BBC WPTY Results

Ken Watkins · 10-30-2008, 09:18 AM

Results of the 2008 competition are available at the following link

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-...ory=54&group=4

Ken Watkins · 10-30-2008, 09:54 AM

Can I be the first to say well done to the Leopard for taking such good photos of himself.

The winner should clearly have been Stefano Unterthiner IMHO.

**Sabyasachi Patra** · 10-31-2008, 05:02 AM

Ha ha!

Fabulous image of the snow leopard. I doubt whether any other national geographic story would have got so many of its pictures awarded in a BBC Competition.

Well if you exclude all remote triggered shots, then Stefano Unterthiner or David Maitland are the two most deserving for the title Wildlife Photographer of the Year.

May be this is the first time in the history (I am not sure) of BBC contest where the Wildlife Photographer of the Year has not seen the subject in his eyes at all except for the images captured in sensor. Not just during that trip, but never in the lifetime. Case of Science and Technology taking over art?

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

Jasper Doest · 10-31-2008, 05:16 AM

Remote triggered photography is a LOT of work....and the results of Steve Winter are IMHO the result of photographic knowledge and persistence. Also, you still have to think of compositions when doing remote triggered photography....as the setting is very important....

Ken Watkins · 10-31-2008, 06:04 AM

I have to say I disagree entirely with the choice of winner, and in my opinion there have been many finer photos taken of Snow Leopard, some of which were actually taken by the photographer. This technique is fine for what it is meant to be used for scientific research, I for one was very impressed that photos were taken of Sumatran Tigers a few years ago, but I would not consider them to be suitable subjects for a photograhic competition. Setting up photo traps is not exactly rocket science and is not exactly hard work.
I found this comment on another website which sums up my feelings as to this situation

"I am all for equipment and the maximum use thereof, but I tend to agree with you that there should be a limit.

In these type of competitions digital manipulation is not allowed. In other words, I cannot clone out a hair that obscure a lions eye, but can set multiple cameras, covering all angles, triggered by IR and run at 8fps till the buffers are full, all while I'm not even there.

Somewhere we must have lost the plot."

**frank harrison** · 10-31-2008, 06:29 AM

I see what you mean Ken.
The overall competition standard has improved this year & the winning image was indeed remarkable.
That said, the title is 'Wildlife Photographer of the Year", not "Wildlife Image of the Year".
I think it is fair to ask that when an image is captured then the photographer should at least be there when the photograph it is taken.
Keep safe all,
Frank Harrison

**Mike Tracy** · 10-31-2008, 06:31 AM

My first thought was " that's a pretty cool photo" but then I started questioning the merits of awarding such an esteemed prize which was taken in this manner.

I guess I am just old ( and old school ).

**Arthur Morris** · 11-05-2008, 06:15 AM

Originally Posted by Jasper Doest

Remote triggered photography is a LOT of work....and the results of Steve Winter are IMHO the result of photographic knowledge and persistence. Also, you still have to think of compositions when doing remote triggered photography....as the setting is very important....

Hi Jasper and all, I gotta say (see my comments in BAA Bulletin #276 here: http://www.birdsasart.com/bn276.htm) that IMHO there is no way that the leopard image should have earned the photographer WPOTY honors. Yes, it it a ton of work, and yes, he had to choose the setting, but he had zero control over the placement of the subject in the frame, zero control of it's posture, and he had nothing at all to do with tripping the shutter at that magical moment that we all dream of. (Actually, he could have been dreaming at the exact moment that the shutter was released.)

I am totally with Ken Watkins on this one. In an e-mail he wrote in part,

"The image is also in my view on breach of the rules, I am sure you are familiar with them, but I think this is the relevant passage:

“Adjusting your image Digital adjustments are only acceptable if limited to minor cleaning work, levels, curves, colour, saturation and contrast work. The faithful representation of what you saw at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained.” (emphasis added).

(and I am surprised that he did not post that here as I believe that it is relevant).

I had not even considered that the winning image should have been disqualified for not meeting the rules. Though the rule above was instituted to prevent digital manipulation, if you consider that it says, "The faithful representation of what you saw at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained” it would seem that the image was not created within the rules of the contest. After all, the photographer was not looking through the viewfinder...

Respectfully...

