BBC WPTY Results

[Ken Watkins]

Results of the 2008 competition are available at the following link

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/photo.do?photo=2450&category=54&group=4

[Ken Watkins]

Can I be the first to say well done to the Leopard for taking such good photos of himself.

The winner should clearly have been Stefano Unterthiner IMHO.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Ha ha!

Fabulous image of the snow leopard. I doubt whether any other national geographic story would have got so many of its pictures awarded in a BBC Competition.

Well if you exclude all remote triggered shots, then Stefano Unterthiner or David Maitland are the two most deserving for the title Wildlife Photographer of the Year.

May be this is the first time in the history (I am not sure) of BBC contest where the Wildlife Photographer of the Year has not seen the subject in his eyes at all except for the images captured in sensor. Not just during that trip, but never in the lifetime. Case of Science and Technology taking over art?

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

[Jasper Doest]

Remote triggered photography is a LOT of work....and the results of Steve Winter are IMHO the result of photographic knowledge and persistence. Also, you still have to think of compositions when doing remote triggered photography....as the setting is very important....

[Ken Watkins]

I have to say I disagree entirely with the choice of winner, and in my opinion there have been many finer photos taken of Snow Leopard, some of which were actually taken by the photographer. This technique is fine for what it is meant to be used for scientific research, I for one was very impressed that photos were taken of Sumatran Tigers a few years ago, but I would not consider them to be suitable subjects for a photograhic competition. Setting up photo traps is not exactly rocket science and is not exactly hard work.
I found this comment on another website which sums up my feelings as to this situation

"I am all for equipment and the maximum use thereof, but I tend to agree with you that there should be a limit.

In these type of competitions digital manipulation is not allowed. In other words, I cannot clone out a hair that obscure a lions eye, but can set multiple cameras, covering all angles, triggered by IR and run at 8fps till the buffers are full, all while I'm not even there.

Somewhere we must have lost the plot."

[frank harrison]

I see what you mean Ken.
The overall competition standard has improved this year & the winning image was indeed remarkable.
That said, the title is 'Wildlife Photographer of the Year", not "Wildlife Image of the Year".
I think it is fair to ask that when an image is captured then the photographer should at least be there when the photograph it is taken.
Keep safe all,
Frank Harrison

[Mike Tracy]

My first thought was " that's a pretty cool photo" but then I started questioning the merits of awarding such an esteemed prize which was taken in this manner.

I guess I am just old ( and old school ).

[Arthur Morris]

Remote triggered photography is a LOT of work....and the results of Steve Winter are IMHO the result of photographic knowledge and persistence. Also, you still have to think of compositions when doing remote triggered photography....as the setting is very important....

Hi Jasper and all, I gotta say (see my comments in BAA Bulletin #276 here: http://www.birdsasart.com/bn276.htm (http://www.birdsasart.com/bn276.htm)) that IMHO there is no way that the leopard image should have earned the photographer WPOTY honors. Yes, it it a ton of work, and yes, he had to choose the setting, but he had zero control over the placement of the subject in the frame, zero control of it's posture, and he had nothing at all to do with tripping the shutter at that magical moment that we all dream of. (Actually, he could have been dreaming at the exact moment that the shutter was released.)

I am totally with Ken Watkins on this one. In an e-mail he wrote in part,

"The image is also in my view on breach of the rules, I am sure you are familiar with them, but I think this is the relevant passage:

“Adjusting your image Digital adjustments are only acceptable if limited to minor cleaning work, levels, curves, colour, saturation and contrast work. The faithful representation of what you saw at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained.” (emphasis added).

(and I am surprised that he did not post that here as I believe that it is relevant).


I had not even considered that the winning image should have been disqualified for not meeting the rules. Though the rule above was instituted to prevent digital manipulation, if you consider that it says, "The faithful representation of what you saw at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained” it would seem that the image was not created within the rules of the contest. After all, the photographer was not looking through the viewfinder...

Respectfully...

[Sabyasachi Patra]

I fully agree with Artie and Ken.

Today we have remote sensing satellites with cameras resolving upto a meter. The pictures shot from those satellites can then be entered in the Wild Places category. One of those can even win. So who will be the Wildlife photographer of the year? Some public relations officer who enters that photo? That's terrible.

And the tragedy is the photographer hasn't seen the snow leopard till date. Nor has he much of hope to see a wild snow leopard in his lifetime. I agree that this is a serious breach of rules. This has seriously devalued the competition. I hope somebody writes to the organising committee.

[Arthur Morris]

For me this issue is a concern and not at all a tragedy. Let's keep things in perspective...

[Ken Watkins]

Art,
Thank you for your comments, I agree that this should not be made into a crusade, after all I am sure everybody has seen winning photos which they do not admire for one reason or another.
My gripe is that nobody else could seriously have thought this was within the rules. I urge everybody to send an email to the organisers asking why these images were allowed.
In the meantime I would just like to say congratulations to the remaining winners, some of which I like others I do not. It is after all just a matter of taste.

[frank harrison]

Now then you blithe coves!
Here is another hat in the ring.

I'm sure I recall that last year (or a year or two earlier) a category choice in this competition was a 'self portrait' taken by (I think) an ape. In that case a photographer had temporarily left their equipment & in the interim the curious subject had approached the camera & pressed the shutter as it stared down the lens.

Now it is obviously a fact that monkeys are more intelligent than human beings (just look at the state of the planet) & it was indeed an intriguing image but again seems to contravene the rules of the competition.

So the precedent was set prior to the Snow Leopard snap.
Funny old world ain't it?

[Jim Poor]

While I don't particularly care for the photo in question, I think folks are taking "The faithful representation of what you saw at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained" far too literally.

If you want to get super literal, nobody sees anything through the lens of an SLR at the precise moment a picture is made because the mirror is up and in the way of the viewfinder.

I believe the rule is in place to prevent images being tampered with and not in order to prevent the use of a remote camera.


All that said, I don't like the photo much at all, but then I'm not a judge ;)

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Jimm, Are you OK with the fact that the top prize was created with a camera trap?

[Jim Poor]

Hi Artie,

Personally, I'm not OK with the image that won, period. I don't find it all that special.

Given two images of the same caliber, one taken with a trap, and the other taken "by hand," I'd have to give more weight to the second one.

Given an incredible image made by a trap up against a bunch of mediocre images, the choice might be harder.

Seeing that this image was up against other REALLY great images, I think I'd have given the award to someone who held the camera in their hands for the picture.

All that said, I don't think this image violated any rules, at least not the spirit in which I believe they were written. I also don't think it deserved to win.

[Tell Dickinson]

Hi, I personally do not like the winner even if it had been taken 'in person' and since seeing the oof hare image I have now renamed my 'Waste basket' to 'Possible WPTY entries' :) However what I would like to know is this (I am sure Arty and others that entered will know)... did the judges know BEFORE they picked the winners that the shot was taken with a remote trigger i.e. All the winners have a write up by the photographer but is this written for all entries or are the winners asked to provide it only AFTER the judging ?

