Disqualified for alteration: Thoughts

[Manfred M]

If that's the hypocritical aspect you're referring to, I agree. If those people instead simply explained that they picked a set of rules that would result in the photographic outcomes and restrictions they wanted their contest to showcase, that would be fine and not hypocritical in and of itself.

Mike that is precisely my point. I have found that in some cases they do this knowingly and in other cases they might do this unknowingly and are even fooling themselves. The rules they propose might seem innocuous at first glance, but any deeper analysis suggests that what are really doing is tilting the playing field in a particular direction that favours one group over another. What I don't like is the cover story that these rules add integrity to the process, when they don't. In general, the rules tend to favour the "old guard" and the status quo. Any new ideas tend to be relegated to the second or third tier.

I don't have an issue when someone sets a rule for a photojournalistic image that says that the image must truthfully reflect the situation that was photographed. I do have an issue when the rules claim to enforce that, without really doing so.

Back last fall I posted an image of the remote and beautiful Agawa Canyon, in Northwestern Ontario, Canada. I was quite truthful when I wrote that the it very remote and can only be reached by train; a 183km / 114mile journey from the nearest city. This is a different image than the one I posted then and has been retouched more rigerously.




If I then show a wide-angle shot of taken quite near the spot where I took the picture from, the truth seems somewhat different, yet every word I wrote is accurate and true. The fact that I minimized the number of people that actually come out puts a whole different spin on the original image.

I know a photographer in Charleston who decided to enter a contest that was held annually. Her method was to review the previous winning photos, note the similarities and produce her own photo having those similarities. She won the contest the first time she entered. She won the contest the next year. She decided not to enter the contest after that because it had become for her more about how to play the game than how to make a great photo.

I was once a member of a couple of camera clubs. I was essentially there to learn and the club itself (at least the executive) was very much into competitions and there was a great push to enter competitions. It did not take long to figure out that all of the prizes went to a select group of members, regardless of how good or bad I found their work to be. When I complained about one particularly bad (both technically and compositionally) piece that one, I was told that I was obviously not an artist and did not understand art. Perhaps not, but I did understand rules that were rigged in a particular direction and cronyism at work. I left the club soon afterwards and have not joined another once since.

[Saorsa]

I don't see where your image of the Agawa Canyon is in any way misrepresenting the beauty of the canyon or the means of reaching it.

I would expect any place served by train to have periods of great activity followed by periods of solitude. In this case it looks like most of the folks never left the scenic overlook. I guarantee that on any summer weekend in Yosemite or Yellowstone or the Everglades you can find the same thing. But, if you walk a hundred yards or two and don't look back, you are on your own.

I would enter the first image in Color or Photo Travel divisions it wouldn't qualify as a landscape in nature because the road is 'hand of man'. If you zoomed back a bit the crowd descending on a scenic spot might work in Photojournalism. Neither image is a lie or misrepresentation. Each presents a facet of the location which is valid in it's own right.

[Manfred M]

I would enter the first image in Color or Photo Travel divisions it wouldn't qualify as a landscape in nature because the road is 'hand of man'. If you zoomed back a bit the crowd descending on a scenic spot might work in Photojournalism. Neither image is a lie or misrepresentation. Each presents a facet of the location which is valid in it's own right.

Brian - you have perfectly demonstrated my key issue with these competitions.

It's a landscape! I don't care if there are a few man made structures in it, the image is still a landscape. The hair splitting categories are absolutely silly in my view.

[Saorsa]

Brian - you have perfectly demonstrated my key issue with these competitions.

It's a landscape! I don't care if there are a few man made structures in it, the image is still a landscape. The hair splitting categories are absolutely silly in my view.

Manmade structures are perfectly acceptable in the Color, Monochrome and Photo Travel divisions. I don't see any reason why one couldn't be entered in Photojournalism but I'm not sure how it would be judged. The only place it would not work in Nature and the Hand of Man limitation that applies to all images, landscape or not.

The upcoming Wrekin International Salon even has a special award for best landscape in both color and monochrome divisions.

[Manfred M]

Manmade structures are perfectly acceptable in the Color, Monochrome and Photo Travel divisions. I don't see any reason why one couldn't be entered in Photojournalism but I'm not sure how it would be judged. The only place it would not work in Nature and the Hand of Man limitation that applies to all images, landscape or not.

The upcoming Wrekin International Salon even has a special award for best landscape in both color and monochrome divisions.

Brian - I don't enter in competitions because photography would stop being fun for me. I am a very competitive person and do photography to relax and have fun. I really do find the rules and multitude of categories rather over the top and I would probably spend all my time fighting the establishment to simplify these things.

Maybe some year when I get bored, but certainly not now.

[Saorsa]

I got into it in 2013 when folks kept asking "what do you do with your photographs?". I had been putting some up online on zenfolio and had others in Dreamstime for stock sales. Not so much for the money but for something to do with them. I also participated in our local "Art in Public Places" program which put them up for display and sale in various offices and facilities around the area.

A friend in my camera club had seen my bugs and asked if I was entering the National Insect Salon with them. I decided to try and ended up with an acceptance and carried on from there. This will probably be my last year competing internationally, I will be up to four star (PSA) in Color and Nature this year and it's just a matter of making more and more entries to get further. It's quite a large number of acceptances to get the fifth star. Those all cost money that I would rather spend on other things. I'll probably continue to enter some of the US salons to help support camera clubs but some of the internationals seem to be a bit of a business for a few people.