**Sabyasachi Patra** · 11-05-2008, 06:35 AM

I fully agree with Artie and Ken.

Today we have remote sensing satellites with cameras resolving upto a meter. The pictures shot from those satellites can then be entered in the Wild Places category. One of those can even win. So who will be the Wildlife photographer of the year? Some public relations officer who enters that photo? That's terrible.

And the tragedy is the photographer hasn't seen the snow leopard till date. Nor has he much of hope to see a wild snow leopard in his lifetime. I agree that this is a serious breach of rules. This has seriously devalued the competition. I hope somebody writes to the organising committee.

**Arthur Morris** · 11-05-2008, 06:45 AM

For me this issue is a concern and not at all a tragedy. Let's keep things in perspective...

Ken Watkins · 11-05-2008, 10:47 AM

Art,
Thank you for your comments, I agree that this should not be made into a crusade, after all I am sure everybody has seen winning photos which they do not admire for one reason or another.
My gripe is that nobody else could seriously have thought this was within the rules. I urge everybody to send an email to the organisers asking why these images were allowed.
In the meantime I would just like to say congratulations to the remaining winners, some of which I like others I do not. It is after all just a matter of taste.

**frank harrison** · 11-05-2008, 12:32 PM

Now then you blithe coves!
Here is another hat in the ring.

I'm sure I recall that last year (or a year or two earlier) a category choice in this competition was a 'self portrait' taken by (I think) an ape. In that case a photographer had temporarily left their equipment & in the interim the curious subject had approached the camera & pressed the shutter as it stared down the lens.

Now it is obviously a fact that monkeys are more intelligent than human beings (just look at the state of the planet) & it was indeed an intriguing image but again seems to contravene the rules of the competition.

So the precedent was set prior to the Snow Leopard snap.
Funny old world ain't it?

**Jim Poor** · 11-05-2008, 01:53 PM

While I don't particularly care for the photo in question, I think folks are taking "The faithful representation of what you saw at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained" far too literally.

If you want to get super literal, nobody sees anything through the lens of an SLR at the precise moment a picture is made because the mirror is up and in the way of the viewfinder.

I believe the rule is in place to prevent images being tampered with and not in order to prevent the use of a remote camera.

All that said, I don't like the photo much at all, but then I'm not a judge ;)

**Arthur Morris** · 11-05-2008, 02:42 PM

Hey Jimm, Are you OK with the fact that the top prize was created with a camera trap?

**Jim Poor** · 11-05-2008, 03:02 PM

Hi Artie,

Personally, I'm not OK with the image that won, period. I don't find it all that special.

Given two images of the same caliber, one taken with a trap, and the other taken "by hand," I'd have to give more weight to the second one.

Given an incredible image made by a trap up against a bunch of mediocre images, the choice might be harder.

Seeing that this image was up against other REALLY great images, I think I'd have given the award to someone who held the camera in their hands for the picture.

All that said, I don't think this image violated any rules, at least not the spirit in which I believe they were written. I also don't think it deserved to win.

Tell Dickinson · 11-05-2008, 03:19 PM

Hi, I personally do not like the winner even if it had been taken 'in person' and since seeing the oof hare image I have now renamed my 'Waste basket' to 'Possible WPTY entries' :) However what I would like to know is this (I am sure Arty and others that entered will know)... did the judges know BEFORE they picked the winners that the shot was taken with a remote trigger i.e. All the winners have a write up by the photographer but is this written for all entries or are the winners asked to provide it only AFTER the judging ?

Tell

**john jackson** · 11-05-2008, 03:33 PM

Can I (hopefully tactfully) suggest that the adverse reaction to the wining photograph is a little knee-jerk? To summon a posse to mount a campaign to have the winner shot down on a perceived technicality seems to me way OTT, particularly drawing as it does on a rule that is there specifically to deal with digital manipulation and this image is not manipulated.

On this forum there are widely admired images that involve setting up outdoor studios to photograph hummingbirds under flash and against man made backgrounds, use of captive bait animals to draw in predators in line with a camera, physical and digital removal or addition of habitat features, photoshop surgery to remove birds' eyelids or add an eye where one was hidden, and so on and on. All these have resulted in images that inspire the users of this forum to take more and better pictures.

