Keeping digital photography...a photography.

[timor]

Hi everyone, just found something and submitting it for your discussion.
Photography competition winner disqualified for 'too much Photoshopping' - Telegraph

 

[OLaA]

I would like to see the original to see how much and what processing was done.

 

[timor]

Well, me to, especially that I don't like the final rendition, is too supernatural like for earthly landscape.

 

[OLaA]

I honestly can't see any detail in the photo. Only pulled it up on the mobile. Going to check it out in more detail when I get home

 

[Overread]

Honestly I'm surprised that they gave the award before they checked the photo out. Manipulation on the computer is something that can be very hard to pin down between too much and just enough so I would have thought they would want to see originals and have a general idea of the workflow submitted before they were to award the prize.

That said the article reports that it wasn't a case of outright cheating and more one of a difference of opinion on the line that was crossed. It makes me curious indeed to see the original and also hear what specific process or use of processes were responsible for the disqualification.

 

[rexbobcat]

It's kind of funny how they never specified what the manipulation was.

 

[unpopular]

I agree. Did he add something that wasn't there? Otherwise, I'd say this is just appeal to tradition in the worst possible way.

And man. Look at what they ended up choosing. Talk about no photoshopping at all.

 

[timor]

what specific process or use of processes were responsible for the disqualification.

I don't think, we will ever know that. That would be like drawing clear line between digital photography and digital graphics. I just wonder, if that heavily manipulated (entirely in darkroom) silver halide print would be consider: "too far".
This are rules of that contest:
Take a view - Landscape Photographer of the Year

 

[MLeeK]

I'd like to know who decides how much photo manipulation is too much and how much is acceptable

 

[timor]

I'd like to know who decides how much photo manipulation is too much and how much is acceptable

Subjective.
From the rules:
11) Digital adjustments. 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 organisers reserve the right to disqualify any image that they feel lacks authenticity due to over-manipulation. The judges will allow more latitude in the ‘Your view’ category, which aims to encourage originality and conceptual thinking.

 

[OLaA]

I found this on the website. Not terribly specific.

"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."

 

[timor]

I am really curious, what this panel of judges would say about landscape photography of Minor White.

 

[Tony S]

Isn't this the second or third time they ahve done this now for that contest....... and it's only been running 6 years?

 

[Gadfly]

According to some articles and blog posts I've been reading, the manipulation in the image went beyond adding filters and adjusting curves. Features of the landscape were added or removed, and the sky was apparently cut from another photo. Furthermore, the image is compositionally identical to an image made by another photographer (which isn't inherently wrong, but it seems odd).

I don't know how well substantiated those articles were, but it might be wise to withhold judgment of any party until more information comes to light.

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/11/02...-2012-stripped-of-title-for-too-much-shoppin/

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

http://www.timparkin.co.uk/2012/10/landscape-photographer-of-the-year-2/

Thread in which the photographer (cannockwolf) is called out on the manipulations:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=444304

Relevant post (192):

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=5086789#post5086789

Personally, I think digital manipulation on this scale is just fine, but if you're adding elements that weren't present in reality, that's crossing over into graphic art, rather than photography, and the submission should be part of a different contest.

 

[timor]

Thanks Gadfly for your search. This is a "lifetime" of reading as links pile upon links. It looks like a serious disturbance in the Matrix.
Funny thing, I heard that Adobe made or is developing a detective software aiming at discovering amount of digital picture manipulation. There maybe time, when courts will again accept only film pictures as an evidence.