I (didnt) Won Charlie Waites Landscape Photographer of the Year 2012 LPOTY

Status
Not open for further replies.
timparkin said:
That's fantastic!! You can add my support as I think you've made a great shot and that took talent. So there really isn't much of an issue then?
Tim
Click to expand...

lets leave it there then or were going to go round in circles :gag:
 
Culture show bbc2 on now, says it has the national galleries first photographic exhibition.
Isn't that where these winning photos are going to be shown in November?
 
no its the national theatre mate
 
Byker28i said:
On now. I got a little excited there :)
Click to expand...

i made this mistake when i told my dad the news, had to go back and say err no it the theatre lol
 
Well done on the award, your black and white pics on this forum in the landscape forum are excellent too. Don't get concerned with the jealousy and envy, haters gonna hate as the saying goes!
 
timparkin said:
So you categorically say that the chimney's image is not a composite of two different photographs?
Click to expand...

Well with everything presented as it is I think you and I could well be in the the same camp and are of the belief it is a composite.
 
cannockwolf said:
Ive just had an email to say im getting featured in a german photograhic magazine for winning a gold PSA medal in germany, its this photo along with the other winners but mine will be a full page print, ive seen the mockup but they said i cant post it online yet until it goes to print

I enter amateur club exhibitions round the world, no money prizes just medals, lpoty was the first money comp i entered actually.
Click to expand...



Right, this is the final straw! I have been to that mud hole and the 2 blokes werent there. Nor was it that muddy. From whatever angle i stood at i couldnt find the blokes or the mud. This must be a composite of another mud hole and other blokes. Not only that, unless this is being published in 'Blokes jump in muddy puddle weekly' it shouldnt be used.

Also - every year at leigh on sea they have the annual mud flat race. I have seen many pictures of blokes in muddy puddles and therefor i think you have blatantly copied these for your own personal gain and we should all be carefull as you are obviously after world domination (like an evil james bond baddie) with your photos of things that arent there !!!:D:nono:


:lol:
 
gpc1 said:
Right, this is the final straw! I have been to that mud hole and the 2 blokes werent there. Nor was it that muddy. From whatever angle i stood at i couldnt find the blokes or the mud. This must be a composite of another mud hole and other blokes. Not only that, unless this is being published in 'Blokes jump in muddy puddle weekly' it shouldnt be used.

Also - every year at leigh on sea they have the annual mud flat race. I have seen many pictures of blokes in muddy puddles and therefor i think you have blatantly copied these for your own personal gain and we should all be carefull as you are obviously after world domination (like an evil james bond baddie) with your photos of things that arent there !!!:D:nono:


:lol:
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Some amazing pieces of work there and a huge congratulations. The copse one is just draw dropping.
 
thanks, im really happy with it, as its not me, i was trying something different
 
Will show my ignorance now, I know nothing of this competition or of previous winners and their images.
I think the images which you have shown here are beautiful and very striking.

Congrats on doing so well in what is obviously a prestige competition.

Feed off the positive, simply dismiss the negative I'd say, that's not meant to sound disrespectful to anyone either.

All the best for the future, this may be a defining moment I imagine.

cheers
tony
 
wow, Classic View winning image is clear breach of rules
 
I forgot all about that didn't even know myself it's the same trees though
 
Last edited:
Are these the rules?

When you have selected your pictures, digital adjustments, including High Dynamic Range (HDR) imaging techniques and the joining together of multiple frames, are allowed in all categories. However, for images entered in Classic view, Living the view and Urban view, the integrity of the subject must be maintained and the making of physical changes to the landscape is not permitted (removing fences, moving trees, stripping in sky from another image etc). The judges will allow more latitude in the ‘Your view’ category, which aims to encourage originality and conceptual thinking.
Click to expand...
 
cannockwolf said:
I forgot all about that didn't even know myself it'd the same trees thiough
Click to expand...

You forgot that you cloned and/or composited all of your LPOTY entries?
Was that before or after you were told you had won?

I'm sorry that I'm being accusatory now, but this is a major issue it's gone past 'did he didn't he' to 'he did' and he is unapologetic.

The way I see it. You dropped a sky into your winning photo (if it can be called a photo) but you DEFINITELY cloned areas of the image in order to remove distractions and create a reality that isnt there.

Now you are quite welcome to do that. I see in some of your threads that you are quite open about it, which is great, but quite frankly a lot of peoples money went into a competition where the winner was ineligible.

Can you understand why I might be more than a bit disgruntled?
 
Did it a year ago look at the date complete forgot and I didn't read the rules your right
 
All I've ever done is post up pretty pictures never claimed to do anything else, all this conspiracy theories is getting a bit much tbh

I'm not this evil mastermind that I'm being made out to be........
 
They aren't conspiracy theories David and I don't think you're an evil mastermind, but you have yet to actually admit what you did to any of the images.

To be honest, what I want to see is LPOTY change, not see you run into the ground. Unfortunately you were the first overall winner to have entered a series of images which didn't meet the submission guidelines. You've also continually 'high fived' people trying to brush this all under the carpet. I can't hold much against you because its a very difficult situation, but it would be nice to hear what you did to the images so we can put this to bed an forget about it.
 
Last edited:
Did the LPOTY not ask for RAWs to verify images after shortlisting? BWPA did for me, seems strange for a big competition to be slack in this aspect
 
So which images are actually 'disqualified' under the rules rather than just considered by some to be incorrect.
 
All of Davids images apart from the 'Maria Tree' image (entered into Your View) would technically be disqualified as composite images. If my interpretation of this rule is correct:

11) Digital adjustments.
Digital adjustments, including High Dynamic Range (HDR) imaging techniques and the joining together of multiple frames, are allowed in all categories. However, for images entered in Classic view, Living the view and Urban view, the integrity of the subject must be maintained and the making of physical changes to the landscape is not permitted (removing fences, moving trees, stripping in sky from another image etc). The organisers reserve the right to disqualify any image that they feel lacks authenticity due to over-manipulation.
 
Would seem my use of the term defining moment could prove to be more relevant
than I'd have ever imagined.
what a mess

tony
 
alexnail said:
The organisers reserve the right to disqualify any image that they feel lacks authenticity due to over-manipulation.
Click to expand...

Wonder what the outcome of all this will be ... as above "what a mess"!
 
gramps said:
Wonder what the outcome of all this will be ... as above "what a mess"!
Click to expand...

The problem is that there is still some latitude with the way the rule is written, it is not definitive, which leaves it open to interpretation and the opinion of the judges.

In one breath they state what you cannot add or remove, but go to say that they may disqualify an image due to over manipulation, which would indicate that some manipulation is allowed.

It is a poorly drafted rule as there is ambiguity.
 
Point taken, I read that last sentence as a 'blanket' caution for digital images in general, rather than applicable to the specific rule for Classic, Living or Urban.
For these specific classes of entry it does seem to be very clear ... "the making of physical changes to the landscape is not permitted (removing fences, moving trees, stripping in sky from another image etc)"
 
Wow this has moved on at a pace and I feel sorry for David. I believe he's honestly entered images from his portfolio without recognising the implications of the competitions rules, but it does now appear he's in an embarrassing spot.
I can't imagine the roller coaster of emotions he must be going through.

With emotions running high, I must commend the main parties in this in being so retrained and I hope others continue that way also.

At the end of the day, I don't think many will disagree that David's images are very good. Just not suited to this competition.
 
gramps said:
Point taken, I read that last sentence as a 'blanket' caution for digital images in general, rather than applicable to the specific rule for Classic, Living or Urban.
For these specific classes of entry it does seem to be very clear ... "the making of physical changes to the landscape is not permitted (removing fences, moving trees, stripping in sky from another image etc)"
Click to expand...

That proves the ambiguity, I read that last sentence and the rule in general differently to how you did.

It also says the integrity of the subject must be maintained, coupled with that last sentence, that would suggest that the removal of a distracting minor element like a clump of grass would be acceptable, as the integrity of the image would be maintained.

It should simply state that no cloning or removal / addition of any element except for sensor dust spots is allowed.
 
Byker28i said:
At the end of the day, I don't think many will disagree that David's images are very good. Just not suited to this competition.
Click to expand...

Indeed, quite spectacular images ... pity that the running of the competition appears to have been lacking.


Martyn... said:
That proves the ambiguity, I read that last sentence and the rule in general differently to how you did.

It also says the integrity of the subject must be maintained, coupled with that last sentence, that would suggest that the removal of a distracting minor element like a clump of grass would be acceptable, as the integrity of the image would be maintained.

It should simply state that no cloning or removal / addition of any element except for sensor dust spots is allowed.
Click to expand...

Even so, in the case of the forest shot there can be no ambiguity, it's now clear from evidence here on TP that it comprises parts of two different photos.
Others will judge the extent of changes made to produce the winning image.
 
gramps said:
Even so, in the case of the forest shot there can be no ambiguity, it's now clear from evidence here on TP that it comprises parts of two different photos.
Click to expand...

I had missed that one, I was just looking at the main winning image of the boats

gramps said:
Others will judge the extent of changes made to produce the winning image.
Click to expand...

I agree, I am glad it is not my job to resolve the matter
 
From the very outset I felt that the principal purpose of TaV was to make money for the organisers. I don't have a problem with that at all. Good luck to them. The winner has *always* been contraversial and IMO there are sound business reasons for doing this. TaV needs to inspire people, not just 'photographers' (whatever they are) to (pay to) take part and it does this in two ways. Firstly it gets up the nose of the cogniscentii hoping that the indignation it creates will lever the entry monies out of them next year. Secondly, it avoids being elitist, encouraging everyone to participate. The fact that it generates so much divided opinion, for me, is a demonstration that the comp does both of these very well. Clearly it is making money and god knows that's a hard thing to do with photography in the current climate.
 
What an embarrassment. I wonder what will happen now. Someone made reference to the Spanish Wolf before. I wonder if the same happens here.
 
Last edited:
"Hi all....we are certainly not ignoring all your comments and have been investigating the issue. We will be making a statement shortly."

Does this statement from Take-A-View a couple of hours ago refer to this situation here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top