Tell

[john jackson]

Can I (hopefully tactfully) suggest that the adverse reaction to the wining photograph is a little knee-jerk? To summon a posse to mount a campaign to have the winner shot down on a perceived technicality seems to me way OTT, particularly drawing as it does on a rule that is there specifically to deal with digital manipulation and this image is not manipulated.

On this forum there are widely admired images that involve setting up outdoor studios to photograph hummingbirds under flash and against man made backgrounds, use of captive bait animals to draw in predators in line with a camera, physical and digital removal or addition of habitat features, photoshop surgery to remove birds' eyelids or add an eye where one was hidden, and so on and on. All these have resulted in images that inspire the users of this forum to take more and better pictures.

I happen to like the winning image, but that is not the issue here (some previous winners I like, others leave me cold). I like it because it shows a wild animal in natural surroundings. I also admire the photographer's skill in setting up such a composition. I have seen many camera trap photos and almost all are artistically garbage. Here is one that is undoubtably art to my eyes. I see no difference between this set up and, say, Andy Rouse's remarkable ground-up view Elephant images for which he used remote triggers.

This competition is for me consistently the best such competition on the planet. It has rules and judges. The judges considered the rules, viewed the entries and chose their favourite image. The photographer (i.e. the person who made the image happen) has not hidden the technique that made the capture. The photograph won fair and square, like it or not.

Do what makes you happy and live and let live.

John

[Ken Watkins]

With reference to the above, I have had the following confirmed by Andy Rouse. His 1998 winner in the Animal Behaviour Category was indeed remotely triggered, the vast majority of his other shots were not taken in this way.

So it appears that remote technology has indeed been accepted in the past, but Andy has not confirmed whether he was asleep or not!

Nevertheless the rules need to be clarified, and I believe that photos taken in such a manner should be the subject of a separate category.

[john jackson]

How about concentrating on how good some of the winning images are?

My favourites include: Dan Mead's Sand sprinters; Amos Nachoum's Sailfish strike; and Barış Koca's Starling genie.

Just wonderful photographs.

[Ganesh H Shankar]

Last February me and a few friends of mine made a trip to Kaziranga National Park in north east of India in search of Rhinos. We happen to stay in the same resort as Steve Winter did for a week and we use to meet him everyday during breakfast/lunch/dinner. Steve too was photographying there. During those lunch/dinner discussions Steve was kind enough to show all those breath taking images of his snow leopards he made. Which later appeared in one of the National Geographic issues too. One thing he clearly told us then was "I want images to be mine, I carefully work on compositions". He carefully plans positioning of the placement of trailmaster trasmitters and receivers and the trigger points based on the composition he has in his mind. Sure, instead of head the tail can trip the shutter but then out 10 (or more) one of those shutter releases will precicely results in the composition the way he wanted and that is what he shows to the world. Is it not a composition ? Not sure why we insist photographers presence - instead of physically seeing through the view finder he has seen them through his mind which is far more challenging. Don't we need to commend him for that ? He also mentioned it takes more than about 3 hours to set one camera trap. Having used with 3 trailmaster units and radio controlled Pocket Wizard in my own attempts at creating some unique perspectives (and with no success) of elusive wild lifes in my country so far I can confidently say looking at Steve's images he not only takes care of compositions and also does it best. This is what Steve has to say on his winning entry during a conversation with a BBC reporter -

" Commenting on the use of trigger cameras rather than being sat behind the lens, Mr Winter said: "They are something that needs to be used to get intimate portraits of elusive animals.

"I used to hate these cameras because they just gave you a record of an animal.
"Images are all about composition and light. If I cannot control that as if I would as I put the camera up to my face, then essentially I have failed.
"So I asked myself that if I did not like these cameras, how can I like them more.
"It turns on his winning imageout that snow leopards are the perfect species on which to use these cameras. They always come to specific locations to mark their territory. "So I viewed the locations as movie sets. I put the cameras there, I put the lights there. "

Other than incredible snow leaopard images he also showed us some of his Tiger images he made at Kaziranga - some of the best tiger perspectives I have ever seen. Soon we may see them in National Geographic magazine. I will not be surprised if they win WPY again. I wish him all the best, having seen him working closely I would like to give credit where it is due.

Congrats Steve !

[Bob Blanchard]

While I don't know Steve, and certainly respect his opinion on the use of "game" cameras, I respectfully disagree with awarding this type of photography any type of prize. There's no art here. It's pure, dumb luck. It makes one wonder if the judges are actually photographers or not. I have no problem at all with using this technique just to capture images for sale or magazine publication, but I have a HUGE problem with calling it "art" and winning prizes with it. The judges of that competition should be ashamed of themselves. Anyone who's ever laid in the mud, waiting on that precise head turn, foot raise, catchlight, and light angle knows exactly where I'm coming from. Sorry, but you can't control those details remotely, or with a trip wire!

In my opinion, a true wildlife photographer takes the moment of "luck" when the desired animal appears, and then crafts it into a work of art. On this forum, I know that most of us actually "see" the image in our minds BEFORE we manipulate the camera to record it as we've seen it. Dozens of variables are calculated in seconds BY THE PHOTOGRAPER. I can give you the intimate details on the creation of every one of my best images. They are vividly engrained in my memory. They were not accidents. They cannot be pre-planned, as EVERY moment in time presents unique conditions.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm a bit irked by the award of such a prestigious prize to a radar gun, and not a photographer.

[Ken Watkins]

I HAVE MADE A BAD MISTAKE,!
The pictures by Andy Rouse were taken using a remote trigger which Andy pressed, so these are in no way comparable to the Snow Leopard images, the photographer actually took the pictures, not the animal.

I'm with you Bob!

[Dave Hutchinson]

I totally agree that the Snow Leopard shot should have been disqualified since there was no interaction whatsoever from a photographer. Sorry, but camera traps don't qualify as photography skills. This photo was purely luck! However, I wish that I had been the lucky one to be able to add this photo to my collection.

[Bob Blanchard]

To expand just a bit on my previous post...

I would be completely fine if this image were up for "photograph" of the year and won. But the fact that it won "photographer" of the year is the problem in my mind. It's like this: Let's say that the Ivory Billed Woodpecker is not extinct, and let's say that one of the many hundreds of remote trip cameras that the Cornell folks stuck all over that Cypress forest in Alabama happens to actually catch one. Is the guy who tied that particular camera to the tree going to win the "Photographer of the year" award next year? How's that any different than this?

Personally, I wish it had been my remote camera that had captured this image, and that I was rolling in the money with the sales of it to whatever magazine(s).....But I'd have never entered it in a contest for "PHOTOGRAPHER" of the year.

I guess I'm just kinda weird this way, but I don't want to win any photo contest I don't deserve to just because I got lucky when some animal stepped on a tripwire. Heck, I'm even struggling with the contest I'm in right now where I followed what I believed to be the letter of the law on the rules about photo manipulation (all I did was crop, spot removal, and NR on mine!), and I'm competing against images with EXTENSIVE Photoshop manipulation in them. I'm not saying those images don't look great (they look fantastic)....But that's not what the rules said were allowed by my interpretation! I guess "manipulation" has now become a very subjective term. I could've tweaked mine a lot more, but I wanted to make sure I was staying within what I percieved to be the boundaries and spirit of the rules. Apparently, I was wrong about that "manipulation" part. This is my first year competing in these contests, but you can bet I'll have a better feel for the "rules" next year. No sour grapes there, though. They did state that the amount of manipulation was up to the judges "While photo editing software can be used, excessive use of such programs (as determined by Sponsor/judges in their sole discretion) is prohibited.".

