Wildlife Photographer of the Year
Discussion
I saw the trail and thought 'Photoshop!' - but it could be real...
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/peoples-choice-winne...
The challenge these days is often to convince people that an image is captured purely 'in camera'.
Sometimes, I think it's almost not worth the effort to try and produce a really good original image because it won't be appreciated by casual observers used to looking at manipulated still and moving images.
I remember in the very early days of digital when I tried to submit a photo to that very competition and they would only accept original transparencies, not digital files...
Sometimes, I think it's almost not worth the effort to try and produce a really good original image because it won't be appreciated by casual observers used to looking at manipulated still and moving images.
I remember in the very early days of digital when I tried to submit a photo to that very competition and they would only accept original transparencies, not digital files...
And therein lies the problem...
I can see how it could be real and I can also explain how it can be done. The photographer alludes to it himself in the linked article. It just takes a bit of knowledge and experience.
I have always found the whole challenge of working out how an image has been made to be part of my education in the subject. Surely if you can't immediately see how a photograph has been created you are curious to spend a bit of time finding out?
It's way too easy these days to say "I don't know how that's done so it must be fake".
I can see how it could be real and I can also explain how it can be done. The photographer alludes to it himself in the linked article. It just takes a bit of knowledge and experience.
I have always found the whole challenge of working out how an image has been made to be part of my education in the subject. Surely if you can't immediately see how a photograph has been created you are curious to spend a bit of time finding out?
It's way too easy these days to say "I don't know how that's done so it must be fake".
FurtiveFreddy said:
And therein lies the problem...
I can see how it could be real and I can also explain how it can be done. The photographer alludes to it himself in the linked article. It just takes a bit of knowledge and experience.
Yes, technically it can be done using strobe to freeze the bird and ambient for the trail but it must have needed a hell of a set-up!I can see how it could be real and I can also explain how it can be done. The photographer alludes to it himself in the linked article. It just takes a bit of knowledge and experience.
Simpo Two said:
Yes, technically it can be done using strobe to freeze the bird and ambient for the trail but it must have needed a hell of a set-up!
A lot of the photos in these big competitions are the result of a massive amount of pre-planning and technical know-how. The days of a 'lucky shot' are gone for the most part.I met Simon Stafford a few weeks ago, who won the mammals section of the NHM awards. There's a photographer with years of experience and masses of technical expertise who can apply it in very tricky situations to get an image which needs the minimum of manipulation out of the camera. These are the sort of people good enough to win those competitions fairly and they deserve the recognition.
I'm not saying 'cheating' doesn't go on, but the rules are clear in this case and RAW files have to be provided for verification. The normal image level adjustments, cropping, burning and even focus stacking are acceptable but compositing isn't.
The trail in this picture would need more than ambient light. I'd say he's used possibly two optical triggers (one for the shutter opening, another for the flash) combined with a profiled continuous beam for the trail and high speed flash for the main exposure. Not forgetting plenty of test shots to get the balance right and a considerable amount of patience to capture the final image.
Simpo Two said:
I saw the trail and thought 'Photoshop!' - but it could be real...
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/peoples-choice-winne...
Looks like a direct hit to me...
Triggers are easy to rig up now, plenty of access to them.
But yes, the more skilled the photographer, the more time they put in, the more planning, the luckier they get...
Its even easier if you hire yourself a wolf...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/2...
But yes, the more skilled the photographer, the more time they put in, the more planning, the luckier they get...
Its even easier if you hire yourself a wolf...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jan/2...
FurtiveFreddy said:
And therein lies the problem...
I can see how it could be real and I can also explain how it can be done. The photographer alludes to it himself in the linked article. It just takes a bit of knowledge and experience.
I have always found the whole challenge of working out how an image has been made to be part of my education in the subject. Surely if you can't immediately see how a photograph has been created you are curious to spend a bit of time finding out?
It's way too easy these days to say "I don't know how that's done so it must be fake".
Does it matter? It's an image. All such images, even if photoshop is banned, is false as such. It is merely a representation.I can see how it could be real and I can also explain how it can be done. The photographer alludes to it himself in the linked article. It just takes a bit of knowledge and experience.
I have always found the whole challenge of working out how an image has been made to be part of my education in the subject. Surely if you can't immediately see how a photograph has been created you are curious to spend a bit of time finding out?
It's way too easy these days to say "I don't know how that's done so it must be fake".
If there are rules for the competition then those who submit images must comply with the rules of course, but all such regs will do is limit the degree of manipulation.
Dont like the image at all.Primarily because it looks unnatural.
The Urban fox pic that Sam Hobson took is a far less "processed" look and feels more real for it.
http://www.samhobson.co.uk/urban-red-fox/
The Urban fox pic that Sam Hobson took is a far less "processed" look and feels more real for it.
http://www.samhobson.co.uk/urban-red-fox/
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff