DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Wildlife Photographer of the Year?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 30, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/20/2005 11:46:17 AM · #1
//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4355628.stm

Jump on in everybody! This is another great opportunity for all of us national Geographic wannabees to say "Huh? I could done that..."

It's an interesting picture, but Photo of the Year?

color me jealous... :)

Dave
 10/20/2005 11:52:32 AM · #2
I agree. It's interesting, but... I don't think it would do all that well on a challenge.
 10/20/2005 11:55:15 AM · #3
Originally posted by dsa157:
[url]It's an interesting picture, but Photo of the Year?

color me jealous... :)


color at all would have been nice... i didn't like the over exposed sky.

to my eye, the elephant photo was much more interesting...
 10/20/2005 12:09:48 PM · #4
Originally posted by dsa157:
This is another great opportunity for all of us national Geographic wannabees to say "Huh? I could done that..."

"Huh, I almost done that ..."


I really like the winner.
 10/20/2005 12:12:18 PM · #5
I like the image as well. It's nice to see that an image that's a little out of the ordinary is getting some recognition.
 10/20/2005 12:14:15 PM · #6
you know, it doesn't have an immediate wow factor, but its does have depth. Pure contrast, action, life/death. Too blurry for my taste, but inspired image at least.
 10/20/2005 12:32:30 PM · #7
Really nice thanks for the posting!
 10/20/2005 12:46:35 PM · #8
The power of that winning image isn't in the "technical" part at all; technically it's quite mediocre by normal standards. But what he's accomplished there is actually quite rare; he's given us a powerful sense of the dynamics of flock movement and predator/prey interaction. I've never seen an image like that before. In a sense it transcends photography, and you could say that this is what "great" wildlife photography is about; not about "perfect" light & "perfect" poses but rather about the dynamics, the mystery if you will, of animals interacting with their environment and each other.

Robt.
 10/20/2005 12:53:32 PM · #9
Honestly I didn't like any of them. Were the judges wildlife folks or artists. I assume artist, who have no idea what makes a great wildlife shot. I've seen numerous much better on DPC, weekly.
 10/20/2005 01:19:30 PM · #10
Originally posted by bear_music:
The power of that winning image isn't in the "technical" part at all; technically it's quite mediocre by normal standards. But what he's accomplished there is actually quite rare; he's given us a powerful sense of the dynamics of flock movement and predator/prey interaction. I've never seen an image like that before. In a sense it transcends photography, and you could say that this is what "great" wildlife photography is about; not about "perfect" light & "perfect" poses but rather about the dynamics, the mystery if you will, of animals interacting with their environment and each other.

Robt.


Nicely put Robt.! I second his opinion
 10/20/2005 01:25:17 PM · #11
Originally posted by Cutter:
you know, it doesn't have an immediate wow factor, but its does have depth. Pure contrast, action, life/death. Too blurry for my taste, but inspired image at least.

The "wow" factor lies in what Robert (bear_music) described so well.
10/20/2005 01:26:33 PM · #12
Originally posted by res0m50r:
Originally posted by bear_music:
The power of that winning image isn't in the "technical" part at all; technically it's quite mediocre by normal standards. But what he's accomplished there is actually quite rare; he's given us a powerful sense of the dynamics of flock movement and predator/prey interaction. I've never seen an image like that before. In a sense it transcends photography, and you could say that this is what "great" wildlife photography is about; not about "perfect" light & "perfect" poses but rather about the dynamics, the mystery if you will, of animals interacting with their environment and each other.

Robt.


Nicely put Robt.! I second his opinion


I THIRD IT :-D
 10/20/2005 01:39:11 PM · #13
Here is the photographers website;

//www.wildlifephoto-presti.com/start.htm
10/20/2005 01:43:21 PM · #14
Originally posted by shannylee13:
Originally posted by res0m50r:
Originally posted by bear_music:
The power of that winning image isn't in the "technical" part at all; technically it's quite mediocre by normal standards. But what he's accomplished there is actually quite rare; he's given us a powerful sense of the dynamics of flock movement and predator/prey interaction. I've never seen an image like that before. In a sense it transcends photography, and you could say that this is what "great" wildlife photography is about; not about "perfect" light & "perfect" poses but rather about the dynamics, the mystery if you will, of animals interacting with their environment and each other.

Robt.


Nicely put Robt.! I second his opinion


I THIRD IT :-D


Very eloquently put. I personally think more of this level of "seeing" an image would do this community some credit. One can wish...
 10/20/2005 01:49:18 PM · #15
Originally posted by cloudsme:
I agree. It's interesting, but... I don't think it would do all that well on a challenge.