All I know is I want to be proud of my accomplishment when I'm hanging around my peers (you all). I doubt I'd feel that way had I won an award for photogrpher of the year for a picture I didn't even take myself. Maybe it's just me, and I need to get over those nastly little integrity flaws I seem to have :confused:

[Ramon M. Casares]

I am sorry to disagree, but do you all really think that that particular Snow Leopard shot was pure luck? What about studying the subject to know where he will walk thru, don't we do that too? What about knowing where to locate the camera to get a plaesent composition and know where to locate the flashes and how to usde them to get good light, aren't those great photographer skills? I am sorry, but in a forum where Photoshop skills are celebrated with so much enthusiasm it is hard for me to understand what has happened here where suddenly if you are not there to press the trigger you are not a photographer but if you can save whites or ad a whole wing to a bird you are a great photographer... I use photoshop, I am not at all against it as I think it is a fundamental tool in digital photography, but infrared barrier is, to me, a much greater and hard to use tool that PS, you REALLY have to know a lot to work with barriers when with PS you can always go back and restart.. I am just trying to be coherent with myself here... I respectfully disagree with you, I think that winning shot it is the result of a LOT of a photographer hard work and skills.

Ps: Still, the image I really loved the best was Miguel Lasa's Polar Bear silhuette!

[Bob Blanchard]

I am sorry to disagree, but do you all really think that that particular Snow Leopard shot was pure luck? What about studying the subject to know where he will walk thru, don't we do that too? What about knowing where to locate the camera to get a plaesent composition and know where to locate the flashes and how to usde them to get good light, aren't those great photographer skills? I am sorry, but in a forum where Photoshop skills are celebrated with so much enthusiasm it is hard for me to understand what has happened here where suddenly if you are not there to press the trigger you are not a photographer but if you can save whites or ad a whole wing to a bird you are a great photographer... I use photoshop, I am not at all against it as I think it is a fundamental tool in digital photography, but infrared barrier is, to me, a much greater and hard to use tool that PS, you REALLY have to know a lot to work with barriers when with PS you can always go back and restart.. I am just trying to be coherent with myself here... I respectfully disagree with you, I think that winning shot it is the result of a LOT of a photographer hard work and skills.

Ps: Still, the image I really loved the best was Miguel Lasa's Polar Bear silhuette!

I definitely respect what you are saying, and I do believe that there is skill involved here. Of course it was not ALL luck. But I feel that this image was more luck than skill, and not the other way around. Of course we all know where to find the animals, and where the light needs to be....but that's only part of it. it's the pose, the composition, the subtle angles, the adjustments to changing light, etc. etc. that seperate the great photographers from the rest of the herd. Sorry, but you can't achieve those details remotely without luck. Just not possible. I feel that skill should be awarded, and luck should be envied ;)

Again, this photographer is obviously a good one (maybe even a geat one). He has certainly accomplished far more than I have....So who am I to judge? I congratulate and applaud that. I simply disagree with this award in this contest. Heck, I wasn't even competing in this one, so it shouldn't bother me as much as it does.

FWIW - I still suck at Photoshop, so I HAVE to rely on my photography skills to get it right out of the camera. Maybe as I ..."ahem"... evolve as a digital photographer, I'll become lousy with the camera, and better at Photoshop :D

[Ramon M. Casares]

it's the pose, the composition, the subtle angles, the adjustments to changing light, etc. etc

But except for the pose, isn't the rest after months of study something you can foresee (light, comp, speed, ISO, etc) and so get the parameters right? He didn't had a SUPER camera or anything, that shot was taken wiht an Xt!!! That tells me a lot about skills more luck. Plus, pose is not luck? Sure? Didn't you ever get a great pose from a bird or animal just out of pure luck and you got it thanks to the camera continous burst? I know I did, so why is this case any different? That is way I think in photography skills and luck go together preety much as one thing, sometimes we have more luck than skills and somedays skill are all we need but, but these two things to me, go preety much toghether, such as in the snow leopard case and so many other cases that we can all see here in BPN and everywhere else. :)


Maybe as I ..."ahem"... evolve as a digital photographer, I'll become lousy with the camera, and better at Photoshop :D

Sadly, that is happening a lot, there are a lot of folks out there who relay on PS way to much in stead of getting better as photographers... :(

[Bob Blanchard]

But except for the pose, isn't the rest after months of study something you can foresee (light, comp, speed, ISO, etc) and so get the parameters right? He didn't had a SUPER camera or anything, that shot was taken wiht an Xt!!! That tells me a lot about skills more luck. Plus, pose is not luck? Sure? Didn't you ever get a great pose from a bird or animal just out of pure luck and you got it thanks to the camera continous burst?

We have all had "luck" shots. Heck, just last weekend I was working a group of Spoonbills, and they all took off suddenly. I knew that meant a Bald Eagle was flying over. I immediately grabbed my 40d which was lying next to me, and fired off about 4 frames at him on a prayer that one would come out. Sure enough, one did! The other three were oof. Now the BIG difference here is I won't be posting my Bald Eagle to any contests, trying to say what a great photographer I am. I know it was pure luck. I have no problem being transparent about such things.

Perhaps it's due to the fact that I shoot with a relatively slow full frame camera as my primary, so I HAVE to be somewhat frugal with my frame buffer, and wait on the right moment to start the sequence. In fact, many folks on this forum have been out in the field with me, and probably think I'm a bit nuts because of the way I talk to the birds while photographing them! I'm always speaking aloud things like "c'mon, turn that head....give me that catchlight!". LOL - It think half the time I get the shot because the bird's curiosity gets piqued from all my self-chatter :D They all have that "What the heck is he talking about" look on their face!:D Most of my composition time is spent moving a single focusing point around to firmly place it on the eye, with the bird framed where I want it. You sure won't do THAT with a remote trip camera! I believe that the luck ends when the animal presents itself. It is then up to the photographer to craft that lucky moment into a work of art. Most people NEVER achieve that (as evidenced by the plethora of boring wildlife images out there).

The way I see this debate is that it boils down to two possible points....Luck or Skill. I clearly feel that luck was the domintant in the case of this particular image (thus making it non-deserving of the award it received), and you feel that skill was dominant (making it a justified award). Clearly, the judges agree with you. I don't think that either of us will have much luck convincing the other to change his opinion, so I'm content to just "agree to disagree". Besides, it will give us something fun to debate while we're hanging out in the bar after some fantastic photo shoot one day!

I will say that I agree with you 100 percent on the Photoshop discussion, though! But alas....that's another whole debate to be had another day in another thread ;)

[Ramon M. Casares]

:)Good Bob I agree with you about being content to just agree to disagree, it is fun and always good to debate!

