Jeff, With all due respect, it seems that you might not be reading the posts above. Several folks have asked questions of Maxis on the NSN thread. So far, he has not responded. As one of the owners of this site we cannot allow access to someone who generated a malicious spam attack against BPN.Originally Posted by Jeff Donald
Maxis has the opportunity to defend himself on the NSN thread.
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
Hey Jeff,
I do relate.....That's why I made sure he had a voice and asked on NSN!... I hope he responds.
PS I was typing when Artie responded....read the posts carefully on NSN....Artie provide a link
.. wonder how you feel about people doing felonies to support their families Raul? No parallels but the principle is the same.
And Jeff also....Fred Miranda site link where a contestent felt hurt/betrayed; http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/832639
and another wher Maxis posted an image; http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/831540
Like you....I feel he needs to speak up.....many opportunities B4 this.....silence. Maybe he is away.
This site, and the others have the moral high ground. What more can be gained by the continued asking of questions when no answers seem to be forthcoming. Ask you stated, Maybe he is away, would seem to be accurate because he has not posted on either Fred Miranda or NatureScapes since Friday.
While we wait for Mr. Gamez to reply, maybe the moderators could steer the discussion in a more enlightening and positive direction that would benefit the entire community here at BPN.
Hi Jeff,
Here is the message that I sent Maxis via his web site:
Hi Maxis, There is a thread involving the disqualification of your images in the NWRA contest here:
http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=49270
Several folks are concerned that you are not able to defend yourself there. I would be glad to post your answers to the various questions that have been posed or to post any defense that you may wish to offer. Please e-mail me at the address above if you wish.
Please note also that Roman K and I have posed several questions for you on the similar NSN thread. We all look forward to hearing you.
Sorry that I did not think of that sooner. On a related note, there are two relevant life-concepts that might be applicable here:
1-You shall reap what you sow.
2-What goes around comes around.
As for steering the thread in a more positive direction I have clearly stated my thoughts above as have others. To summarize: do what you want to an image, let folks know what you have done, and read and abide by the rules of any contests that you enter (and any groups that you choose to join).
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
You and I come from similar backgrounds, having both been (actually still are) teachers in our the pasts. I caught a student cheating once (submitted prints that he didn't print) and had him expelled from college. I'm sure this was a life changing event for him. In some ways I probably ruined his life, I think it's said that the average college graduate makes over $1 million more in his lifetime than the average high school graduate. I'd like to think that I changed that student in a positive way and the lessons he learned have benefitted him the rest of his life. Maybe he's gone on to be a successful photographer, I don't know.
I would just like to see this whole life changing event ultimately be a positive one for Mr. Gamez. Hopefully he will learn some ethics along his way and become a productive member of the photographic community.
I agree the principle is the same, when people violate the law, they are punish, and eventually they are re-integrate to the general community, I am only wish that the penal system was better, since the re-incidence ratio is too high. So I feel in the same way, Maxis was punish, I hope he learns his lesson and eventually could re-integrate to the nature photography community (as I mentioned before).
I think that the punishment should by according the "crime"... here I got no answers, although it seems that the punishment was that his work was removed from the contest, and the honorary mention publicly removed.
My points is that there are not many young photographers that have the skills and the passion to carry the torch when our senior members are not going to be able or willing to make the sacrifice to make awesome pictures.
Saludos, Raul
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_162680.asp
The news made the Chattanooga paper
Here it is straight from Mr. Evan Hirsche, President of The National Wildlife Refuge Association. He was kind enough to answer these questions for me.
James Shadle's Question
Evan Hirsche's Answer
The NWRA disqualification of Mr.Gamez has become a very active thread on birdphotographers.net. Most of the discussion revolves around the rules violation of digitally adding elements in post processing. Do you consider removing an element and replacing it with a sampled area as "adding an element"?
In the case of Mr. Gamez' photo, he clearly added an element that hadn't existed in the original. It may construed as removing an element (in this case birds that existed in the original), but the removal necessitated adding something in their place. We may decide to clarify further in the future, but the intent is clear and there should be no confusion by photographers.
If can tell me, were any images disqualified because their location was misrepresented?
Concerning misrepresentation of location, Mr. Gamez image of a snowy plover chick taken on Egmont Key caught our attention because refuge biologists have no documented nesting of snowy plover chicks on Egmont in recent history. When I explained that fact to Mr. Gamez, he said that he was simply confused and that he takes so many pictures, he's not always sure where he took them. Perhaps, but then he shouldn't enter photos in a contest that have a specific location requirement if he's not sure where he took them.
Our members are also interested in why you named the photographer.
We chose to name Mr. Gamez to send a clear message to photographers that if they enter, their images will be scrutinized and they will be called out if we determine they've willfully violated the rules. Further, we wanted photographers who take pains to follow the rules to know that their integrity is valued and appreciated.
Our contest has a purpose - to collect first-rate images that illustrate the magnificent natural treasures conserved by our national wildlife refuges. If we end up using images in program and marketing materials that are not taken on refuges or create an artificial scene, then our integrity as an organization is compromised and our cause suffers.
Evan,
Thanks for taking the time to set the record straight.
All the best,
James
Raul, I am confused by your remarks about us old folks... Please do explain and let us know what that remark has to do with Maxis' conduct.
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
[quote=James Shadle;377685]Here it is straight from Mr. Evan Hirsche, President of The National Wildlife Refuge Association. He was kind enough to answer these questions for me.
James Shadle's Question
Evan Hirsche's Answer
The NWRA disqualification of Mr.Gamez has become a very active thread on birdphotographers.net. Most of the discussion revolves around the rules violation of digitally adding elements in post processing. Do you consider removing an element and replacing it with a sampled area as "adding an element"?
In the case of Mr. Gamez' photo, he clearly added an element that hadn't existed in the original. It may construed as removing an element (in this case birds that existed in the original), but the removal necessitated adding something in their place. We may decide to clarify further in the future, but the intent is clear and there should be no confusion by photographers.
.
I am not defending what the photographer did here in light of the misrepresentation about the location but I think this organization, and anyone else running a photography competition, needs to provide more clarity in their rules. This guy is equating removal to addition of something that is not there. If the photographer added the second gull in the picture on Naturescapes, i could see their point. I have a problem with this rule if he took out the oof ruddy turnstone on the beach and replaced it with sand. Afterall there was sand behind the bird before he cloned it out. If they are going to disqualify the shot because of something like that, the rule should state no removal of anything from the image is allowed.
[quote=Art Peslak;377907
I am not defending what the photographer did here in light of the misrepresentation about the location but I think this organization, and anyone else running a photography competition, needs to provide more clarity in their rules. This guy is equating removal to addition of something that is not there. If the photographer added the second gull in the picture on Naturescapes, i could see their point. I have a problem with this rule if he took out the oof ruddy turnstone on the beach and replaced it with sand. Afterall there was sand behind the bird before he cloned it out. If they are going to disqualify the shot because of something like that, the rule should state no removal of anything from the image is allowed.[/quote]
So Art,
Are you saying that removing a good portion of 2 birds falls within "Limited image modifications"?.....because that is what the very first rule states.
Roman,
what I am saying is if one is going to run a photo contest, be clear about the rules. Especially if you are intent on embarassing the **** out of the photographer by issuing press releases that are getting picked up in the national press.
If you don't want anyone to remove anything from the photo, the rules should say that. I have entered photo contests where the rules say you can't add anything in. I would not interpret that to mean I can't remove anything.
Mr. Morris,
As I mentioned in both replies, I don't think that cheating is an acceptable behavior, I said he should (an have already been punish). I am not sure if the punishment fits the behavior, but this definitely harder question to the "what is right and wrong?" ... just look at our judicial system.
Regarding age difference, my point is very simple, I believe that future generations should have the same opportunities that my generation have,been able to enjoy the work of talented photographers documenting nature, with the hope that their work will generate the desire to preserve wildlife.
Aside from the controversy on the contest, Mr. Gamez does have the skills and passion (on my humble opinion, from his work), and he is young, again I hope he learns from his mistakes. I also hope this serve as a lesson for other upcoming photographers.
Raul
It seems in this particular case there was an alltogether too clear violation of the rules, and quite correctly the organisers withdrew the images.
This in my mind is perfectly fair!
My concern is that the strict interpretation of rules is not always upheld by all contests.
This is one of the rules of BBCWPTY
"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.
I still have no idea how the winners for the past two years, each taken remotely with nobody present fail to breach this rule.
Oh nooooooo! Not that can of worms again!!!
