NEW TITLE: Images disqualified because of misleading photoshoping

[dminton]

http://nppa.org/news_and_events/news...4/denmark.html


I changed the thread title because I misread something, and the title was misleading and incorrect.

[ndsimm]

Christensen disagreed with the outcome. "In my opinion, a RAW file ... has nothing to do with reality and I do not think you can judge the finished images and the use of Photoshop by looking at the RAW file," he told Tønnesen.

am I the only one that sees something wrong with that statement? If the RAW images is not reality, then why take the shot at all? why not just create an image in photoshop and don't even bother with a camera????

[Collins]

Not at all surprised. More and more cases of this pop up all the time. And those are just the ones we know of...

[sandboa]

That is an interesting read. Here's the link to the full English translation with all three images shown.

http://www.pressefotografforbundet.d...x.php?id=11708

Personally, I agree with the judges. This went too far to be considered realistic photojournalism. Those photos no more represent the reality of what was there than a painting could. Photojournalism should have a representative photo.

[Roy]

I see what I think is extra, over the top editing in a lot of contests. Much looks like HDR to me and the thing is, the HDR styles are winning the contests. Noting against HDR but if there's a contest shouldn't the HDR be in it's own category?

[jamesw]

Very interesting read. In my opinion, as art the images look MUCH better after his postprocessing. As journalism, I ask my self - could he have used a Fuji color film and gotten these eye-popping results?

I think he actually COULD have gotten these images if he's shot them on film and pushed them around.

I personally "shoot to the right" all the time, and then pull the histogram back to the left in LR. The result is eye-popping color without ANY selective adjustments.

Cheers
James

[dcnctx]

Originally Posted by Roy

I see what I think is extra, over the top editing in a lot of contests. Much looks like HDR to me and the thing is, the HDR styles are winning the contests. Noting against HDR but if there's a contest shouldn't the HDR be in it's own category?

Sony's new SLRs do in-camera HDR and most company's SLRs do considerable in-camera processing with undoubtedly more to come.

[semperaggie]

Quite a difference:

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by ndsimm

am I the only one that sees something wrong with that statement? If the RAW images is not reality, then why take the shot at all? why not just create an image in photoshop and don't even bother with a camera????

Photography is never reality. It's just narration by other means. As for just creating an image directly in Photoshop, that's just what David Hockney is doing. Or how about Ray-0-Grams?

Suggested reading Sontag, Barthes and Photographic Theory edited by James Elkins.