World Wildlife Photographer of the Year Exhibition

[Donald]

Just been, this morning, to see the exhibition of all the award winners from the WWP of the Year 2013 currently on at the National Museum in Edinburgh. See this link http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/wpy/ga...013/index.html.

Stunning exhibition.

Of so many stunning images, my own particular 'Oh my God, I wish I'd made that image' was not a B & W. Instead it was Gregoire Bouguereau's 'Storm Panic' - http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/wpy/ga...orm-panic.html. Thge light and tone is spell-binding. The texture in the clouds is gorgeous. This online copy is good, but the original on an exhibition wall just takes your breath away.

[Shadowman]

Nice link.

[Black Pearl]

Great link and some astonishing pictures - the Light Box was so slow I nearly age up though.

Just me?

[Bobobird]

Great images or should I say technically great images.
The winners need to join up here and get into our comps.

The best comps imho are those like ours - let the peers decide. A judge or panel of judges (with a chief judge obviously) bring baggage, bias and lots of ignorance with them.

One contest run by NatGeo 2013 has all the entries to view. I looked at a substantial number of the nature shots. The ones that were judged as most worthy were not quite what I expected.

Winner - clearly a setup shot. Unique view perhaps but setup and calling that Nature? It is not nature, the animal was enticed by fish placed underwater (possibly confined space). No animal is going to let that go. Despite what the photographer has said - there is NO way anyone is going to use a wide angle lens on a polar bear. Even that guy and the train in the video in another post. Last year I would have thought Wow. This year after seeing all the monkey business that bird photographers get into to get their paying tourist photographers the best shots was truly blood curdling.

2nd - that scene can be seen in Toronto Zoo everyday. One guy decided to take a pic and join the contest and came 2nd. How on earth could an image of a very bored, obviously nuts animal even get into a Nature contest? Merits of the photo or pity for the rhino? The Indonesian zoo is a great place for such shots if anyone is interested. One can even claim it was taken in the wild. LOL

3rd - anybody that lives in a very crowded almost treeless city sees those sort of nests made partly out of clothes hangers. Nothing special in many highrise Asian cities like Tokyo. The judge obviously North American thought it was awesome of course. A mass of black with little or no definition and if one did not read the text one could not tell what it is he is looking at. Great? Perhaps as an abstract.

To this day, the only nature contest winning shot that sticks in my mind is that of the bird rescue after the BP disaster.

Donald's link to one of the commended images is a great image and got just a commendation. LOL Minor nitpick with that image would be too little foreground, too much sky. I learned that here. haha.

[AB26]

Winner - clearly a setup shot. Unique view perhaps but setup and calling that Nature?

2nd - that scene can be seen in Toronto Zoo everyday.

To this day, the only nature contest winning shot that sticks in my mind is that of the bird rescue after the BP disaster.

Donald's link to one of the commended images is a great image and got just a commendation. LOL Minor nitpick with that image would be too little foreground, too much sky. I learned that here. haha.

Shame on you Bobo. Commenting on something you have no idea of how it was done does not suit you.

Greg Du Toit took that shot of Elephants in Botswana. I challenge you to “set up” African Elephants for a shot like that. Check out his other Wildlife shots!

Hannes Lochner most probably also took that Lion shot in Botswana. Another challenge, why don’t you try it with Kgalagadi Lions.

What does sympathy with the Rhino have to do with the winners?

Donald’s link: READ the title. STORM panic! You want to increase foreground and reduce the impact of the threatening storm above the Elephants? Nitpick, learned on CiC? In that case CiC is a bad place for people to learn more about Photography!

Envy has never made anybody a better photographer, learning from people like those, whom made the shots, might turn you into a Photographer.

Photographers envy is a nasty reality with many a bad amateur.

[Mike Buckley]

It's apparent to me, though admittedly a bit confusing, that Bobo is describing images of a NatGeo 2013 competition, not the competition that Donald has brought to our attention.

I'm still trying to figure out whether I like the cold white balance of the overall winning entry of the elephants. My initial impression is that it's supposed to look like nighttime but doesn't succeed.

[Donald]

I agree with Mike that Bobo was referring to the Nat Geo competition, not the WWP images that I visited.

With regards to Bobo's comments, I was indeed quite disturbed by this image - http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/wpy/ga...survivors.html. If you read the accompanying notes, you find out that the photographer placed the deer carcase into position and then waited for the leapords to appear. I have a problem accepting the legitimacy of that, magnificent final image thought it is.