[John 2]

..............................................and it's just a matter of making more and more entries to get further. It's quite a large number of acceptances to get the fifth star. Those all cost money that I would rather spend on other things. ....................................... but some of the internationals seem to be a bit of a business for a few people.

Precisely why I stopped competing and not any inherent bias in the rules. After I gained my EFIAP award, FIAP changed the requirement for the awards above that. It meant even more acceptances were required, some of which had to be in print competitions. The cost benefit equation became untenable and I called it a day. In UK competitions, judges seem to be hooked on trends rather than an overall appreciation of good photography. In the last couple of years, the preference seems to have been towards altered reality (Photoshopped to the point of it becoming graphic art). Don't get me wrong, I've seen some stunning images some of which I have quite admired but if that isn't what floats your boat, there isn't much point in competing. In the longer term, it may also cause a problem for the UK circuit. The workers in that genre are in a minority and if the majority start to take the same view that I have, the UK circuit will suffer. I note that there is an increasing trend for UK competitions to extend their closing date at the last minute. That and the fact that increasingly, established competitions are introducing a separate section for altered reality images, makes me wonder whether the effects are already being felt.

[Saorsa]

Altered Reality is the RPS term for what the PSA calls creative. I think that when the Graphic Arts component reaches an obvious element of the image that it is becoming graphic art vs photography but that's a line that's hard to draw. This is usually incorporated into the color division as a theme with it's own seperate judging but with PSA and FIAP points counted as color. I haven't seen a monochrome creative theme but then I'm not looking for it in particular. I have noticed that the word (trad) has been entering the Photo Travel division recently to reflect overprocessing in that division. Nature and Photojournalism have their own standards and those are necessarily stricter.

Our camera club sometimes hosts the judging of the Florida Council of Camera Clubs exhibitions. They hold 4 per year, Three called TriAnnual and a fourth for all ribbon winners for the year. They aren't PSA sanctioned so are not expensive to enter but the judges are the same that do the PSA judgings.

One aspect is that while you can keep entering the same image over and over it doesn't help you to get to award levels. You need a certain count of unique images. I don't know how the FIAP does their awards but the PSA stars are awarded for

1 - 18 acceptances for at least 6 different images
2 - 36 acceptances for at least 12 different images
3 - 72 acceptances for at least 24 different images
4 - 144 acceptances of at least 48 different images
5 - 288 acceptances of at least 96 different images

So, going from my fourth start to my fifth will take as much time and expense as all the previous submissions.

[John 2]

FIAP is very similar Brian except that they have a requirement for a minimum number of countries and a minimum number of print acceptances. Countries are not so much a problem but if you are not a print worker, that's a real turn off added to which, the cost of mailing prints makes the whole thing worse - unless you are really keen of course. It's that lack of sufficient enthusiasm that mainly governs my view these days.

[Rebel]

I've removed bigger dust spots from images than that foot!!

[Shanghai Steve]

The idea that that RAW file could ever be good enough for a World Photography Competition is sheer lunacy. It was a very badly-taken shot that had the life manipulated out of it and the finished product was mediocre at best. THAT guy wants a World Photography Award for that?
Please!

[Wayland]

I think the "hand of man" definition for a landscape is complete baloney.



By that definition, a simple "Landscape" such as this would be disqualified.... Human beings cut down all the trees...

The best thing that can be said about rules is that they are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

[george013]

I think the "hand of man" definition for a landscape is complete baloney.



By that definition, a simple "Landscape" such as this would be disqualified.... Human beings cut down all the trees...

The best thing that can be said about rules is that they are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

A perfect picture. But not if you did cut the trees in pp.

George

[Wayland]

I didn't touch any of them but this would have been covered in woodland before the arrival of humans as would most of the UK. To say that a "Landscape" image must not show evidence of the "hand of man" would be a complete mockery in most of Europe.

[rpcrowe]

Doesn't the initial framing in the camera along with lens selection and DOF consideration and then cropping the print alter a photo?

[george013]

Doesn't the initial framing in the camera along with lens selection and DOF consideration and then cropping the print alter a photo?

Not in the way meant. The photo is the result of those actions.
Adding or removing things in the actual frame is altering the photo. A crop is just changing the frame.

George

[Brev00]

I was amazed to see the original raw file and how much it had been altered in so many ways to get to the final entry. Wow! Makes me think the fellow had no idea of the final result when he took that shot and then just arrived at that result by pure post processing wizardry. I guess it almost worked for him in this contest getting a very nice finish before his cloning was caught. Makes me wonder what the originals look like for the other top finishers. Almost makes me want to start shooting jpegs again.

[Mike Buckley]

Makes me wonder what the originals look like for the other top finishers.

That explains why some contests require that the original capture is made as a raw file and that before winning entries are confirmed, the raw file must also be provided so it can be compared with the file submitted to the contest.

[Brev00]

Obviously, a great deal of alteration was allowed in this contest as this image was miles from the raw before any cloning. So, my question is just how far did the others go stopping short of cloning? Makes me wonder. is the raw file available for the actual winner? Would be nice to see a before/after lineup.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[thetraveler]

I don't want to see photography as a competition because that would inevitably affect what and how I shoot.

If I was working to get 'stars' or points hat would take all the fun out of it for me.