This gave me a good chuckle today.....so I will share;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IU1bzZheWk
Last edited by Roman Kurywczak; 11-09-2009 at 11:50 AM.
Art, with all due respect, the rules state: "Limited image modifications are allowed. The intent and effect of any modification must be to produce a more natural looking and accurate photograph."
Removing a turnstone and two Laughing Gull heads is clearly more than a "limited modification." And in no way could removing three birds be considered to have made the photograph "more accurate."
In addition, Maxis entered an image of a nesting Snowy Plover as having been created at Egmont Key where they have never been recorded as nesting. His "defense" was that he takes lots of images and got confused. That is patently ridiculous; I have been photographing for almost 27 years now, have taken probably close to a million images (film and digital combined) and though my memory is poor (and gets poorer every day) if you showed me any one of them I could with very rare exception (as most photographers could) tell you instantly exactly where it was photographed.
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
Raul, I am not quite sure how Maxis has been punished. I would call having his images disqualified as him getting what was his just due and in no way do I see that as punishment. And as for us old folks losing our will to make the sacrifices needed to create great images, don't count on it.
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
I've never had the good fortune of an older photographer stepping aside so that I can take his/her place. It's always been the case that they step aside because the better shot is a couple of feet over.:)
While the public nature of this discussion may make some folks understandably uncomfortable, I find this to be immensely helpful. A respectful, honest discussion about what we do as photographers can only help the profession as a whole. There are not many online forums that provide this service. Like any group, we are a compilation of many types of personalities, and each of us has to deal with how we manage our ambitions. This seems to be a case of ambition going to far, although I too await the responses of the person in center. I sincerely believe in redemption, and hope that this episode will go that direction. Either way, I am grateful for this thread and those who have contributed.
The current thread on "how close" we should get to our subjects, and the thread on use of audio in the ER section, are both enlightening as well.
Last edited by david cramer; 11-09-2009 at 01:30 PM.
Artie,
I am not defending what Maxis did here. I agree with you that misrepresenting the location is patently ridiculous. My memory is not as good as yours so i always rename my photographs with the location as part of the file name when I ingest the photos into my computer. There is no excuse for what he did on the location.
My point is that there is an ambiguity in the rules of the contest and the association may not have been acting prudently by sending out press releases. Maxis admitted extensively modifying the photos in his naturescapes post and it is clear that it took a lot of work to take out the heads of the oof background gulls underneath the in focus gull.
I will give you a hypothetical to illustrate my point on the ambiguity in the rules and tell me if it fits these rules or not. If Maxis' shot on NSN did not have the out of focus gulls in the water but only had the oof ruddy turnstone in the foreground which could be removed by a simple quick mask from the sand, is that a "limited modification...to produce a more natural looking and accurate photograph."
BTW, a judge once told me not to preface my comments with "All due respect.." because usually that meant the lawyer was going to tell him he was wrong.:)
If a rule is indeed ambiguous then err on the side of caution...why take a chance? Not worth the consequences as we can see with this situation.
\
I am not counting on it. I do enjoy your work, and the fact that you share it on the internet, so is accessible to millions. I wish you many years of productive healthy life.
We also know that you are not going to be able to do it for ever, we need some talented young photographer to keep producing amazing images, after all skills to make extra ordinary images (consistently) are obtained over a lifetime.
Note: This is from somebody with limited knowledge of photography and the photography business... I just love to browse the net, look a book, or go to nature centers around Florida to admire what a very few are able to do with a camera.
Saludos, Raul
Hi Artie,
Thanks for the clarification (post #37). Like David Cramer, I too am grateful for this thread.
Best as always,
Nicki
"Limited image modifications are allowed.The intent and effect of any modification must be to produce a more natural looking and accurate photograph."
I don't find this to be at all ambiguous. With the digital age, most photo contests allow for minor adjustments to a RAW file to make the image "more natural looking." This includes minor dust spot removal and adjustments to levels, curves, saturation, and sharpening. This is how we develop a digital file, just as one takes certain steps to develop film. The inclusion of the term "accurate" means that the image represents the content of the scene as photographed. Adding or deleting elements from the scene (note - a dust spot is on the sensor, not in the scene) would result in an inaccurate representation, regardless of how it improved the image in terms of overall beauty.
