BBC WPTY Results

[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/vi...eID=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/ind...gh-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.