[Mike Buckley]

the photographer placed the deer carcase into position and then waited for the leapords to appear

The information shown below is excerpted from the competition rules. You get to decide for yourself whether dragging a carcass into position adheres to the rules.

Images entered must not attempt to deceive the viewer or misrepresent the reality of nature.

If the Organisers suspect that an image has been achieved through the use of cruel or unethical practices, including the use of live bait, the entry will be disqualified...


I infer from that last item that the organisers feel that using dead bait is compliant with competition rules. Interesting.

[Bobobird]

Thanks Mike, Donald, Andre.
The NHM images are really great but I was commenting on the NatGeo 2013.

@Andre - strong words my friend. Strong words. I agree that I cannot setup elephants. Go to Thailand or India in particular and find the same scenes. I agree I cannot take lion shots. Go to Canada of all places and you will find pups that will snuggle up to you and lick your nose. If so inclined they can even present to you a baby lion and tiger at the same time. Wolf even. Breathtaking backgrounds if you select the right day. $40 for the whole day when I visited that place many many years ago. No camera in those days.

Not photography envy I can assure you. Whether I am able to do it or not is not the point. The point is that my admiration of the accomplishment leads to something a bit deeper than appreciation. As a beginner I try to envisage how it was taken, and in many cases it is not black and white and raise certain doubts. I had never experienced setups prior to last winter and would go wow with every great shot. Imagining how it could be done was very illuminating having actually witnessed 3 baitings. Being cynical has certain advantages in my continuing education. I have vowed never to do that. Not saying the 2 you referred to were setups, probably not. Great images whatever way taken. Seriously good photographers those 2.

If you have seen my shots of the snowy owl and great gray owl. Perhaps better could have been taken for about 200 buck in all. I choose to weather -20+ temps, 40-80kmph winds, over 4000 km of driving, over 50 long trips despite my bad back, toll road charges that could have put a nice prime into the bag, 2 thigh deep falls into snow/ice, frozen fingers that took 3 days of more for feeling to return. A while back posted images of the conditions we endured almost every day from January to late March in possibly the worst winter conditions in decades.

What for you may ask. One reason only - ethics! A sadly missing commodity these days. 2 actually - really wanted to get those birds. I am 65 this year and really should not be doing all this. Glad to say that there are dozens of people who can attest to the authenticity of what went into getting those shots. Might post the 2 series one day.

Does how difficult it was to get a shot have anything to do with the shot? Of course not. That is why we see that kind of shot.

[Nomadr]

i enjoy seeing nature shots, I do remember seeing one the other year with a wolf jumping a gate lit by a flash and the moonlight and thinking to myself there is no way on earth anyone could be that lucky,turns out my feelings were justified, the wolf belonged to a zoo and the gate was nearby. http://www.theguardian.com/environme...award-stripped

[Bobobird]

Here is how one got his shot. Read the description. Honesty about how the shot was obtained is important to dispel doubts about how he could have got so close to a cub without the entire pride that has to be in close proximity.
http://yourshot.nationalgeographic.com/photos/3519988/

[drjuice]

I'm with Bobobird on this one. I also took a pretty good look at the polar bear (mama, I presume) and cub. I finally decided that, regardless of whatever the photographer did, he could have done it better without help from the dead fish!

JMHO!

virginia

[davidedric]

I don't know, but I do wonder if the nature of the bait has an effect. Would folks who are "anti" feel the same about using seeds to attract birds to photograph? Not stirring, genuine question.

Dave

[Brownbear]

For a wildlife photography contest, I'm with Bobo. True nature photography, is about photographing wildlife in its natural habitat, and the patience to wait to capture behaviours, seek out the best light/background etc...

Bobo's bird images are stunning and to me represent the dedication of true nature photography, even more so...especially for a wildlife photography contest. (ie; using seeds or anything to bait birds is not the same)

I don't know, but I do wonder if the nature of the bait has an effect. Would folks who are "anti" feel the same about using seeds to attract birds to photograph? Not stirring, genuine question.

Dave

[Mike Buckley]

I think it depends on the rules of the competition and that requires the owner of the competition to clearly write them. Examples of things that can and cannot be done should be provided. Unfortunately, that kind of clarity is not always achieved. This competition that explicitly refers to live bait but does not mention other kinds of bait is an example of lack of clarity.