I have stayed out of this as much as possible but would like to tell Raul (Whom I personally know and respect) that carrying a torch while cheating at the same time is hardly a way to benefit future generations.
Integrity and honesty as just as important as talent if you want to be taken seriously.
Hi Raul,
re:
I am not counting on it. I do enjoy your work, and the fact that you share it on the internet, so is accessible to millions. I wish you many years of productive healthy life.
Thank you sir.
We also know that you are not going to be able to do it for ever, we need some talented young photographer to keep producing amazing images, after all skills to make extra ordinary images (consistently) are obtained over a lifetime.
I do hope that those talented young photographers can show respect for photography and for the folks that they have learned from. To do otherwise is to dishonor both.
I just love to browse the net, look a book, or go to nature centers around Florida to admire what a very few are able to do with a camera.
Me too!
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
NWRA Rule: Do not add any elements or objects that do not exist in the original scene.
NWRA Decision: In the case of Mr. Gamez' photo, he clearly added an element that hadn't existed in the original. It may construed as removing an element (in this case birds that existed in the original), but the removal necessitated adding something in their place.
Art Peslak's Opinion: My point is that there is an ambiguity in the rules of the contest.
My Opinion: Reading the rules and the NWRA decision, there is no ambiguity.
Raul said: I think is that Maxis was (still into my eyes) one of the best new generation photographers.
My Opinion: Is that the case, or is he one of the best new generation Photoshop editors? If someone adds or subtracts elements in a contests where it is against the rules, can you trust their other images to be legitimate? Could unchecked ambition or desire for recognition motivate someone to take short cuts and make themselves seem like a better photographer than they are?
Ed said: I didn't quite understand the purpose of singling out the individual, unless it was to shame or embarass him.
NWRA said: We chose to name Mr. Gamez to send a clear message to photographers that if they enter, their images will be scrutinized and they will be called out if we determine they've willfully violated the rules. Further, we wanted photographers who take pains to follow the rules to know that their integrity is valued and appreciated.
My Opinion: If the photographer had not been named, there would be a shadow of suspicion cast on all who entered and did not have images displayed on the NWRA's website.
I find all of this discussion so very unbelievalble. Can a photo contest be that important; can any contest be more important than your integrity?
Isn't it how you play the game; not whether you win or lose?
Cheers, Jay
My Digital Art - "Nature Interpreted" - can now be view at http://www.luvntravlnphotography.com
"Nature Interpreted" - Photography begins with your mind and eyes, and ends with an image representing your vision and your reality of the captured scene; photography exceeds the camera sensor's limitations. Capturing and Processing landscapes and seascapes allows me to express my vision and reality of Nature.
Fabiola,
I hope you know that the respect is mutual, for you and Alfred. I respect your opinion, but I belief that most people are good, and people learn from their mistakes.
(BTW... I not talking about hard core criminal, people with mental problems, ....)
In previous post I said: "I don't think that cheating is an acceptable behavior"
and also: "I hope that Maxis learns from his mistakes"
I believe we all make mistakes trough our lives, and we deal with the consequence. Some people are fortunate to learn from their mistakes, and we, as a society should give this small group a second opportunity. I am not saying that this is the case here, is too early to know, but I really wish the best to Maxis.
You are right Integrity, honesty are important, but I will like to add a couple more... understanding and forgiveness.
Raul
While i do not condone what mr Maxis did in the contest I also do not condone the behavior of this site and the reaction to a former member of the site
There seams to be a personal vendeta against MR Maxis here
If former forums that asked whether or not manipulation should be disclosed there were a lot of members and some moderators that condoned the issue of not telling if an image is modified
Mr Arhtur Morris was not among them but a number of moderators were.
When we condone that activity in everyday life who are we to condem the same practice in any other field
Mr Maxis has already paid the price of his mis deeds and further degrading of his personna here without the benifit of him being a member borders on criminal
I do believe there are too many hypocrits residing here
Those who live in glass houses
John
There is a reason he is a former member of the site, that is certainly not going to help his cause on here for some members i am sure.
The rules seem pretty simple to me so I don't see how anyone can clone out 3 birds in one photo and think that's acceptable, although looking at it I had no clue it was done
It will be interesting to see what modifications were made on the other photos. I mean its easy enough to say I took the picture at a location and got mixed up, things like that could happen. Even the picture that he showed with the birds remove maybe he forgot he did it. However putting those 2 and even more pictures together seems to me it was done on purpose.
If he could not come up with good enough reason for them to believe I can see why they spilled the beans. Hopefully its a lesson to him and it will make people think twice before they try the same thing.
John, this is not about cloning, and I know cloning is a sensitive issue for you.
This is about not abiding rules.
Trying to pass something as a legit image when it has been modified, seems a lot more criminal to me than discussing it in a forum where we are all photographers and to a point, are affected by another photgrapher's behavior.
If you read carefully, Mr Gamez has a lot of open question in NSN and has declined to make his defense. We even provided a link here.
If we discuss the BBC, and NB contests why not discuss the NWRA?
Hi John,
re:
While i do not condone what mr Maxis did in the contest I also do not condone the behavior of this site and the reaction to a former member of the site. There seams to be a personal vendeta against MR Maxis here.
Please see my next post.
If former forums that asked whether or not manipulation should be disclosed there were a lot of members and some moderators that condoned the issue of not telling if an image is modified
Mr Arthur Morris was not among them but a number of moderators were.
I am glad that you remember the "Truth in Posting" thread that I started on NSN :) And yes, lots of folks felt that it was fine that they do what they want to with no need to tell anyone. Some of them have to their benefit changed their tunes. And we do encourage folks here to optimize and tell :)
When we condone that activity in everyday life who are we to condemn the same practice in any other field.
Several folks have advanced this argument but it makes zero sense to me. For posting images, making prints, selling images, do what you wish and let the buyers/photo editors/forum participants know what you have done. I have been preaching that for about seven years now. But to argue that because folks routinely optimize their images by removing, adding, and substituting that there actions should be condoned when the knowingly violate the rules of a contest simply does not cut it. As I said above, it makes no sense at all (if I am understanding you correctly).
Mr Maxis has already paid the price of his mis-deeds and further degrading of his personna here without the benifit of him being a member borders on criminal
As stated above several times I have let Maxis know that I would be glad to post one of more statements that he might wish to make here. He has not responded here and he has not responded to the questions asked of him on the NSN thread. If Maxis feels that he has been libeled or slandered here (I forget which would be the applicable term) here he is of course free to institute a law suit.
I do believe there are too many hypocrits residing here.
Are you saying that folks who use Photoshop to improve their images should not be commenting here? If yes, that again makes no sense.
Those who live in glass houses
I use Photoshop to improve my images. I do not enter these images in contests where doing so would be in violation of the rules. I am entitled to throw a few stones when they are deserved. Again, do see my next post.
John[/quote]
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
Interesting John,
You name harsh words such as "Vendeta"...and yet you don't provide the link to others so they can decide for themselves if your claim is on topic! On this forum I always give people other options to improve their image.....as far as I know, no one on this site says this is what you need to do to cheat in a competition. For the record also....I was the first.....BPN moderator or otherwise....who gave Maxis a voice on NSN....no response all these hours later.....so how dare you make that statement! Bring the proof and not inuendoes.......otherwise.....you are looking like an A**!
Last edited by Roman Kurywczak; 11-09-2009 at 06:09 PM.
Oh BTW.....please do state for the record if you are friends with Maxis.....have taken his workshops....etc. ....because if you check all my replies to him....you will see as well as on NSN....that I thought he was a fine photographer.....my question to him on NSN is and still will be .....why?
As a member of NSN that is up to him to respond there. As a non-member of this site we should leave the story and stop condeming him here.
I am not in defense of the man but I think we would be much better served if we educate others here to fully divulge no matter where the image is shown
If we teach from the beginning maybe we can help avoid a simular happening in the future
When one turns a blind eye in our daily lidfe how can we condem when the act happens in another arena
Artie states that this is the number one educational nature photography site on the web
well let us educate not be hypocrits
It is all of our best interests if we try to educate all to tell what they have done to a photograph
even if it is to be shown to just one other
John
for the record I have never met maxis or taken any workshops what so ever from any one here never mind Maxis
You are missing my point about educating all so this does not happen in the future
Once again some here do not read everything but are quick to jump down one's throat for a single line read everything please
John, Please let us know via a direct link to the post or posts of any BPN owner or moderator who has not asked folks to disclose what they did to create their images either in the field or at the computer or who has suggested that they instead conceal that information.
And, this thread is serving to reinforce the premise that it is always best to disclose.
