Fully understood!M_S said:
It seems the jury was more on a stroy then on a technically perfect (sterile?) picture.
Upvote
0
World Press Photo of the Year 2015 winner only uses 5DMk.II & 3 primes!
- Thread starter Mark D5 TEAM II
- Start date
It seems the jury was more on a stroy then on a technically perfect (sterile?) picture.
Could the image have been sharper, less grainy and with less camera shake if shot with "better" technology? Of course!
Does it make one shred of difference for this photographer and the judges who were moved by it? Not. One. Bit.
The "war zone" feeling of this image is reinforced (for me) by the graininess and camera shake. It makes it feel like a desperate moment was captured.
Artistic photographers often use cameras/settings that create less than a "technically perfect" image capture for the sake of creating a work of art that communicates a message.
Examples:
Was this particular photographer intentionally creating an image with noise, grain and camera shake for the sake of art? Probably not. He was probably just trying to capture a moment with what he had before it was gone. Does that "harm" the image? Only to those who are convinced art can't reach magnificence without the best technology.
Of course, this is all a side-track. Art is a matter of opinion and taste. Trying to convince individuals that a piece of art is not good enough because of technical flaws is kinda silly. Critiques of technical image quality are irrelevant in a contest judged on art and emotion, particularly one in which the judgments are already final.
Does it make one shred of difference for this photographer and the judges who were moved by it? Not. One. Bit.
The "war zone" feeling of this image is reinforced (for me) by the graininess and camera shake. It makes it feel like a desperate moment was captured.
Artistic photographers often use cameras/settings that create less than a "technically perfect" image capture for the sake of creating a work of art that communicates a message.
Examples:
- Which portrays a scene of drunkenness and frenzy (Mardi Gras, anyone?) with more impact to the viewer, a sharp image with level horizon, or a tilted image, smeared with motion from a dragged shutter?
- Which gives a feeling of speed at the racetrack, a perfectly sharp image with a deep field of focus, or a panning shot at lower shutter speed?
Was this particular photographer intentionally creating an image with noise, grain and camera shake for the sake of art? Probably not. He was probably just trying to capture a moment with what he had before it was gone. Does that "harm" the image? Only to those who are convinced art can't reach magnificence without the best technology.
Of course, this is all a side-track. Art is a matter of opinion and taste. Trying to convince individuals that a piece of art is not good enough because of technical flaws is kinda silly. Critiques of technical image quality are irrelevant in a contest judged on art and emotion, particularly one in which the judgments are already final.
Upvote
0
Just one correction: This is the Serbian - Hungarian border. There is no war zone there, just a fence, to keep the refugees from entering the Hungarian motherland.Famateur said:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/06/17/21/29B7AE6D00000578-3128631-image-a-3_1434573489004.jpg
Upvote
0
NancyP said:
Yes, and if we look back on many superb Photojournalists images, we find just that, and I might add a predominance of Leica's, a load of Nikons etc, but if your in mind to win the WPP award, you had better be shooting with a Canon because anything else won't be in the picture, Canon after all support this venue so no surprise there.
It's a good shot for what it is, a nighttime high ISO quick pull Image, having said that, in my own view mind, it's just not a great Image, and if you have a look at the other Images (I didn't look at all of them, there's 57,000 ??) there does seem to be a lot more worthy, but again, having said that the Judges (some very respected Photographers among them) thought this Image had enough to Win, and for the Aussie Chap that Won, this will help his Career and his future financial situation a great deal, so my congratulations to him.
In my view the Image won a lot more based not on it's technical greatness, but on what is currently a very emotive issue, especially if your European. I was recently 6 weeks in Europe and this story of the Middle East (Mostly) migrants or refugees, is of huge concern to pretty well everyone that lives in Europe. Last year alone there were 1.3 Million Refugees/Migrants trying to cross Borders into Europe, mostly trying to get into Germany, it's a Disaster no question.
He mentions he's off to Antarctica, I can definitely see a spot for his current Kit, I've used the same gear in the past on at least 3 trips to either the Arctic or the Antarctic, but I think the 5DsR would have to be on his list of new purchases, plus a Lens or two that has a longer reach than 40mm. And that's not a disparaging comment on his 5D2, it's a wonderful Camera and will continue to take amazing Images, but the 5DsR is about as close as you will get to a Medium Format Sensor in a DSLR, so it does have some benefits over an older tech Camera in particular for anything being shot in the Antarctic, and I do still have a 5D2, the Sensor has had mods though for Infrared Photography.
Actually I just read this chap is walking to the Arctic Circle, so maybe his current Kit is perfect, plus some good Hiking Boots, hope he's not walking from Australia, could be a swim or two involved.
Upvote
0
GuyF said:
Yeah, that doesn't add up. The content of one's work is what matters. If some guy has a $500 hockey stick is he good at hockey? How about a $1000 snowboard. Hey, that guy has a super fast car, probably a good racecar driver.