I happen to like the winning image, but that is not the issue here (some previous winners I like, others leave me cold). I like it because it shows a wild animal in natural surroundings. I also admire the photographer's skill in setting up such a composition. I have seen many camera trap photos and almost all are artistically garbage. Here is one that is undoubtably art to my eyes. I see no difference between this set up and, say, Andy Rouse's remarkable ground-up view Elephant images for which he used remote triggers.

This competition is for me consistently the best such competition on the planet. It has rules and judges. The judges considered the rules, viewed the entries and chose their favourite image. The photographer (i.e. the person who made the image happen) has not hidden the technique that made the capture. The photograph won fair and square, like it or not.

Do what makes you happy and live and let live.

John

Ken Watkins · 11-05-2008, 04:46 PM

With reference to the above, I have had the following confirmed by Andy Rouse. His 1998 winner in the Animal Behaviour Category was indeed remotely triggered, the vast majority of his other shots were not taken in this way.

So it appears that remote technology has indeed been accepted in the past, but Andy has not confirmed whether he was asleep or not!

Nevertheless the rules need to be clarified, and I believe that photos taken in such a manner should be the subject of a separate category.

**john jackson** · 11-05-2008, 06:22 PM

How about concentrating on how good some of the winning images are?

My favourites include: Dan Mead's Sand sprinters; Amos Nachoum's Sailfish strike; and Barış Koca's Starling genie.

Just wonderful photographs.

Ganesh H Shankar · 11-05-2008, 07:50 PM

Last February me and a few friends of mine made a trip to Kaziranga National Park in north east of India in search of Rhinos. We happen to stay in the same resort as Steve Winter did for a week and we use to meet him everyday during breakfast/lunch/dinner. Steve too was photographying there. During those lunch/dinner discussions Steve was kind enough to show all those breath taking images of his snow leopards he made. Which later appeared in one of the National Geographic issues too. One thing he clearly told us then was "I want images to be mine, I carefully work on compositions". He carefully plans positioning of the placement of trailmaster trasmitters and receivers and the trigger points based on the composition he has in his mind. Sure, instead of head the tail can trip the shutter but then out 10 (or more) one of those shutter releases will precicely results in the composition the way he wanted and that is what he shows to the world. Is it not a composition ? Not sure why we insist photographers presence - instead of physically seeing through the view finder he has seen them through his mind which is far more challenging. Don't we need to commend him for that ? He also mentioned it takes more than about 3 hours to set one camera trap. Having used with 3 trailmaster units and radio controlled Pocket Wizard in my own attempts at creating some unique perspectives (and with no success) of elusive wild lifes in my country so far I can confidently say looking at Steve's images he not only takes care of compositions and also does it best. This is what Steve has to say on his winning entry during a conversation with a BBC reporter -

" Commenting on the use of trigger cameras rather than being sat behind the lens, Mr Winter said: "They are something that needs to be used to get intimate portraits of elusive animals.

"I used to hate these cameras because they just gave you a record of an animal.
"Images are all about composition and light. If I cannot control that as if I would as I put the camera up to my face, then essentially I have failed.
"So I asked myself that if I did not like these cameras, how can I like them more.
"It turns on his winning imageout that snow leopards are the perfect species on which to use these cameras. They always come to specific locations to mark their territory. "So I viewed the locations as movie sets. I put the cameras there, I put the lights there. "

Other than incredible snow leaopard images he also showed us some of his Tiger images he made at Kaziranga - some of the best tiger perspectives I have ever seen. Soon we may see them in National Geographic magazine. I will not be surprised if they win WPY again. I wish him all the best, having seen him working closely I would like to give credit where it is due.

Congrats Steve !

**Bob Blanchard** · 11-05-2008, 09:54 PM

While I don't know Steve, and certainly respect his opinion on the use of "game" cameras, I respectfully disagree with awarding this type of photography any type of prize. There's no art here. It's pure, dumb luck. It makes one wonder if the judges are actually photographers or not. I have no problem at all with using this technique just to capture images for sale or magazine publication, but I have a HUGE problem with calling it "art" and winning prizes with it. The judges of that competition should be ashamed of themselves. Anyone who's ever laid in the mud, waiting on that precise head turn, foot raise, catchlight, and light angle knows exactly where I'm coming from. Sorry, but you can't control those details remotely, or with a trip wire!

