RSPCA young photographer

F

Ferj

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,655
Edit My Images
No
Saw a fantastic photo on the WEX blog of a seal that won young photographer of the year. While it's an incredible image I couldn't help but think there's not many 16yr olds that could afford a £7k 600mm prime lens!

Realistically it's pro grade equipment and it made me question perhaps there needs to be different levels of young photographer ability a bit like pro/amateur?
 
Last edited:
Google found it..

http://www.wexphotographic.com/blog/behind-the-image-owen-hearn-seal-at-sunrise

FWIW I think the equipment used made little difference to this shot. There are cheaper alternatives to getting that reach but I imagine it won on the merits of it's creativity. The winner is obviously a keen wildlife photographer if you read the bumpf and spends a lot of time out with the wildlife. The cost of the equipment seems like a very worthwhile investment to me, but I can't see a need to separate out the judging categories based on gear tbh.
 
Last edited:
At least it's I the uk. There was a patch of young wildlife photographer on expensive trips to the arctic winning. Good image too, perhaps he's got a sad who lends hi. The lens
 
Owen had a winner in the WPOTY a couple of years ago: "Owen’s interest in photography began when he got a point-and-shoot camera for Christmas. The next year he saved up and bought a bridge camera, moving on to a DSLR. He sold all his belongings to buy lenses, taught himself photography using internet tutorials and practised on his grandparents’ wildlife-rich dairy farm."

Owen's portfolio certainly suggests somebody who is going to succeed in the field because good gear or not, he has talent.

Youth categories are invariably won by kids with good gear, accompanying their parents (or more likely, father) to some good wildlife opportunity. I think it's simple an unavoidable fact that those who are luck enough to have a wildlife photographing parent(s) are going to be ahead of the curve. I guess you could have gear-restricted classes but sadly I image it'd be a headache to police.
 
Last edited:
If I was the parent of a child who was into serious photography. I wouldn't have a problem with him/her wanting expensive equipment to improve the quality of their photos. It's no different than a parent spending £££ on private coaches hoping their son or daughter will be the next sporting superstar.

We are also assuming that the lens is his for all we know it's his grandfathers lens.

At the end of the day it's a quality photograph and deserves its place as it more creative than just the standard wildlife photo.
 
Unusual shot and very striking - very striking. Tuck that idea away in my head and hope for a similar opportunity.
 
Ferj said:
Saw a fantastic photo on the WEX blog of a seal that won young photographer of the year. While it's an incredible image I couldn't help but think there's not many 16yr olds that could afford a £7k 600mm prime lens!

Realistically it's pro grade equipment and it made me question perhaps there needs to be different levels of young photographer ability a bit like pro/amateur?
Click to expand...

Couldn't we say the same about ANY Wildlife award then? After all, how many ADULTS can afford a 7K lens?

What you are saying suggests that wildlife photography is just gear dependent, not skill dependent, and awards should be streamed according to how much money you have?

[edit] I recall making a similar comment regarding certain genres of photography being more dependent on gear than skill a couple of weeks back and got met with some pretty stiff resistance from the wildlife crowd, but when it comes to the wildlife crowd feeling as if it's unfair when rich people win competitions, you suggest streaming entries via gear.

It's either skill.. or it's gear. Which is it?
 
Last edited:
TimmyG said:
Skill
Click to expand...


If that's the case, then there's no need for streaming entries based on gear, age, money... nothing. Well.. age I suppose... but having a "junior" section isn't unusual... after all skill often accompanies age and experience, but the OP seems to have an issue with people with more money having an advantage, and if skill is what determines a good wildlife image, then money shouldn't be a factor.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
It's either skill.. or it's gear. Which is it?
Click to expand...
Looking at some of the crap posted by guys with expensive kit, I would say skill plays a large part of it.

I would also chuck patience into the mix, one of the most important aspects to wildlife photograhy.
 
I agree a Camera's - Lenses are just tools, It's how you use them that really counts

Having a fast car doesn't make you a Racing driver

Les ;)
 
But having a slow car sure as hell doesn't help you be a successful racing driver! If you're a good photographer with top kit, chances are that you'll get better images than you would with lower level kit but if you're crap, you'll get crap with whatever kit you're using.
 
arclight said:
Unusual shot and very striking - very striking. Tuck that idea away in my head and hope for a similar opportunity.
Click to expand...
:lol: +1 here but just need that nice early start. Well over the age of burning the candle at both ends :(
 
Nod said:
But having a slow car sure as hell doesn't help you be a successful racing driver! If you're a good photographer with top kit, chances are that you'll get better images than you would with lower level kit but if you're crap, you'll get crap with whatever kit you're using.
Click to expand...

Only with a certain TYPE of wildlife image though. Why limit yourself to the stuff that needs a 600mm f4 lens then? Break the mould then.. do something else.


http://media.digitalcameraworld.com...her-of-the-Year-Awards-image-c-Mark-Smith.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top