Like I said, I find this doubtful, it should be about the portfolio.
Upvote
0
Hi,LOALTD said:
Ya... technically, all sensor are black and white... it's the color filter and the camera that interpolate them as color.
Anyway, IMHO, if the photo is clean and technically perfect, it'll just be another photo... it's the dim and imperfection of the photo that enhance the mood and probably win him the award...
Have a nice day.
Upvote
0
Breakdown of camera brands used for 2016 World Press entries:
- from http://petapixel.com/2016/02/19/here-are-the-cameras-that-won-world-press-photo-2016/
"DSLRs continue to reign supreme when it comes to photojournalism. At least 40 of the winning shots were captured using full frame DSLRs — mirrorless, compact, and action cameras accounted for one winning photo each.
Quesabesde did this same data crunching last year after World Press Photo 2015 winners were announced. There was less diversity in the winning cameras this year compared to last year. Olympus, Apple, Hasselblad, Phase One, Ricoh, Leica, and Mamiya cameras were used by winners last year, but they were entirely absent from this year’s contest — Sony, Pentax, and Fujifilm took their spots."
- from http://petapixel.com/2016/02/19/here-are-the-cameras-that-won-world-press-photo-2016/
"DSLRs continue to reign supreme when it comes to photojournalism. At least 40 of the winning shots were captured using full frame DSLRs — mirrorless, compact, and action cameras accounted for one winning photo each.
Quesabesde did this same data crunching last year after World Press Photo 2015 winners were announced. There was less diversity in the winning cameras this year compared to last year. Olympus, Apple, Hasselblad, Phase One, Ricoh, Leica, and Mamiya cameras were used by winners last year, but they were entirely absent from this year’s contest — Sony, Pentax, and Fujifilm took their spots."
Upvote
0
Not sure what the surprise is about, the 5DII has a great sensor. All images from this famous landscape photog are taken with one...
http://www.erinbabnik.com/
http://www.erinbabnik.com/
Upvote
0
Refurb7 said:
Probably he takes to heart this Robert Capa quote: "If your pictures aren't good enough, you aren't close enough."
But kids, don't take that too literally, Capa died on the job in a warzone.
Upvote
0
M_S said:
It looks to me you or don't know what's happening there, or you don't care. That fence didn't exist before, and didn't grow up by itself. It was being installed there by other men, governments, to stop the very people who are crossing it. It's a symbol of new divisions inside Europe. A barb wire out of focus doesn't show its hard spikes. Inanimate? Is Auschwitz gate inanimate? Think about it...
Upvote
0
Famateur said:
Lol, additionally adding grain/artificial noise can help when resizing images and after applying certain kinds of blur or noise reduction, to improve the impression of sharpness and reduce posterisation - at least in my experience, I have no empirical data to support that assertion. It's why I wonder about people who object to any noise at all - a little, especially luminance noise, can enhance an image.
Upvote
0
Famateur said:Could the image have been sharper, less grainy and with less camera shake if shot with "better" technology? Of course!
Does it make one shred of difference for this photographer and the judges who were moved by it? Not. One. Bit.
The "war zone" feeling of this image is reinforced (for me) by the graininess and camera shake. It makes it feel like a desperate moment was captured.
Artistic photographers often use cameras/settings that create less than a "technically perfect" image capture for the sake of creating a work of art that communicates a message.
Examples:
- Which portrays a scene of drunkenness and frenzy (Mardi Gras, anyone?) with more impact to the viewer, a sharp image with level horizon, or a tilted image, smeared with motion from a dragged shutter?
- Which gives a feeling of speed at the racetrack, a perfectly sharp image with a deep field of focus, or a panning shot at lower shutter speed?
Was this particular photographer intentionally creating an image with noise, grain and camera shake for the sake of art? Probably not. He was probably just trying to capture a moment with what he had before it was gone. Does that "harm" the image? Only to those who are convinced art can't reach magnificence without the best technology.
Of course, this is all a side-track. Art is a matter of opinion and taste. Trying to convince individuals that a piece of art is not good enough because of technical flaws is kinda silly. Critiques of technical image quality are irrelevant in a contest judged on art and emotion, particularly one in which the judgments are already final.
+1
Upvote
0
First, I am truly glad that there are those who will undertake the deprivations to bring all of us such images. Perhaps through their efforts we all can move toward a better world.
Related to the image, I am critical of the judges, is this a contest of photojournalism overall, or just those who submitted their images? I have seen many images far more compelling than this - not that this image lacks in message, it is others have so much more.
Related to the equipment discussion, I +10 those who express the sentiments of the best camera is that which is in your hand, that echo Capa's call to get closer - both physically and emotionally. Recall the portraits of the same guy with six different stories. The messaging of this image is independent of the equipment. Surely, any of the current crop of "prosumer level" cameras could have captured this image, regardless of brand.
No, I have explicitly chosen not to pursue a career in photojournalism, I will not likely be joining those who pursue such endeavors. I am able to support them with contributions and drawing attention to their work.