[Bobobird]

Christina, thanks. I appreciate that.

Mike, refer to Donald's comment at post #7. The organisers want to be told if a shot was setup and/or if live bait was used. The photographer followed the rules and stated that. Killing a deer for the shot? That is no better than live baiting the only difference being the deer probably got a bullet in the head. The things people do now for the shot is getting from bad to worse. But it was not against the rules so...

Dave. Seeds. I have more objection to bread which carry no nourishment and create far too much poo. Seeds are fine. The birds look for the same anyway. Having it delivered free of charge is not bad. It certainly is not the same as seeing the intestines of a mammal being ripped out while it is still alive or a scared little mouse swallowed whole. Agreed?

Regarding the seed to attract for photos - I have never seen that done. Backyards yes but not in the open. Other people feed so there is no need to do it yourself. But few if any photographers actually take these shots or go deliberately for these kinds of shots.

[Mike Buckley]

Killing a deer for the shot?

We don't know that happened. We also don't know that didn't happen.

[BJ Denning]

Interesting discussion. It has been said many times that speaking to the photographer and hearing the context of the shot, makes the shot. Hence, camping out in -20 C temps for weeks, frost bite, and miles of hiking to get a rare Amur leopard ( < 40 in the wild) shot gets a “wow”. Yet, went to the grocery store, bought a couple steaks, drove up a hill, and waited in my warm 4x4 doesn’t get the “wow” – even if the end shot is the same. Now you see photographers, in Africa, using RC buggies to get amazing up close photos of lion prides and elephant herds, angles that just are not possible otherwise. Oddly I don’t hear people speaking about those shots with as much doubt.
I have to wonder if the discussion really is about perseverance, tracking skills, mountaineering, ingenuity, etc. and not photography.

I mean no disrespect. In fact I have the utmost admiration for the determination of those that invest the time and sweat and blood and money (i.e. many RC cars and pro cameras are lost to curious pride cubs) to know their subject and bring back stunning shots.

Perhaps I’m a little sensitive to the subject. Most of my animal shots are captive. I, far too often, have seen wildlife photographers distinguish themselves as “completely natural”, “never captive”, and disparage shots of captive animals as lesser.

I would say that most humming bird shots are baited, and that only satisfies a caloric need and very very little nutrition. So I would say that a local deer, killed and baited, is similar.

For the record, as far as captive or not, I would love to see mankind be better caretakers of this amazing plant. Harmful baiting (i.e. rotten or overly fatty fish, carcasses, etc.) is paramount to animal cruelty, as would be staking out live animals and observing their death. I have also actively worked against “sanctuaries” and organizations that glorify exotic pets, and photos with exotic animals. I take photos of animals because I am amazed by them, their beauty, and our world’s harmony.

[Mike Buckley]

I have to wonder if the discussion really is about perseverance, tracking skills, mountaineering, ingenuity, etc. and not photography.

For me, the discussion is about ethics, none of the above.

I understand that 10 people can have 100 different ethics and I respect their right to have them whether or not they are my ethics. I also understand that some people have no ethics about certain things, especially when it comes to making their own life more convenient for themselves. I have no respect for a lack of ethics. Zero respect. Zilch. Nada.

[John 2]

I've come into this discussion late, but to me there is another element to this whole subject and that is motive. If a photographers intent is merely to win a competiton, then setting up a shot under artificial conditions that purports to be an "amazing" capture, is deceitful and therefore ethically wrong. On the other hand, as an example, the BBC were recently criticised (by some) for taking images in Edinburgh Zoo for inclusion in some of their excellent wildlife programmes. The criticism was that they were misleading the public because the footage was not achieved in the wild. Thankfully, the majority view was that there was no problem because the motive was to educate and provided that the shots in question did not misrepresent what occured in the wild, their inclusion in the overall piece was meerly allowing the general public to see what under other circumstances they could never hope to witness. I agree with that notion but, as in all walks of life, there are of course limits. Sacrificing live bait for instance which by definition is deprived of its "natural" opportunity to escape, whether it's a mouse or a deer, purely for the sake of making an image is a step too far. In my mind this goes beyond the ethics of photography and has more to do with the ethics of being a responsible human being. We are after all the caretakers of this planet.