User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  8
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34

Thread: Furore over award-winning photo

  1. #1
    Ausphotography Regular JimD's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Mar 2009
    Location
    South Coast
    Posts
    1,286
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Furore over award-winning photo

    .
    .
    .
    .
    f o t o w o r x

    People taking the time out to give me CC is always very much appreciated

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think this photo is fine, would be very hard to form a composite image from a few, especially when the subjects are moving and not in a linear manner.
    Commercial/Editorial/Wedding work - www.jackietranphoto.com
    Travel Photography - www.wanderingasianguy.com

    Broncolor lights up my world.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    Orange
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just my thoughts but it's essentially a HDR image as he re-worked several different versions of the RAW and blended them to create a larger dynamic range and it does show with unrealistic range through the photo. The question for me is "is this acceptable editing as defined by the rules of the competition?" Most seem to suggest only basic colour correction and dodging and burning is allowed. Were other images submitted allowed the same latitude when it comes to editing the images? Did the photographers entering the competition know that would be allowed? The image is powerful enough to win on it's own merit and I accept it's a single image but is it fair? Don't know.

  4. #4
    http://steveaxford.smugmug.com/ Steve Axford's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Nov 2007
    Location
    About in the middle between Byron Bay, Ballina and Lismore
    Posts
    3,138
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think it would be quite possible to do, if you had taken a lot of photos, and you had a bit of luck with positions.. It's good that they checked it all out and found it was ok

    p.s. I doubt that we're talking HDR here. That would be very hard and probably wouldn't work.
    Last edited by Steve Axford; 15-05-2013 at 4:59pm.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I dont even think HDR is possible, as there is a lot of movement from different ppl and the resulting output wouldnt match up well. Nothing wrong with lifting shadows and using tonal contrast as I suspect he did.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    24 May 2010
    Location
    MELBOURNE
    Posts
    937
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JM Tran View Post
    I dont even think HDR is possible, as there is a lot of movement from different ppl and the resulting output wouldnt match up well. Nothing wrong with lifting shadows and using tonal contrast as I suspect he did.
    Probably HDR with multiple images exported out of the one shot. Easy to do in LR
    Daniel Thompson

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Canon 7D & 5D Mark II : 24-70mm f2.8L : 70-200mm f2.8L IS II : 17-40mm f4L : CANON EF 100MM F2.8 MACRO L IS USM: 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM : 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS : 50mm f1.8 : 430EX II & 580EX II External Speedlites : Manfrotto 190X PROB + 804RC2 head : Lee CPL, ND and GND filter system : Lee Big Stopper : CS6 Photoshop : PS Elements 11 : PS Lightroom 5 Tightly packed into a Lowepro Pro Runner 450

    Follow me on FACEBOOK http://www.facebook.com/GreenOrchardPhotography

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Nov 2009
    Location
    Kalgoorlie
    Posts
    1,153
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Certainly sounds like he applied a HDR approach to it. Easy to do a psuedo HDR from the RAW file by increasing or decreasing exposure, white point, black point, shadows, highlights.

    I think it is a great photo and if his explanation of the process and the competitions scrutiny say it is within the rules then it should stand.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    Orange
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Exactly. HDR does not mean you need to use mutiple different shots of different exposures. To me it means you extend the dynamic range of the image beyond what the single shot was capable of and when shooting RAW you can easily push out several different exposure level images of the exact same image and then blend them together either manually or by wizardry.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    15 Jul 2010
    Location
    Forest Lake
    Posts
    1,948
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You could do the same thing with a single negative and some creative dodging, burning, and some masking.

    I see no problems here.
    Greg Bartle,
    I have a Pentax and I'm not afraid to use it.
    Pentax K5
    Sigma 10-20 | Tamron 17-50 F:2.8 | Sigma 50 F:1.4 | Sigma 70-200 F:2.8 Plus a bunch of Ye Olde lenses


    Would you like to see more?
    http://flickr.com/photosbygreg

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I also think it is an incredibly moving photo!
    D800 Nikon 70-200 VR II, Nikon 105 2.8, Nikon 24-120 f4,
    Sigma 85mm 1.4, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4 DG HSM

  11. #11
    http://steveaxford.smugmug.com/ Steve Axford's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Nov 2007
    Location
    About in the middle between Byron Bay, Ballina and Lismore
    Posts
    3,138
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Warus View Post
    Exactly. HDR does not mean you need to use mutiple different shots of different exposures.
    I think that's exactly what HDR does mean. When you a "single shot HDR" it isn't really HDR at all. It just gets the maximum dynamic range out of your single RAW file, at the loss of some colour information. Even if he managed to use real HDR (which is very hard with a fast moving subject), that would be perfectly ok for most comps, even journalist ones.