Related to the image, I am critical of the judges, is this a contest of photojournalism overall, or just those who submitted their images? I have seen many images far more compelling than this - not that this image lacks in message, it is others have so much more.
Related to the equipment discussion, I +10 those who express the sentiments of the best camera is that which is in your hand, that echo Capa's call to get closer - both physically and emotionally. Recall the portraits of the same guy with six different stories. The messaging of this image is independent of the equipment. Surely, any of the current crop of "prosumer level" cameras could have captured this image, regardless of brand.
No, I have explicitly chosen not to pursue a career in photojournalism, I will not likely be joining those who pursue such endeavors. I am able to support them with contributions and drawing attention to their work.
Upvote
0
eml58 said:
+1 to this comment. I've added the 6D to the 5DII but to be quite honest at lowish ISO the 5DII is, if anything, cleaner when used competently. In fact it can be quite surreal. I tend to add some film grain / noise into my images now to stop them looking too artificial.
krisbell said:
Great images in that link Kris, and I am still favouring the 5DII over more 'modern' stuff at lowish ISO. I don't know where the unholy comments regarding the 5DII low ISO performance in terms of "banding" "shadow noise" and "poor DR" that we read on here by some individuals comes from. You have to under expose to the point where you hit zero data to create this, and how you do that unintentionally when the camera has an accurate expose meter and a rear LCD with histogram I have no idea.
Famateur said:
I agree on this point; the picture quality is on the edge, and it emphasises the feeling of clandestine desperation in the shot.
Upvote
0
To people questioning over the focus on the fence, maybe it was the only thing the focus point could catch on to in a limited timeframe. I've had situations where in very low light a human face is just too plain for the camera and the focus hunts back and forth. I could see the journalist using the fence in a fast situation to get any photo at all, I've done the same thing in many occasions where I prefocus on what I can. Since we don't know the lightning situation we can only speculate that this was intentional or not. Don't just talk sh*t but think what would you do if you were there.
Yeah a -4ev focus point might get better focus, but he didn't have that, so that argument isn't valid.
This is only my opinion but I can it as a possible explanation. Like "get some kind of picture" or "no picture at all" scenario.
Yeah a -4ev focus point might get better focus, but he didn't have that, so that argument isn't valid.
This is only my opinion but I can it as a possible explanation. Like "get some kind of picture" or "no picture at all" scenario.
Upvote
0
I literally have hundreds of pictures I took during my 39 months in combat during my three deployments to Iraq. Most of the time they were with a crappy Nikon E2200, and when that stopped working during my second deployment, I stepped up to a Canon Powershot SD780. I also owned a Digital Rebel XTi, but was too scared to bring that with me for fear of breaking it. Now days I shoot with a 5DMK3.
My first deployment was with the 3rd Infantry Division to the Sunni triangle, and this was before the Abu Ghraib incident, so we were able to film pretty much anything we wanted to. I consider that my bloodiest deployment, due to the amount of casualties my unit took. By Brigade lost 89 and had close to 900 wounded. I forgot to mention that I am a Combat Medic.
During my second deployment I was Senior Medic assigned to Charlie Company 1-504th Parachute Infantry Regiment 82nd Airborne Division. My unit was the first unit to arrive to Baghdad during the 2007 Surge and we made History by who we were and what we accomplished. I was able to take some truly remarkable pictures.
My 3rd deployment we made history again. This time with 2-504th deploying to Ramadi Iraq as the first American unit to train the Iraqi Army. Again I took some amazing photos.
I need to clarify that I always maintained my professionalism with every picture I took. I retired from the Army in 2013 so all the restrictions I have are self-imposed. My wife keeps telling me to submit my pictures, but I haven’t made up my mind yet. I may be biased, but being a soldier put me in many unique situations that journalists might never be able to obtain.
My first deployment was with the 3rd Infantry Division to the Sunni triangle, and this was before the Abu Ghraib incident, so we were able to film pretty much anything we wanted to. I consider that my bloodiest deployment, due to the amount of casualties my unit took. By Brigade lost 89 and had close to 900 wounded. I forgot to mention that I am a Combat Medic.
During my second deployment I was Senior Medic assigned to Charlie Company 1-504th Parachute Infantry Regiment 82nd Airborne Division. My unit was the first unit to arrive to Baghdad during the 2007 Surge and we made History by who we were and what we accomplished. I was able to take some truly remarkable pictures.
My 3rd deployment we made history again. This time with 2-504th deploying to Ramadi Iraq as the first American unit to train the Iraqi Army. Again I took some amazing photos.
I need to clarify that I always maintained my professionalism with every picture I took. I retired from the Army in 2013 so all the restrictions I have are self-imposed. My wife keeps telling me to submit my pictures, but I haven’t made up my mind yet. I may be biased, but being a soldier put me in many unique situations that journalists might never be able to obtain.
Attachments
Upvote
0