Ps: As I said, I don't think that the Snow Leopard shot would've been my overall winning choice at all (there were a few other I loved much more), but that said I clearly think that it is a deserved award.:)

[Ken Watkins]

The excuse that this was hard work by the photographer is interesting but does not hold up. Yes it is cold in the Himalayas, but when you have a large team of assistants to assist you and you are being paid to stay there then that is your choice, do not claim this as skill. How many of us could set up 14 IR triggered cameras (even if they were cheap models) and come up with such average images after 10 months speaks for luck rather than skill. Locally to me we have a research group studying Leopard called Cape Leopard Trust, they are doing very worthwhile research into an elusive animal and have "captured" many good images but I would not conceive that prior to now any would have considered they should be entered in a photographic competition
http://www.capeleopard.org.za/


At least nobody here has said it is a rare picture, of an endangered animal, there are in fact considerably more Snow Leopards than Tigers it is just that they are in areas where not many people go. Just google Snow Leopard, I do not think the judges did they just believed what they were told.

[Ramon M. Casares]

The excuse that this was hard work by the photographer is interesting but does not hold up. Yes it is cold in the Himalayas, but when you have a large team of assistants to assist you and you are being paid to stay there then that is your choice, do not claim this as skill.

So then, all of the photographers out there that can travel the world exclusively to take photographs are not great photographers but just lucky guys that can afford it, period? :)

[Arthur Morris]

So then, all of the photographers out there that can travel the world exclusively to take photographs are not great photographers but just lucky guys that can afford it, period? :)

Ramon, Your smiley face has confused me. What is it that you want to say? Is you commment intended to be serious?

[Ken Watkins]

Hi Artie,

Thanks for that I am confused by these comments as well. My simple point is that an image has no more merit because it was supposedly difficult to get. On another forum another "professional" photographer claimed that this image must be better than that of a common bird, because this subject is endangered. On that basis your winning image this year and that of Andy rouse last year have no merit because there are clearly lots of birds in each shot. Also perhaps I should enter pictures of Bontebok calves as there are only around 3,000 of them in the world, and a lot of them live in a game park near to where I live. The general public do not seem to be voting for it either.

[Arthur Morris]

Difficulty of attaining or creating an image is never a factor. All the matters is the image. Assuming that the photographer created the image...

Let's see what Ramon has to say...

[Ramon M. Casares]

Yes Arthur, it was serious, I just didn't want to "sound" mad or anything as I know that written words can usually be misinterpreted, that's whay I used a smiley face. I am having a good time debating this and I tend to get a little passionate about my opinions heheeh and I just didn't want to sound mad or anything.
As I said, I wouldn't have chosen the Snow Leopard shot as the overall winner either, but from that to thinking that was just a lucky shot there is a big difference...
For what matters I am the first one in loving and enjoying to see great artisitc shot of "common" wildlife, I don't think difficulty is a factor at all, artistic eye and photogrpahic skill are. And as I said. to me, luck and skill go by hand, here there is a lot of work put into this particular shot, and a lot of study about the subject and its habbits to achieve without even being there, a pleasent composition with a very nice technical execution, I loved the light in that shot, the snow in the air, the atmosphere in general, it could have been a common fox in stead of a snow leaoprd to me and I would have loved it any way, not to be the overall winner but to be awarded for sure. I insist on this quiestion, why is infrared barriers such a despicable tool? Why es luck such a despicable factor?

[john crookes]

Is not the award for Photographer of the year based on a collection of work rather than one picture.
If you read his bio and look at all of his work I believe he is very deserving of this award

http://www.stevewinterphoto.com/about/

[Dave Courtenay]

If you replaced the snow leopard with a fox or instance would it have still won?probably not so it won on the animals rarity value rather than photographic value-2 other images i dont understand are the hare in snow-the photographer admits he didnt intend to get a shot like this and resigned it to the bin and the Robin taken with a compact-Robins are the friendlist birds in the UK and will feed from the hand so to get one with a compact is no big deal and its not even a good image
Still some great work there but stuff that should have never got past the inital viewing

Dave

[Ramon M. Casares]

Dave I didn't like hte Hare shot either, it as it was not intended to come out like that by the photographer, still, this is Art, and it is subjective, there's no right or wrong just and only "likes and dislikes", as I said before, the snowleopard wouldn't have been my overall winning choise, there were other TERRIFIC images that I liked better, still, as I said already too, infrared barriers are a great photographic tool to me and I just don't understand why everybody despic their use.
Probably if in stead of a Snow Leopard that would've been a Fox, I might have not won at all, but bottom line, it is a Snow Leopard and it came out (to me) to be a fantastic shot and as the photogrpaher intended regarding light, comp, etc, not like the Hare shot... that was just a "lucky" shot as the photogrpaher didn't inteded to take that shot with that atmosphere and effect, but still, all is subjective, that's what art is all about.

[john crookes]

Ken said

"At least nobody here has said it is a rare picture, of an endangered animal, there are in fact considerably more Snow Leopards than Tigers it is just that they are in areas where not many people go. Just google Snow Leopard, I do not think the judges did they just believed what they were told"

according to the WWF there are between 3000 to 6000 snow leopards in the wild and according to the same source there are 5000 to 7500 tigers in the wild

Add inn the habitat and a photo of a snow leopard is much more elusive than a photo of a Tiger.

Most of the photos in print are of captive Snow leopards

The highly acclaimed documentary Planet Earth took an extremley long time to capture its footage of a Snow Leopard and almost gave up in its endeavors

I think Steves persitence and willingness to pursue this creature paid off with what i believe is the most stunning image of this creature to date

[Andy Biggs]

Very well said, John. Very well said. But the thread seems to be about whether Steve's use of camera traps were within the guidelines of the competition rules. Only they can comment on this. I can see both sides. I do think it was a worthy winner of the overall contest, as I think it is a great photograph of a threatened species.

[Alfred Forns]

I think it would be helpful if the judging guidelines would be clear. I like to think it should be the image itself that counts and not the trouble you went to make the image. I do agree the winner made the the best image of this species to date.

[Arthur Morris]

So then, all of the photographers out there that can travel the world exclusively to take photographs are not great photographers but just lucky guys that can afford it...

OK, Ramon says that the above is a serious statement. I would argue that his statement is convoluted at best If not ridiculous).

#1: Most but not all of the photographers that travel the world, like Art Wolfe, Frans Lanting, and Andy Rouse to name three, are great photographers. Each of them has worked incredibly hard and deserve all the honors they have been accorded.

#2: They are able to travel the world for various reasons. Neither luck nor personal wealth has anything to do with their success and their ability to travel the world.

The issue that I originally raised is that the creation of the WPOTY winning image had everything to do with luck and craft than with artistic vision and skill.

[Arthur Morris]

Very well said, John. Very well said. But the thread seems to be about whether Steve's use of camera traps were within the guidelines of the competition rules. Only they can comment on this. I can see both sides. I do think it was a worthy winner of the overall contest, as I think it is a great photograph of a threatened species.

