so much anymore, but when I was young I used to do really stupid things to get a nice picture!
Do you encourage your children to take photographs?
Yes, I’m trying to teach my 3 sons. The youngest one is 7 and really loves it. He asks for my camera all the time, he runs around taking pictures – he’s really good. He says to me ‘stay away Dad, you don’t know how to do it!”
What a legacy to leave your kids.
The real surprise is that this issue doesn't revolve around digital manipulation - how long before a winning competition entry is exposed as a 'fake'? There is no doubt that the authenticity of images is far easier to call into question with the advent of digital technology.
I echo John Mac's sentiments and I can't help feeling that living with the burden of these circumstances will be very hard - or at least it would be for me.
Cheers,
Chris
But- having said that, are the BBC or any other wildlife film producing company squeaky clean ? You can put a nature programme on telly ,and really, there are no rules . They don't have to declare how the footage was obtained. If people only knew how some of the stuff was done. Remember the old OSF days ?
I see the competition this year will not allow captive images. That's fair enough, but what about an insect in the early morning still not warmed up - being rmoved from its roost and placed on a "conveinient "flower or twig? Is that "Captive"
I think this whole issue will make a lot of people think very carefully in the future.
Is a frog placed on a nice lily leaf "captive "
Or a hedgehog "arranged" in a nice place ?
In my mind it might as well be.
Is a flower in a studio "captive "?
Food for thought.?
JR
It is a Sad, very sad story indeed. But this has raised a question in my mind. How many people on THIS forum, photograph captive birds or mammals and called them wild?
Best wishes everyone
Frederic Desmette
That guy made a huge mistake and will pay the price.
Edwin Kats
Lets hope somehow this situation can be turned into some positive steps for wildlife photography in the long run.
Lewis.
I was talking generally Julian, not about one specific magazine.
I have been confused for many years now on the basis for awarding the Title. In recent years the overall winner has varied from a gorilla in Berlin zoo, a family of elephants (taken on a safari tour), a picture of starling flock from a park in Rome. In theory this is a competition to find the best wildlife photographer, not the best wildlife image.
OK the images are judged without knowing who the photographer is, but surely subject matter and technical difficulty should be the main criteria for a "first cut" then a judgement of the images after that. It is very hard to understand how an image taken in a zoo or public park can have been taken by a better wildlife photographer than someone who paddles 5 miles out to sea in a canoe and then photographs humpback whale feeding behaviour. The former two for me are simply observational photography of a nature subject by a photographer who understands "composition and form" to generate a good image, the latter requires intimate knowledge of the subject and great dedication to get the image - the essence of the wildlife photographer. (hence why last years image won, compositionally it was poor, but the events leading up to the image was pure wildlife photography)
I don't envy the task of the judges, the world of nature photography has now moved on and is light years away from when the competition first started. The availability of phototourism ( lets face it where it is relatively easy to obtain a stunning image) now competes happily against the tradional wildlife photographer who develops their own sites/hide work etc - how do you differentiate the two when judging? You have to rely upon honesty, but really the value of the competition has been severely eroded. It is equally difficult to take seriously some of the junior category winners that have used equipment they cannot even lift (a multitude of 500mm and 600mm F4 lenses have always figured in the categories), although this year this crop of images does seem to have been weeded out fairly well and the camera techs are more in keeping with what an aspiring young nature photographer can actually use unaided.
Don't get me wrong, for me the Competition remains inspiring, but really only for the composition and final images, I am increasingly leaving the competition exhibition wondering if the best true wildlife photographer has won!
It is a good point you raise about BBC Wildlife Magazine and their very recent decision to label photos as captive – let’s face it, it was the intelligent thing to do in light of the mag's part ownership of the WPOY competition.
I can't help wondering if this new development will impact on what images photographers supply to the magazine from now on. The use of captive animals in 'wildlife' images is not well received in some quarters and therefore, photographers with 'captive' next to their copyright credit may feel they will lose some kudos - we'll have to wait and see. Personally, I agree with Mark Carwardine's comment about not being against the use of captive subjects per se.
Interestingly, BBC Wildlife Magazine promotes a preference for 'wild subject' images, yet in this months issue the inclusion of captive subjects in preference to some equally good wild alternatives (from well respected pros) suggests that there are a number of other criteria involved in image selection for this and other publications. The issues around 'captive' and 'wild' will rumble on but good images will always be in demand regardless.
Cheers,
Chris
Peter