Just goes to show- spend less time trying to be number one on the DPC site and more time getting your stuff out there. :-p
 10/20/2005 01:57:45 PM · #16
I think maybe he would have done well in the DPChallenge ( What ):/
 10/20/2005 02:13:49 PM · #17
Originally posted by elwoodsplace:
I think maybe he would have done well in the DPChallenge ( What ):/


upper 5's at best
 10/20/2005 02:17:40 PM · #18
well i just hope no one seriously gauges the validity of their work by DPC challenge results.

I think that winning photo is amazing, for the reasons bear said pretty much.
 10/20/2005 02:26:28 PM · #19
Originally posted by bear_music:
The power of that winning image isn't in the "technical" part at all; technically it's quite mediocre by normal standards. But what he's accomplished there is actually quite rare; he's given us a powerful sense of the dynamics of flock movement and predator/prey interaction. I've never seen an image like that before. In a sense it transcends photography, and you could say that this is what "great" wildlife photography is about; not about "perfect" light & "perfect" poses but rather about the dynamics, the mystery if you will, of animals interacting with their environment and each other.

Robt.


Well said, I work with wildlife and observe it as often as I am able.. I've yet to see something as raw as that image.. fight or flight (I'd be flying away too and fast having had the talons of a falcon in my finger before lol) I loved the image not necessarily the techie. stuff but the image and what its saying. :)
 10/20/2005 02:34:43 PM · #20
Originally posted by petrakka:
well i just hope no one seriously gauges the validity of their work by DPC challenge results.

I think that winning photo is amazing, for the reasons bear said pretty much.


You (and others) are quite correct on this. IMO anyway. I see DPC as a "game", a "diversion", a subset, if you will, of the larger world of photography. It's been said before, but I'll say it again; a LOT of what some of us consider "great" photography would bomb in our challenges here. The divergent reactions to this image tend to prove the point.

This is a really great site for camaraderie, technical information, feedback of all sorts, and "having fun with challenges", but it's in the nature of how/by whom the "judging" of our challenges is done that it tilts the scale towards the comfortable, the "easily judged" as it were.

When judgment is rendered by averaging the votes of a broad and diverse pool of participants, the pretty pictures will almost always win.

BTW, as an aside: many have commented on the "blurriness" of that winning wildlife image. I think it's quite possible that's simply an example of poor reduction of the image for web viewing; it may very well be sharp as a tack in the original.

R.

Edit to add: on closer examination, "sharper" anyway. There's obviously motion blur in the birds' wings.

Message edited by author 2005-10-20 14:36:43.
 10/21/2005 02:23:07 AM · #21
I completely agree with Robert!!!

By the way the photographer of that wonderful picture is Italian like me and I'm really happy for that!

I think that picture is the perfect wildlife exemple; that's what wildlife means: everyday a fight for staying alive.

Congratulations, Manuel Presti.
 10/21/2005 02:33:48 AM · #22
It is blurry. It is average. There are elements that say something above average, especially the flight/fight/prey/predator phenomena. But ultimately, it looks like a snapshot taken while driving with one hand on the wheel and another saying, "ooh, look at all those birds".

If the viewer is forced to stare at it longer, not because of beauty or essence, but because they don't "get it", then it is trash. And we should all stop trying to find the art in something that is average. Otherwise, everything is art and beautiful and great, and we should all just hold hands and sing songs about meaning in the meaninglessness.


10/21/2005 02:34:22 AM · #23
i think the photo is awesome for probably the same reasons bear posted.

the majority of the photos that win challenges around here dont tell stories or have depth. im not bashing anyones photos some do have depth and maybe im blind to some others. the way i feel is a lot of the photos in dpc are like instruction manuals. there is not a lot of interpretation, its more of a what you see is what you get. while photos like the one mentioned are more like poetry books. full of depth and metaphors.
its 2:33am and im not sure i know what im talking about.. so goodnight! =P
 10/21/2005 02:36:37 AM · #24
Originally posted by Cutter:
It is blurry. It is average. There are elements that say something above average, especially the flight/fight/prey/predator phenomena. But ultimately, it looks like a snapshot taken while driving with one hand on the wheel and another saying, "ooh, look at all those birds".

If the viewer is forced to stare at it longer, not because of beauty or essence, but because they don't "get it", then it is trash. And we should all stop trying to find the art in something that is average. Otherwise, everything is art and beautiful and great, and we should all just hold hands and sing songs about meaning in the meaninglessness.


This would be fine IF the criteria for judging wildlife photography was about the "art" in it, but I don't see why that has to be the case.

R.
 10/21/2005 02:40:31 AM · #25
That is why I feel the elephant and bird/lake picture are better. They invite you in, not because it is "artistic" and force you to find something, but because there is reality and beauty that needs to be absorbed. You can stay awile and feel the place. Isn't that what photographs do, make the viewer live in that time/place?
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 06/27/2025 06:03:33 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/27/2025 06:03:33 PM EDT.