Welcome Andy. The issue that I originally raised had to do with whether the top prize should have been awarded to an image created when the photographer was not present. The question of whether it was created within the guidelines was a secondary issue.

I so think that it is a great image but do not think that it was worthy of the top prize since the photographer had zero to do with the composition and zero to do with capturing a dramatic pose...

[Ken Watkins]

One thing is for certain, the selection of this image has caused a lot of controversy, I and some others believe that this was the intent of the organisers.

I for one am happy to share the views of Art, Andy Rouse and the majority of contributors to this thread.

In relation to more recent postings I hope this helps

There are as far as I am aware no guidlines, the full rules for the 2008 competition can be viewed at
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy-entry/Rules.jsp

As far as I am aware the winner is determined from one image rather than a portfolio. There was a portfolio category for Young Photographers (Eric Hosking Award) , but this does not seem to be in the 2008 results.

As for the comparative rarity of the subject, I and others do not think this should have any value in determining the quality of the image. Having checked with SnowLeopard.org and TigerWatch.org I can confirm that the figures given above by John Crookes are correct, I was therefore slightly incorrect in making my comparison.

[Cliff Beittel]

. . . The issue that I originally raised is that the creation of the WPOTY winning image had everything to do with luck and craft than with artistic vision and skill. . . .


. . . I so think that it is a great image but do not think that it was worthy of the top prize since the photographer had zero to do with the composition and zero to do with capturing a dramatic pose . . .

Arthur,

A few points in opposition. To my mind, craft and skill are the same thing. So that leaves luck versus vision, composition, and pose (the animal's exact position at the time of exposure).

Luck is a factor in most images. Bob Blanchard has said that he wouldn't enter a lucky image in a competition, but in that he's surely a tiny minority. Luck may not be enough, but few photographers would refuse to take full advantage of it. Luck certainly played a part in Winter's Snow Leopard images, mostly the exact position of the animal (head turn, etc.). Even there, however, it doesn't seem much different than running the motor drive and later selecting the best frames, something most shooters do.

But I'd say artistic vision was a much bigger factor in Winter's winning images than with many previous WPOTY winners. These are far more premeditated images than most. The eyes and head may be partly luck, but the placement of the animal in the frame is very much controlled by where the remote triggers are placed. (When remote triggers are used for owl photography, for example, the position of the bird at exposure can be determined within inches.) Look at the habitat in the backgrounds, the positioning of the animal within that habitat, the balance of ambient and flash lighting, the depth of field. It's incredible, and all planned in advance, sort of like Tom Mangelsen framing a beautiful arctic landscape and then waiting patiently for hours or days for a fox to follow a polar bear through the frame, except that the lighting and exposure compensation had to be anticipated (RAW processing helps, I assume--you gotta love it!).

Although I've never used remote triggers, they don't seem that unusual to me. Many people have used them to produce winning images in the Valley Land Fund contests, and Nick Nichols has made and published many great images with them for National Geographic. I have no problem with WPOTY deciding not to allow them in the future, but since they were not disallowed up to now, I think it unfair to say Winter's photo shouldn't have won. The rules may not be perfect (I don't agree, for example, with allowing online entry of digital originals but not scans), but they are what they are.

Great Western Sandpiper image, by the way. I think most of us know how subjective judging is, and that as good as the Snow Leopard is, in a different year, probably even with the same judges, any of the commended or winning images (not to mention some that didn't get that far) could have won the overall title.

[Ramon M. Casares]

OK, Ramon says that the above is a serious statement. I would argue that his statement is convoluted at best If not ridiculous).
Did you mean that what I said is ridiculous? First, I just said what I have interpretated from Ken Watkins' comment about working with assistants and a salary...


#1: Most but not all of the photographers that travel the world, like Art Wolfe, Frans Lanting, and Andy Rouse to name three, are great photographers. Each of them has worked incredibly hard and deserve all the honors they have been accorded.
I've never said anything that contradicts that.


#2: They are able to travel the world for various reasons. Neither luck nor personal wealth has anything to do with their success and their ability to travel the world.

I agree, that was my point, maybe I forgto to put the quiestion mark at the end at the end of the phrase you quoted from my comment... that's all.


#2: The issue that I originally raised is that the creation of the WPOTY winning image had everything to do with luck and craft than with artistic vision and skill.

There's where we don't agree, I don't think luck was a t the only factor and for what matters.. why would that be so terrible, the photographic skills to achieve such a stunning shot are, to me, indisputable.

[Arthur Morris]

Ramon,

I figured that I was not understanding what you were trying to say (or ask...) Am still not.

As far as this: "I don't think luck was the only factor and for what matters.. why would that be so terrible, the photographic skills to achieve such a stunning shot are, to me, indisputable."

Where I come from designing a pleasing composition is a huge part of the photographic skills that are needed to create good images. When you are using a camera trap, you have zero control of the placement of the subject in the frame and the captured pose/attitude of the subject...

Not sure how any photographer could disagree with that...

[Ramon M. Casares]

The eyes and head may be partly luck, but the placement of the animal in the frame is very much controlled by where the remote triggers are placed.

I am quoting Cliff as he has been very clear about the composition posibilities that remote triggers can give to a dedicated photographer, about the animal's pose/attitude, I agree that luck was present, but, I insist.. why is luck a bad thing? And why are remote triggers (so well used as in this case) such a bad thing...?
That is what I don't understand Arthur as I think remote triggers are one more of the many photogrpahic tools there are out there, why not use it specially with such an elusive species wich if the photographer would've been waiting in a blind, the cat probably wouldn't have shown up.

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Cliff, First off, welcome. It is good to see you here. Without commenting point by point I offer the following thoughts:

1-I did not see you commentst till now.
2-No matter how lucky you are, you need to be ready and able to take advantage of that luck. The luckiest photographer in the world will not win anyting if they cannot come up with a good exposure, produce a sharp image, and design a pleasing image (often within a moment or two at best). I have been doing this for 25 years and I am finding it hard to think of a single lucky image... And if I had a lucky image I would be glad to enter it in a contest provided that I had actually pressed the shutter button.
3-I see your point as to the creation of the composition but I am not sure that I am buying it as many of Nick Nichols camera trap images feature animals with various body parts cut off. In addition, there is zero control over the subject to imaging sensor juxtapositon. The animal could just as easily been showing his butt to the camera...
4-It seems that your comment about Mangelsen waiting "hours of even days" is pure supposition so I am not sure of the point you are trying to make. As you well know, all that matters is the final image. Nobody but the photographer knows how long you waited, how cold or hot is was, or how many miles that you had to walk...
5-As I stated clearly in my original post, the image is a great one. If there was a category for "Image of the Year," it might have won that prize and I would not have let out a peep. But as one of the folks commenting on the BBC site said, the grand prize goes is for the wildlife photographer of the year, not to the best photograph... If you are not there to push the button then I only ask, how can you be the champion photographer of the year?

[Ramon M. Casares]

So anybody with no photographic skills and without any photographic knowledge can take that kind of images of wild Snow Leopards in their habitat with remote triggers, is that easy really?? I wish I knew...