  12. #12
    Shore Crawler Dylan & Marianne's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Mar 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    8,506
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    The World Press Photo controversy

    What do you guys think of the controversy surrounding the 2013 winner?
    http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...with-photoshop

    The winning photographer admitted to reprocessing different versions of the original RAW file to achieve the final outcome
    Is this worthy of disqualification?
    Coming from a landscape photographer perspective, I can't see the problem - the message is conveyed in the RAW, the message is conveyed probably stronger with some post processing but how much is allowable in the genre?
    Call me Dylan! www.everlookphotography.com | www.everlookphotography.wordpress.com | www.flickr.com/photos/dmtoh
    Canon EOS 5dmk3 : 17-40 F4 L, 70-200F2.8 canon L, 24-70mm canon L, Gitzo Safari +1178 ballhead. |Canon 5dmkII, 16-35mmF2.8 II L, Gitzo 2541 )
    Singh Ray/Hitech/Lee assorted filters, Z pro modified system Cokin holder
    Post : Lightroom 3.6 catalogue -> Export as 16bit TIFF, Edited CS5 -> resized for web.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's ridiculous and the blogger should get sued
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  14. #14
    Shore Crawler Dylan & Marianne's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Mar 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    8,506
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    oops I just realised Jim had a thread about this!

  15. #15
    Shore Crawler Dylan & Marianne's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Mar 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    8,506
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree with Steve - you could reexport the same file over and over again , or you could apply differing levels to duplicated layers on the same file and achieve the same thing - Even if he had managed to do a real HDR with subjects that stayed still for him, as long as the subject matter was the same, I wouldn't see what the problem would be (but then , I'm not a photojournalist). Likewise, if he had taken this shot with a GND hand held to minimise sky highlights, people would have questioned the image (as many questioned a portrait image of Kah Kit Yoong's from Carnivale) . I get the impression that just because manipulation was done in the field in the case of using a GND, it would somehow be OK rather than the lighting adjusted in post.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Warus View Post
    Exactly. HDR does not mean you need to use mutiple different shots of different exposures. To me it means you extend the dynamic range of the image beyond what the single shot was capable of and when shooting RAW you can easily push out several different exposure level images of the exact same image and then blend them together either manually or by wizardry.
    What Steve said above, HDR needs to come from usually 3 or more to blend diff exposures together, creating different exposed ouputs from 1 image/raw file is not the same.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    15 Jul 2010
    Location
    Forest Lake
    Posts
    1,948
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I said it in the other thread before, but I work with idiots, and am not adverse to repeating myself

    The artist did not do anything that could not be done with film.

  18. #18
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,641
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Threads merged
    regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
    Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff



  19. #19
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think if it's from a single image, then there's no issue in recovering as much of the information available in the raw file .. as long as no other pixel deformation/contrivance has been done to alter the actual substance of the image.

    But from my understanding of(not experience with) photoshop, is that this could easily be done as a multi image HDR.
    One shot for the people/laneway which requires more exposure, and one shot for the background/sky which requires much less exposure.
    Irrespective of whether the people are moving in relation to the sky, it's not important to mix those two elements in a HDR/blended image.
    The manner in which photoshop can blend the sky/background(if I understand it correctly) should present no issue to the manipulator.
    The dynamic range within the mass of people and the innards of the laneway, all seem to be within the ability of any decent camera .. just that the exposure requirement may have been low compared to the sky.

    The sky looks to be heavily recovered anyhow, and the shade of blue it depicts looks unnatural and contrived.
    So it looks exactly as tho it was just a simple heavy recovery job from a single image.


    While the image depicts a very sombre and important social story, I can't see how it got voted as world press photograph of the year .. it looks too cartoony to begin with.
    While it has a great look about it, it looks nothing like a new photograph, and more of a social documentary/artistic/gallery type image.

    The shadowing on the faces of the people looks ridiculous to begin with, and is in opposition to the shadowing on the buildings.
    The processing on guy at the far left just looks plain silly, with the light source coming at him from the LHS, yet the sun is obviously on the RHS of the frame.
    The grey buliding wall won't reflect enough light to cast that kind of strong shadowing on his face, and of any external lighting was used(which apparently was not anyhow), it'd have to be placed right at the wall where there is some kind of doorbell or something like that.

    Not an image of news as per the expected type that we usually see .. it's more of an art gallery type impressionist rendering. Definitely not a worthy World PRESS image candidate, let alone a winner IMO.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  20. #20
    Member Mat's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 May 2010
    Location
    San Remo
    Posts
    963
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kym View Post
    Threads merged
    Careful Kim it might be disqualified as a thread...

    HDR is a meathod to increase the dynamic range to more than that can be captured in the one shot. A reprocess of the same RAW file is not an HDR as there has not been any more recored information form the original capture. so to have an HDR you need to have 2 or more images capture at different exposures. Just pushing a single RAW image is more Tone Mapping.
    Mat.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] K-x, Sigma 18 - 125, Vivitar 100 - 300, RICOH KR10Super & KR10M (film), Filters, Tubes
    Flickr, RedBubble, Facebook


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •