Royal Society Photos from the Daily Mail - Stunners among them!

Discussion in 'Casual Photo Conversations' started by Sandy Vongries, Dec 6, 2017.

  1. I like the images, and I suspect that most of the photographs were taken by research scientists rather than photographers as such. I was actually expecting more "spectacular" images to be honest. Many strike me as "interesting" (e.g. Svalbard, polar bear) rather than "stunning". I think the bird looks odd because a lot of noise reduction was required for a high ISO shot.
     
  2. A splendid assortment. Hearing one nature photographer tell of his work, person often risks life to get close enough or high enough. Thanks for the link, Sandy. I like the variety and color a lot.
     
  3. Some are really stunning. However, #3 looks unreal. The plane's shadow looks very wrong. PS'ed? Very likely. Does that take away from the image? Yes, everything.
     
  4. To be honest Sandy the Daily Mail has a long long history of a fondness for marching boots.

    This does reflect my thoughts on the photos which are so so.
     
  5. Vincent Peri

    Vincent Peri Metairie, LA

    The plane's shadow is on an uneven ice surface. There will naturally be distortion in the shadow.
     
  6. Thank you Sandy for supplying these links for us, I thought the photos were well worth viewing.
    I enjoyed the Allen Herbert reference to the marching boots, maybe because this echoes my perception of the Daily Mail. So it makes it more important that Sandy provides the links for me, although in this case the photos were available on the Guardian's web content.
     
  7. Some of those pictures are really good and interesting.
    But, what strikes me most, that half of them not even credited to photographer. I know lots competitions want you to give up all rights to image when you entering contest, but not to give even credit, it's disgusting.
     
  8. I just checked Royal Society website, every one of those photos are credited to photographer, so it is Daily Mail ripping off photographers.
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2017
    Norman likes this.
  9. If you go to the source of the images (
    Finalists 2017) the photographer comments that the light was poor and post processing was used to deal with that (success may be argued but I don’t think the intention was to manipulate as such).

    I think where possible it’s better to link to the original publisher or organizer of the competition to get more of the facts.
     
    Fred G and Norman like this.
  10. I completely agree. These competition links are almost always posted on DPR as well.
     
    Fred G likes this.
  11. I never claimed it was a composite in any of my posts. I'm not a purist; if it was a good one, I wouldn't mind. But to me the post processing takes away from the image, unfortunately.
     

Share This Page