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
John,
Did you read my replies? Did you go see my question to him on NSN?
PS Thanks Artie for asking John to provide the link....I am very interested!
Last edited by Roman Kurywczak; 11-09-2009 at 06:31 PM. Reason: added ps
http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ead.php?t=7355
a former discussion Artie
Please read that and the other about remove that distraction and you will see that some moderators felt that disclosure was not needed or called for
Yes i did read your replys and that is fine for NSN where he can decide whether or not to answer But the fact is that he can not reply here either through a personell email or not we should just report the story and then educate about the actions not continue to mention the person
Yes, I do feel that folks can learn from their mistakes.
Yes, I do feel that that folks should be forgiven.
And, do not be shocked here, I feel that Maxis is quite a talented photographer.
I cannot however ignore the following:
1-Maxis was banned from BPN for his failure to follow the Forum Guidelines despite repeated requests to do so.
2-Maxis then generated a massive and malicious spam attack against BPN.
3-Maxis drove a jet ski up to the shore of the island at Alafia Banks where spoonbills nest. The machine was incredibly loud. I firmly believe that because of the tremendous noise generated by jet skis that they should not be within a mile of any rookery island.
4-Maxis entered images in the NWRA contest that were in violation of the rules involving image manipulation and locations. Maxis' NSN post seems to state that he knew that the image was in violation of the contest rules. In that posts he implies clearly that Photoshop instructors
5-Maxis is currently offering to do Quick Mask slide shows for local camera clubs. Maxis learned to use Quick Masks either from Robert O'Toole or from Robert's APTATS I CD. As far as I know, Robert was the first to utilize Quick Masks for nature photography and has generously shared his knowledge. For Maxis to offer a slide program based solely on the techniques developed and taught by another professional is at best disrespectful.
6-Furthermore, in his NSN post:
Hello,
Thank you for posting this. Let's look at the image above. This is the perfect opportunity to ask ourselves how much is too much? Let this be an eye opener to all and let’s turn it into something positive.[*] Is it really worth OVER editing our images?[*] Are we becoming more editors than photographers?[*] Are there photographers teaching extensive image editing worth it?[*] Is it worth removing that stick in the background?[*] Is it worth fixing every part of our photographs?[*] Should we photograph for a photo contest or should we photograph thinking that we can edit that image later?[*] Since some edit images to the extreme, should they simply stay away from photo contest? Because they know they will violate every rule?
Today I got a phone call from a camera club president that was told about the press release. She mentioned the dilemma of several club members have in every meeting and their “Photoshop cr**”. The constant battle over editing images to the extreme and that’s just ONE camera club.
The bottom line is this probably an ethic type of question BUT is our “extensive” ethic appropriate? In my own opinion……. obviously NOT.
There are several photographers advertising extensive Photoshop image editing techniques to “enhance” our images. Not to mention how many tutorials you can find online. Some go as far as removing subject’s body parts, and replace it with the next frame, taking or extracting parts of photographs and so on… The list is endless.
I’ve just learned that it not worth it. Let this be a lesson to you. It’s not worth editing our images to the extreme. Let's look at the image above. Would you call that extensive editing? Obviously Yes! Let’s get it right straight out of the sensor. Happy shooting! Maxis Gamez
Does anyone see a pattern?
(Note: Maxis never makes it clear if the Laughing Gull image that accompanies his post we one of the images that was removed from the judging.)
What is ludicrous about his comments above is that he while he is insulting and demeaning folks who teach others to use the latest technologies (including Photoshop) to improve their images out of one side of his mouth while peddling his skills as a Photoshop instructor to local camera clubs out of the other side.
Maxis has been desperate in his desire to get ahead in the industry but I do believe that with his actions of the past few months noted above he is doing just the opposite.
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
a Quote from a moderator
It's funny but the more I read the posts it comes down to manipulate or not to manipulate at all or you can do this but not that or this example is over the line and what you can manipulate in a dark room is OK.
Photography is an accepted art form. It differs from painting in many ways but one significant difference is you need a piece of equiptment to get your image. To some that can be the end result or to others that can be the starting point now that darkroom manipulation has expanded to the computer.
Do most artists tell everything they did to create an effect. I don't think so. You go to a show and look at their work and wonder! Should a photographer state after each displayed image the 27 steps he made to get it to that level when he displays at a show? I wouldn't and I don't think most would.
