marcus_hawkins Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 This year's winners are online now...<P><A HREF="http://internt.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2003">http://internt.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2003/</A><P>Overall, I think it's a pretty strong bunch this year. Be interested to hear everyone's thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gloria_hopkins Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 There are many awesome compositions and I was very excited about that. My favorite is the winner of the Wild Places category. And, I'm in love with the photo of the bird on the cover... There were several images that were almost great ... images where a subtle change, such as a head turn, a small shift left or right, would have made all the difference in the world. That's always a bummer to see. Overall I thought they were very strong images and the winners all very deserving. Thanks for sending the link! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewdawsongallery Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Some great stuff, as always; it really is one of the best in the competition world. Kinda surprised they picked that zoo shot for P. of the Year--I like it, but of all the *wildlife* shots they looked at... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_smith2 Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I agree a zoo shot as overall winner? - kinda slap in the face to all the field photographers submitting entries. It is a stunning image which I would expect to grace the cover of National Geographica etc but is it in the spirit of the competition to be eligeable for the overall "Wildlife photographer" award? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian_kennedy Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 It's a joke to award the title "Wildlife Photograph of the Year" to a shot of a zoo animal. The shot is excellent, don't get me wrong, but the point is that it is not wildlife. Is there any precedent for this in the BBC competition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg s Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 "visionary and expressive interpretations of nature" Hmmm, gotta agree that a photo of a gorilla in a zoo is at odds with how I would interpret their criteria. To each their own... not a big fan of contests anyway. Would rather just view photography for its own merit rather than in terms of winners. Still, if I see a superb photo of a lowland gorilla taken in Zaire, I would sing its due praises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimitoucan Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Yea, I agree. That image was from "The World in Our Hands" catagory. That is why it is captive in this competition. But I don't think you can honor a photographer with that title (Wildlife Photographer of the Year) on that image. Shame on BG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hique Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 I am VERY impressed, but it is because of the junior category results. The 17-15 and 14-11 are in the same level as the adults. How come? I feel amazed and down because of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_smith2 Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Junior awards - I haven't had chance to visit the exhibition yet at the Nat Hist museum in London this year, but last year it was noticeable that most, and I stress most not all, of the junior category winners were using very sophisticated camera equipment which one assumes is probably borrowed from their parents. Clues being from the exposure details in the captions eg 100ASA film, 300mm lens 1/350 second at F2.8 and so on. Whilst not denigrating the quality of the pictures taken, the winners are not using equipment I would buy my 14 year old son to use. The results therefore tend to speak for themselves. Good luck to these youngsters they are getting a head start over the rank and file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gloria_hopkins Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 They're using better equipment than me :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bing_huey1 Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Is it of use to anyone to note that all but one of the images were captured on film? Has anyone been following the trend for the past competitions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian_kennedy Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 Bing, since submissions were required to be on slide film, there were probably very few digital entries (digital was acceptable, as long as it was converted to slide film). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 I think David Breed's shot of the hyena tracks is the best of the lot. It's the winner of the composition and form category. I can't stop looking at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewdawsongallery Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 I think BBC/BG is going to get alot of flack about the zoo shot, as good as it is. I think my favorite in that category is the runner-up by Joe McDonald; the tire tracks around resting lions. Talk about a shot that says *so* much about our world today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmohan Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 I was taking a more open attitude about it till I saw <A HREF = "http://michaelnicknichols.com/gallery/keepers/7">this</A> picture. Now I am kind of upset to see even that is not even original. But the animal behaviour category was impressive. There were many good pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewdawsongallery Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 I agree Rajesh; I thought it was very well executed, but not that original. There's a similar scenario in the LA Zoo, with glass partitions where you can see others who are watching the primates. Needless to say, I'd be more impressed with an image of wild gorillas on the verge of extinction in Rwanda... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hique Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 They are surely using better equipment than me also (years ahead) (I mean years of $$ hard work ahead) But I don't think that just that is enough for these teens to be making top quality, wonderful pictures. They are indeed very very good, or they borrowed pictures from their parents (sorry, but I better believe this, or I will quit shooting. Lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbb Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 I never could understand why so many people are attacking photos taken in �controlled environment�. Very often it is the only way to have beautiful portrait of the animal, which can be, use to educate another people about that particular species. Only very few good photographers can afford time/money and are in excellent physical condition to travel and spend long time in remote places. Sorry but most of those so called �wildlife photographers� are in fact sidewalk shooters in urban parks or ditches. Sometimes they visit National or State Parks and are making themselves heroes photographing half tame animals along the walking path. I know from the first hand (I�ve seen detailed photos) that even in serious international field competitions the �pros� are bringing their own perches with the bait containers hidden behind to attract the birds. Fresh worms are shipped daily :). Even the �big� (read rich) shooters going to Safari in Africa are visiting nothing else but the big controled farms arranged for tourist with big cats so tame that they are coming straight to car and pose for the blood freezing photo. Now hero can go back home and show it to all the friends making the face as he almost lost a life taking that shot. Gorilla in wild? The most photos are taken in research station (yeah, but in the jungle) and all those gorillas posing daily to the tourists. In fact they are very �wild�. Try to go in the jungle on your own find the real wild gorilla and then get close enough to take the portrait of his face and you won�t have a place to sit on. I am very againt to manipulate the photos presented as �wildlife� or nature shot but as far as prize for quality only the final frame counts not the place where it was taken. GREAT decision by BG to not discriminate Zoo shots. By their rules if two photos are equal the �wildlife� one wins so I did not believe that the Zoo shot has a chance to win, I was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryn_price Posted October 28, 2003 Share Posted October 28, 2003 I visited it last night and found it offered someone of my level the information that i wanted. Technical details. I've often seen awards, and photo comps, and wondered 'how did they do that' Or 'i wonder what exposure they used'. The listing of equipment and exposure on most images was great. I also strongly agree with Mikes comments above about the junior entries. The equipment they were using was very expensive. EOS 3's with 600mm lens etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now