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Rare image & Perspective:
• The chairman of the BBC judges panel says that rarity of subject doesn’t have anything to do with winning. You have to present the subject in a new angle or perspective. He advises you to take more photos of animals near your home and create a better perspective. So from this point of view, the Snow Leopard shot should not be the winner just because of its rarity.
• Snow leopards have been photographed before. Rajesh Bedi and Naresh Bedi had tracked Snow Leopards for two years (basically two winters) and they have shot it. Not with a camera trap, but shot with their telephoto lenses and made films. Alponse Roy has filmed a Snow Leopard in day light. I would rate their efforts higher than Steve’s.
• Steve’s image shot in the night with snow fall gives a nice perspective. You don’t come across frequently. I like it. It is a good document. However, I won’t say that makes Steve a winner.
• The figures quoted in the WWF is way above the actual numbers and is inaccurate. According to Govt. of India figures, the number of wild tigers number about 1100 to 1400. This estimation is done on the basis of camera trap method. I think the number of Snow Leopards would also be around the same if not lower.

Knowledge of the Photographer about the Subject:
• He has not seen his subject. If you want to say that his knowledge of his subject is great, then I would also say by watching National Geographic or Animal Planet I have plenty of knowledge about Polar Bears ( I haven’t seen a Polar Bear in the wild).


Luck
Steve’s statement:
“After 10 months and a winter with little snow in Ladakh's Hemis High Altitude National Park, India, I was running out of hope of getting the picture I wanted. “

The bottomline is with sufficient funding, you can tie your gear in a number of places and wait. The probability of your getting a shot increases with the number of cameras that you place.

All of you would be aware, that carnivores like Tigers, Leopards etc have got a fixed territory. Snow leopards are not supposed to be so aggressive when there is an intrusion into their territory by another of their species. Snow leopards come down to lower levels of the mountains during winter. At that time they kill domestic sheep for food. And this is the best time to shoot a snow leopard.

Did he manage to find out the route used by a snow leopard? No. A couple of snaps in a camera trap doesn’t give you that. If you keep on collecting info about any live stock killed by snow leopards, then you will have some idea about its probable route. And when the snow leopard appears you wont be surprised. Again, it suggests that Steve was purely lucky.

I know that Steve Winter was taking advise from Dr. Raghu Chundawat, who has done research on Snow leopard and seen it in his eyes. However, I don’t know details of how Steve was searching. I guess at least because of their advice, Steve could place the camera traps that ultimately got him the shots. If Steve were to place the camera traps all by himself, then instead of the 10 months time it would have taken eternity without any results. You can say that Steve found out guys who could advise him. And I would give credit for that to the National Geographic Research team.

Composition:
I don't believe Steve intended to show the snow leopard with its tail facing the camera. If you can't even find a snow leopard, and you are hoping for 10 months that one day a snow leopard would walk into your camera trap and finally when one day it accidentally happens you say that it was planned to the last inch. Tough to believe.

These days a lot of remote sensing satellites are equipped with high resolution cameras. They click lots of shots. A few of those shots would be good enough to invoke awe about the amazing landscapes and can win a prize in the Wild Places category. So some one with access to those photographs can enter it into the competition. So some officer from Nasa or ISRO etc can become the Wildlife Photographer of the Year. I hope you can see the fallacy of awarding it to Steve.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

[Krishnan]

The bottomline is with sufficient funding, you can tie your gear in a number of places and wait. The probability of your getting a shot increases with the number of cameras that you place.

........ Again, it suggests that Steve was purely lucky.

I know that Steve Winter was taking advise from Dr. Raghu Chundawat, who has done research on Snow leopard and since it in his eyes. However, I don’t know details of how Steve was searching. I guess at least because of their advice, Steve could place the camera traps that ultimately got him the shots. If Steve were to place the camera traps all by himself, then instead of the 10 months time it would have taken eternity without any results. You can say that Steve found out guys who could advise him. And I would give credit for that to the National Geographic Research team.

Composition:
I don't believe Steve intended to show the snow leopard with its tail facing the camera. If you can't even find a snow leopard, and you are hoping for 10 months that one day a snow leopard would walk into your camera trap and finally when one day it accidentally happens you say that it was planned to the last inch. Tough to believe.

These days a lot of remote sensing satellites are equipped with high resolution cameras. They click lots of shots. A few of those shots would be good enough to invoke awe about the amazing landscapes and can win a prize in the Wild Places category. So some one with access to those photographs can enter it into the competition. So some officer from Nasa or ISRO etc can become the Wildlife Photographer of the Year. I hope you can see the fallacy of awarding it to Steve.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi


Well... luck certainly aided with a lot of research... why not ?

Why should funding be an issue with getting the photograph you want ?

Technology rolls on and if remotes can get a shot so be it.

To me, not being present does not bother me at all. Id support what Ganesh H Shankar mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, using remote camera traps to get something like what Steve did is, a LOT of planning and work.

Steve used a remote technique, yes he got a brilliant shot of a rare animal and the judges thought he made the grade to win the award.

I personally love the shot.

Congrats Steve !

Best Regards

[Arthur Morris]

Can I (hopefully tactfully) suggest that the adverse reaction to the wining photograph is a little knee-jerk? To summon a posse to mount a campaign to have the winner shot down on a perceived technicality... John

I have no problem with anything that Steve Winter did. He worked extremely hard and long in difficult conditions and created a wonderful image. My problem is with the contest and the judges and most likely with the rules or the lack there-of.

And I would be fine knowing that a category winner was taken with a camera trap.

[Cliff Beittel]

Arthur,

Just to clarify on your points 2 to 5. (2) Yes, you need to take advantage of luck. You're driving by the Goldcoaster and a Swallow-tailed Kite appears. That's luck. You respond appropriately with skill. The two things go together. Again, Winter did design pleasing images, determining focus, exposure, and (largely) composition in advance. (3) I don't recall Nickol's cut-off body shots, but at least in the shots presented at the NG site Winter seems to avoid that by framing loosely, including lots of great habitat and leaving plenty of room for the animal. The key with loose framing is to choose beautiful locations, which is certainly true of many of Winter's images. Note that one of his winning or commended images was a butt shot, and it still worked. A wide-angle image from a few feet behind a large predator is something to see!. (4) My point about Mangelsen is based on my impression of what he was doing at Cape Merry when I was there with you in 1995 or 1996, as well as the look of many of his images. He appears to find a good landscape, then wait for wildlife to appear (doesn't mean it always happens that way, of course). It was this apparent method of framing of the images in advance, not the difficulty in waiting, that I was pointing to. In effect, Winter does the same thing with his camera traps--finding photogenic locations within the leopards' territories, framing the images, and waiting. Done as skillfully as he does, it may be an unfair advantage, but as far as I can tell it was within the rules of the 2008 and previous competitions. Again, because traps have been used for years in the VLF competitions, it didn't seem so unusual to me. (5) I've always thought the title "wildlife photographer of the year" incorrect, as what's selected is the judges' favorite photo; the award isn't based on a career or a portfolio, just the one image. Some past WPOTY winners have had big careers, but as far as I know, some others haven't. Some people with big careers have done consistently well (you are now in that category), but haven't taken the top prize (what are the chances, with 30,000 entries?), while other top shooters seem not to enter at all. The organizers probably won't change the name, but it is the wildlife photo of the year.