__________________
Dave Mills
Hey John,
I am heading out in 2 minutes and will read the thread when I ge back....but I will leave you with this thought.....I am the father of 2 sons...15 and 13.....my father, who is still with me, taught me personal responsibility which I have taught to my sons......go to my the link on Fred Miranda .com on one of my above responses.....and see Maxis's response after the incident happened and someone asked him about it......his reply on NSN after it was disclosed was not assuming personal responsability....it was a warning to us....to take note of contest rules....so here goes...Jay Gould mentioned integrity....my father taught me that and I am looking to pass it on to my sons....not once, and he has had the oppotunity....has Maxis taken responsibility for his actions???! I offer this....how would you feel if you entered the contest and weren't chosen? I believe in integrity.....all the other stuff is BS!
Again I am not here to defen Maxis
I think he got what he deserved
But to use this forum to continue to degrade a person who can not do anything to say in defense is just not right
He is banned from that is fine
he got what he deserved I guess so report the other story and then educate
Not keep going back to the person and continuing to raise issues about the person and not the problem of manipulation of images and not being forthcoming about it
with that said you can remove myself from membership as I see no way I can be a Hypocrit to this myself
thanks for the couple of years and all of the fine images that were shared here
John
I believe in integrity.....all the other stuff is BS![/quote]
WOW! Really! I am glad that most people in society don't share your views.
Integrity is just one piece of the puzzle and if you choose that as your only piece then i feel sorry for you
And I feel sorry for any feelings I may have hurt while here but it is my belief that I intended only to be the better that I can be and try to educate the same to others
I am not the first to be jumped on here by certain moderators nor will i be the last
I hate to see a site that was trying to be good for photography turn into such a vengefull arena
The past has happened let it go and go forth and educate so as to not relive it
Re Feeding ducks at North Chagrin:
Art, as with previous correspondence we've had, we seem to have trouble detecting when the other is being sarcastic.
And yes, tossing gravel is not in violation of the rules, but it is unethical in my opinion. It only works to attract wood ducks because many others have been illegally feeding them. It disrupts their normal behavior (which could be considered harassment). Also if tossing pebbles draws the ducks toward you and away from other photographers, then you are being selfish and interfering with the rights of other photographers.
In addition, you apparently weren't too concerned about the rules violations in the first place when you stated in your email to me "To get around the no-feeding ban--heck, without folks feeding there would be fewer Wood Ducks and possibly no Wood Duck Festival--I simply toss handfuls of gravel....". In the first place, feeding the wood ducks corn does not necessarily increase their abundance-- it is more probably the habitat and available natural food that attracts the ducks. This is readily apparent if you visit some of the other ponds in the area. I saw more wood ducks in the three ponds at Oxbow lagoon than at the ponds behind the visitor center. Waterfowl management is the responsibility of the park biologists. To justify the selfish actions of photographers (and other visitors) by implying that their rule-breaking actions are responsible for the presence of the wood ducks and thus the Wood Duck Festival IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS.
This type of circular, irrational logic is the reason you never lose an argument (sarcasm again).
I agree with everything that Fabs stated above (Pane #83) and with most everything that James Shadle said above in Pane #78. Everything but this In part):
Raul said: I think is that Maxis was (still into my eyes) one of the best new generation photographers.
My Opinion: Is that the case, or is he one of the best new generation Photoshop editors? If someone adds or subtracts elements in a contests where it is against the rules, can you trust their other images to be legitimate? Could unchecked ambition or desire for recognition motivate someone to take short cuts and make themselves seem like a better photographer than they are?
As I stated above I do believe that Maxis is a pretty darned good photographer. And Ansel Adams was a pretty good image editor. And I am pretty good with Photoshop. And I am a firm believer in JIJO; junk in = junk out. James pretty much presents his images as they looked in the viewfinder. That is his call and I respect that. I will spend 30 minutes at times improving a single image. I am fine with that. I let folks know what I do. Whose approach is better? James' approach for James, mine for me.
My belief is that I am simply using the latest technology to create images that make me and others happy and images that sell.
As we all know by now James and I do agree that entering one or more images that are in violation of the contest rules and then refusing to submit the RAW files might not have been the best plan for getting ahead.
Respectfully.
BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.
BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.
Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,
E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.
Posting Permissions
