British Wildlife Photography Awards 2015

[3dogs]

The BBC CountryFile Photo Competition to which @The Hat refers is found at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0314wd7/p030sn2k

The rules etc. at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/art...the-countryfile-photographic-competition-2015

This is a well organised, long standing annual photo competition for inclusion in a charity supporting BBC calendar. It produces some of the best non-professional images each year.

Just at first glance......characters, composition and the moment to push the button not before not after.....
Much more better............

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

When I looked first to the images I thought - oh, another HDR contest, and that distracted me from looking to the pictures. As I understand the rules (some) postprocessing is accepted, and these pictures are apparently those used for the printouts, so they look overdone on a screen. They are selected for a calendar, I have the impression a particular calendar style has developed for them - lots of them look alike - a kind of - even if they are taken at opposite places of this world.

 

[3dogs]

If my softproofing required THAT MUCH pushing to get a print I would BURN myself at the stake before dared call myself a photographer.........first prints I made before I calibrated were a bit like that.....but not even at that level did I have to boost like that to get print that reflected the scene that I saw.
Nature does allow "some" post processing but that is "SOME" post processing....like on a scale of 0-10 thats 12.5!!
NOTHING but proper processing will eradicate the light horizon halo typical of shoddy HDR..

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Interesting discussion!

Rules about post processing in Photo competitions can become very contentious and hard to enforce. Rather like doping at the Olympics. (Ahem - "my coach didn't tell me my cough medicine contained performance enhancing agents")

Here is an interesting read from earlier this year for those who prefer the zero tolerance approach:
http://time.com/3706626/world-press-photo-processing-manipulation-disqualified/

Don't want to wax too eloquent on the subject. I know this is a printer forum, and I don't want to make the moderator's task any more onerous.

RS
http://time.com/3706626/world-press-photo-processing-manipulation-disqualified/

 

[stratman]

Yeah HDR sucks, like those over processed photographs of Ansel Adams.

 

[ThrillaMozilla]

muffled choking and gasps of stomach wrenching brought on by vomit convultions

Other than that, how did you like the pictures?

 

[The Hat]

Very very funny post..

 

[fotofreek]

The BBC CountryFile Photo Competition to which @The Hat refers is found at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0314wd7/p030sn2k

The rules etc. at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/art...the-countryfile-photographic-competition-2015

This is a well organised, long standing annual photo competition for inclusion in a charity supporting BBC calendar. It produces some of the best non-professional images each year.

fabulous images and I also like the rules. I sense that what we are getting at is two expected end results: one is minimal processing to show the scene as the photographer meant to capture it. The other is for use as eye-catching artistic processing - more in tune with advertising or a slick magazine presentation. Sometimes difficult to differentiate! For instance, the beautiful late evening photo in the BBC Countryfile entitled "coastline canter" reminds me of some of my own photos which were taken with a polarizing filter to give the appearance of being taken later in the day or evening, also with enhanced clouds and deeper sundown colors. While that doesn't qualify as post processing, it is different from what the photographer sees. I expect that creative use of the equipment like filters is little different from limiting depth of field for selective focus.

 

[3dogs]

Other than that, how did you like the pictures?

Earlier 2013 were a tad better I thought. We are talking wildlife here, not creative and not still life.......the image still needs to be stand alone and stand out for the right reasons.
Good 'ol Ansel did heaps of processing right from the chemicals he used, however, his were never over the top as most of these are......the starlings look like zebras they are so pushed...for example

 

[3dogs]

fabulous images and I also like the rules. I sense that what we are getting at is two expected end results: one is minimal processing to show the scene as the photographer meant to capture it. The other is for use as eye-catching artistic processing - more in tune with advertising or a slick magazine presentation. Sometimes difficult to differentiate! For instance, the beautiful late evening photo in the BBC Countryfile entitled "coastline canter" reminds me of some of my own photos which were taken with a polarizing filter to give the appearance of being taken later in the day or evening, also with enhanced clouds and deeper sundown colors. While that doesn't qualify as post processing, it is different from what the photographer sees. I expect that creative use of the equipment like filters is little different from limiting depth of field for selective focus.

Off topic for a moment....

I am in hopes that the fires are under control real soon. Trust you are safe?

Cheers

Andrew