[Cliff Beittel]

P.S. While I was writing my reply to Arthur, Sabyasachi Patra posted a comment that suggests, in part, that Winter's photos aren't worthy because he had funding from National Geographic, 10 months to get the images, and advice from a leopard researcher. I hope people see what a bottomless pit these sorts of attack dig. Any photo can be attacked if the desire is there. Imagine Arthur's great Western Sandpiper had won the top prize. Not here, I imagine, but somewhere on the internet someone would be talking about how he was led to the location, that it was all luck, that his great success as a tour leader gets him opportunities others lack, etc., etc., ad nauseum. It's much healthier to just enjoy all the great images.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

P.S. While I was writing my reply to Arthur, Sabyasachi Patra posted a comment that suggests, in part, that Winter's photos aren't worthy because he had funding from National Geographic, 10 months to get the images, and advice from a leopard researcher. I hope people see what a bottomless pit these sorts of attack dig. Any photo can be attacked if the desire is there. Imagine Arthur's great Western Sandpiper had won the top prize. Not here, I imagine, but somewhere on the internet someone would be talking about how he was led to the location, that it was all luck, that his great success as a tour leader gets him opportunities others lack, etc., etc., ad nauseum. It's much healthier to just enjoy all the great images.

Cliff,
Unfortunately, it is a general tendency to not read carefully all the threads when a discussion gets about 50 responses. If you check the third post in this thread, you will see that I had praised the image. This is what I said:

"Fabulous image of the snow leopard. I doubt whether any other national geographic story would have got so many of its pictures awarded in a BBC Competition. "

As opposed to many of the people in the discussion thread, I have read the National Geographic story of the snow leopard when it came out first and I have had the good fortune to have been associated with one of the National Geographic stories. So I know what the photographers do to get images that would be approved by the editor. And considering that Chris Johns - who himself is an exceptional photographer- is now the Editor in Chief on National Geographic, it becomes difficult for photographers as he knows the tricks of the trade. So I would never say that Steve didn't work hard. I was responding to people who by saying that he has worked hard, were trying to justify him as the Wildlife Photographer of the Year based on his camera trap photos.

I would also appreciate if you could read my last posting again. I never said that Steve's photos are not worthy because he had funding from National Geographic. Please show me where I have said that. Nor did I say his photos are not worthy because he took 10 months or because he was advised by a researcher. I am amazed by your interpretation. It is absolutely wrong. Would appreciate if you can carefully read the posting again.

Further you said:
"Imagine Arthur's great Western Sandpiper had won the top prize. Not here, I imagine, but somewhere on the internet someone would be talking about how he was led to the location, that it was all luck, that his great success as a tour leader gets him opportunities others lack, etc., etc., ad nauseum. It's much healthier to just enjoy all the great images."

Please remember, this is not a mutual admiration society out here in birdphotographers.net. Don't know how you got that feeling. The idea here is to give critiques gently, but point out the flaws and areas for improvement. And if there is a difference of opinion, then people voice it and discuss it thread bare. From your posting history, I think you are a new to this forum. I would suggest that you have a look at the various forums and you will find a healthy amount of discussion and mutual respect. If Artie's Sandpiper photo would have been taken with a camera trap, all of us voicing opinion here would have voiced similar opinions. And we would not stop voicing our opinion just because somebody somewhere would attack Artie's photo. We respect each other, but nobody is a blind follower. (I don't even know how Artie looks like in flesh and blood. He is based out of US and I am based out of India. Not that it would have changed my tone or my integrity).

Nobody here is against Steve. I have mentioned earlier that I liked Steve's snow leopard photographs. Just that I don't agree with the idea of it being considered for BBC.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

[Mike Tracy]

Mr. Winters, are you out there ? Surely a man of your stature is aware of this forum with it's own distinguished members.

I invite you to respond to the preceding posts.

[Cliff Beittel]

Sabyasachi,

I just read your previous post again, and my interpretation of it is the same. I don't know how anyone could read it and not find it dismissive of Winter's knowledge and photographs (you acknowledge the winning photograph only as "a good document"). Nor was I saying that Arthur's position here would spare him criticism on a posted photo--only that people on every photo forum I know would not likely be criticizing one of their own for winning a competition. Instead, I find thread after thread on all the photo forums congratulating members who have won or placed in various contests. I will be surprised and disappointed if I someday see a thread, whether here or at NSN or NPN, in which a member announces that another member's contest-winning photo shouldn't have won; it would be best to extend that consideration to all photographers, members or not.

[john crookes]

I think everyone should take a look at this video of Steve's experience

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/video/player?titleID=1531274057

It shows how much detail and thought Steve put into all of his Photographs of the Snow Leopards
going so far as positioning his workers in different poses to help align his camera and trips positioniing the flashes and such

if you still think this was purely luck after watching this
I can only hope some of his luck could rub off on me

John

[john crookes]

Here are Steve's own words


Commenting on the use of trigger cameras rather than being sat behind the lens, Mr Winter said: "They are something that needs to be used to get intimate portraits of elusive animals.
"I used to hate these cameras because they just gave you a record of an animal.
"Images are all about composition and light. If I cannot control that as if I would as I put the camera up to my face, then essentially I have failed.
"So I asked myself that if I did not like these cameras, how can I like them more.
"It turns out that snow leopards are the perfect species on which to use these cameras. They always come to specific locations to mark their territory.
"So I viewed the locations as movie sets. I put the cameras there, I put the lights there. "I knew the animal would come; it was just waiting for the actor to walk on stage and break the beam."

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Cliff,
This was your original post:

P.S. Sabyasachi Patra posted a comment that suggests, in part, that Winter's photos aren't worthy because he had funding from National Geographic, 10 months to get the images, and advice from a leopard researcher.

It didn't talk about subject knowledge. After reading my post again, you have made additional comments
Cliff: "I don't know how anyone could read it and not find it dismissive of Winter's knowledge and photographs (you acknowledge the winning photograph only as "a good document")"

Nobody doubts the photographic skills of Steve. One of the earlier posts talked about his knowledge so I had talked about Steve's subject knowledge or the lack of it in my post.

I had said that there are other photographers who have taken good photos of the elusive snow leopard.

I had said in my first post, that it is a "fabulous photograph". And the post to which you referred, I had said "Steve’s image shot in the night with snow fall gives a nice perspective. You don’t come across frequently. I like it. It is a good document." I caught on to the word document. I didn't say file to mean a physical document. When you read after the previous line you will realise that what i meant was "it is a good documentation of a behaviour". That is why I had used the word perspective. I hope it clarifies.

the post is getting long. So for the benefit of everybody, I am posting a summary points raised for and against a camera trap photo winning BBC Wildlife Photographer of the Year award.
Cheers,
Sabyasachi

[Sabyasachi Patra]

The thread is getting long. So I thought to summarise what ever is written in the previous posts, so that posters can quickly understand the basic issues that are being discussed.

Some of the folks who think the snow leopard photo captured by a camera trap is a worthy winner as the Wildlife Photographer of the Year say the following:

• It is a great photograph of an elusive animal, so it is well deserved winner.
• Photography through camera traps is a LOT of work
• Steve’s snow leopard photo is It is due to knowledge of the subject (where he will walk thru),
• It is due to Steve’s photographic skills (where to locate the camera to get a pleasant composition and know where to locate the flashes and how to use them to get good light, aren't those great photographer skills?
• Results of Steve Winter are due to his knowledge and persistence.
• Though captured through camera traps, compositions have to be visualised.
• Steve is quoted saying that he carefully works on compositions, plan positioning of the trailmaster transmitters, receivers etc. One out of ten photos (the number I believe is used just as an example) is upto the liking of the photographer as it is exactly the way the photographer wanted it to be.
• A precedent has already been set in previous years competitions when nobody had objected to photos from camera traps.
• To get intimate portraits of elusive animals, Camera trap is the only way.
• Why we insist photographers presence - instead of physically seeing through the view finder he has seen them through his mind which is far more challenging.
• On this forum, lot of images are photoshopped, or shot under controlled conditions. (It implied that members should not be against camera traps but it didn’t explicitly say so.) Photoshop is a fundamental tool in digital photography, but infrared barrier is, to me, a much greater and hard to use tool that Photoshop.


Opponents of a Wildlife Photographer of the Year awarded on the basis of a camera trap photograph have the following to say:

• The image should not be judged on the basis of how elusive the subject is.
• There have been many finer photos taken of the elusive Snow Leopard, some of which were actually taken by the photographer.
• Photography through Camera traps is meant to be used for scientific research but should not be considered for a photographic competition.
• Photographer was not physically present.
• Through Camera traps you have zero control and you cant determine the exact composition etc (“Yes, it is a ton of work, and yes, he had to choose the setting, but he had zero control over the placement of the subject in the frame, zero control of it's posture, and he had nothing at all to do with tripping the shutter at that magical moment that we all dream of”. “Everyone who's ever laid in the mud, waiting on that precise head turn, foot raise, catchlight, and light angle knows exactly where I'm coming from. Sorry, but you can't control those details remotely, or with a trip wire! “)
• BBC competition rules states: “Adjusting your image Digital adjustments are only acceptable if limited to minor cleaning work, levels, curves, colour, saturation and contrast work. The faithful representation of what you saw at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained”. Since the photographer was not present he obviously doesn’t fulfil this criteria.
• BBC competition doesn’t even allow image manipulation, but allows use of gadgets/robots/laser traps even when the photographer is physically not present
• There is no art involved in photography through Camera traps. It is plain luck. You place enough traps and you hope for the subject to be caught in camera.
• Steve’s photography skills are not doubted but his subject knowledge is debatable.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

[john crookes]

For those who wish to learn more about the photo trap techniques here is an article by Joe McDonald at Naturescapes

http://www.naturescapes.net/docs/index.php/category-photographic-technique/41-photographic-technique/305-capture-the-incredible-using-the-photo-trap-and-high-speed-flash

John

[Ramon M. Casares]

I don't think anybody is going to change their mind about what they think, but it is always nice to debate.:)

About Arthur's comment, What I can't understand is that the only fact that the photographer wasn't there to shoot the picture can be such a problem when you win such an award... but for any other situation, camera traps are OK... That just doesn't make sense to me.
What difference does it make? I mean, if you are OK with camera traps to the point that it is OK that a category winner was taken with a camera trap, then why complain about a shot achieved with this technique for being the competition overall winner?:confused:

[frank harrison]

Hey Kids...Hey Kids!

I am just wondering if any of our fraternity was present on the big night?

Can you pleas tell us......

Did the gent in question accept his award in person?....
or did he send a cab to pick it up?!!!!!!!!
;-) :-) ;-)

Keep safe out there mates,
regards
Frank & Di Harrison

[Andy Biggs]

Frank, Steve was there in person to pick up his award, as were all other category winners.

[frank harrison]

Gotcha!!!! ;-) :-) :-)

I knew someone would bite!
[See my previous posts in other sections]

Hi Andy, I take it you like to take snapshots of birds....if you ever come this way, there is always a bed & a meal for you at our house.
But be aware that the rule is the same for everyone. Leave your seriousness & ego outside the door.

God bless you son, & thanks for bringing a smile to our fraternity; there's far too much anguish on our planet.

Regards
Frank & Di Harrison

[Ken Watkins]

Frank,

A good remote capture, well done.

I may have something more interesting to post on this subject in the near future

[Andy Biggs]

Gotcha!!!! ;-) :-) :-)

I knew someone would bite!
[See my previous posts in other sections]

Hi Andy, I take it you like to take snapshots of birds....if you ever come this way, there is always a bed & a meal for you at our house.
But be aware that the rule is the same for everyone. Leave your seriousness & ego outside the door.

God bless you son, & thanks for bringing a smile to our fraternity; there's far too much anguish on our planet.

Regards
Frank & Di Harrison

Thanks so much, Frank! And the same goes to you if you ever wish to come this direction. And better bring your ability to have belly laughs that last a while, because that is the way that I operate. All smiles all the time!

:-)

[mhackett]

This has been a very interesting discussion and I applaud those on both sides who have held their collective caps on while trying make their points. The thought that came into my mind after reading most of this thread was one of Thomas Mangelsen, one of my favorite artists with a camera and his musings on the fleeting summer in Jackson Hole when he and hundreds of others were lucky enough to watch a mother cougar raise her cubs on the mountainside outside of town near the Elk NWR. He says in effect how given his belief and adherence to never photographing any animal in a captive or controlled setting, he never thought he would be lucky enough to photograph a wild cougar. then when it was time and meant to be, the events that transpired that summer gave him his once in a lifetime opportunity. And he never had to set foot on a zoo's grounds or a captive farm to attain some really poignant moments.

How does this relate at all you may ask? Well I figure that Mr. Mangelsen could have used a camera trap to capture images of as many cougars as he so desired, and in some areas they are every bit as rare as any other critter. And indeed the use of this type of set-up and technology is becoming more and more prevalent. Especially in conests where lots of money is the prize such as those month long events held down in Texas Hill Country. But I do think that the more deserving photo should be the one from the photographer who used his mental and physical talents in the moment and not with planning, research, homework, study, and luck of the draw that night. I used infrared remote cameras for my dissertation research, and if you put enough sensors out there you can capture almost anything over enough time.

Is the merit of the photographer based on the events leading up to the moment, the moment itself, or the culmination of both? I argue the latter, and to that effect do feel that the winning image should be one where the photographer was present and made the decisive decision when to trip the shutter.

Still a cool photo, as Andy says a fabulous image of an increasingly imperiled species, and as Jasper said well designed and envisioned with camera placement, but not the winning photographer. Most diligent perhaps, most technologically saavy yes, most endangered species probably, but still for me it misses the true essence in the spirit of the competition and those who have won the honor before the age of technology.

Just one humbled photographers opinion.