In my opinion, a true wildlife photographer takes the moment of "luck" when the desired animal appears, and then crafts it into a work of art. On this forum, I know that most of us actually "see" the image in our minds BEFORE we manipulate the camera to record it as we've seen it. Dozens of variables are calculated in seconds BY THE PHOTOGRAPER. I can give you the intimate details on the creation of every one of my best images. They are vividly engrained in my memory. They were not accidents. They cannot be pre-planned, as EVERY moment in time presents unique conditions.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm a bit irked by the award of such a prestigious prize to a radar gun, and not a photographer.

Ken Watkins · 11-06-2008, 02:55 AM

I HAVE MADE A BAD MISTAKE,!
The pictures by Andy Rouse were taken using a remote trigger which Andy pressed, so these are in no way comparable to the Snow Leopard images, the photographer actually took the pictures, not the animal.

I'm with you Bob!

Dave Hutchinson · 11-06-2008, 09:10 PM

I totally agree that the Snow Leopard shot should have been disqualified since there was no interaction whatsoever from a photographer. Sorry, but camera traps don't qualify as photography skills. This photo was purely luck! However, I wish that I had been the lucky one to be able to add this photo to my collection.

**Bob Blanchard** · 11-06-2008, 10:32 PM

To expand just a bit on my previous post...

I would be completely fine if this image were up for "photograph" of the year and won. But the fact that it won "photographer" of the year is the problem in my mind. It's like this: Let's say that the Ivory Billed Woodpecker is not extinct, and let's say that one of the many hundreds of remote trip cameras that the Cornell folks stuck all over that Cypress forest in Alabama happens to actually catch one. Is the guy who tied that particular camera to the tree going to win the "Photographer of the year" award next year? How's that any different than this?

Personally, I wish it had been my remote camera that had captured this image, and that I was rolling in the money with the sales of it to whatever magazine(s).....But I'd have never entered it in a contest for "PHOTOGRAPHER" of the year.

I guess I'm just kinda weird this way, but I don't want to win any photo contest I don't deserve to just because I got lucky when some animal stepped on a tripwire. Heck, I'm even struggling with the contest I'm in right now where I followed what I believed to be the letter of the law on the rules about photo manipulation (all I did was crop, spot removal, and NR on mine!), and I'm competing against images with EXTENSIVE Photoshop manipulation in them. I'm not saying those images don't look great (they look fantastic)....But that's not what the rules said were allowed by my interpretation! I guess "manipulation" has now become a very subjective term. I could've tweaked mine a lot more, but I wanted to make sure I was staying within what I percieved to be the boundaries and spirit of the rules. Apparently, I was wrong about that "manipulation" part. This is my first year competing in these contests, but you can bet I'll have a better feel for the "rules" next year. No sour grapes there, though. They did state that the amount of manipulation was up to the judges "While photo editing software can be used, excessive use of such programs (as determined by Sponsor/judges in their sole discretion) is prohibited.".

All I know is I want to be proud of my accomplishment when I'm hanging around my peers (you all). I doubt I'd feel that way had I won an award for photogrpher of the year for a picture I didn't even take myself. Maybe it's just me, and I need to get over those nastly little integrity flaws I seem to have :confused:

**Ramon M. Casares** · 11-07-2008, 01:35 PM

I am sorry to disagree, but do you all really think that that particular Snow Leopard shot was pure luck? What about studying the subject to know where he will walk thru, don't we do that too? What about knowing where to locate the camera to get a plaesent composition and know where to locate the flashes and how to usde them to get good light, aren't those great photographer skills? I am sorry, but in a forum where Photoshop skills are celebrated with so much enthusiasm it is hard for me to understand what has happened here where suddenly if you are not there to press the trigger you are not a photographer but if you can save whites or ad a whole wing to a bird you are a great photographer... I use photoshop, I am not at all against it as I think it is a fundamental tool in digital photography, but infrared barrier is, to me, a much greater and hard to use tool that PS, you REALLY have to know a lot to work with barriers when with PS you can always go back and restart.. I am just trying to be coherent with myself here... I respectfully disagree with you, I think that winning shot it is the result of a LOT of a photographer hard work and skills.

Ps: Still, the image I really loved the best was Miguel Lasa's Polar Bear silhuette!

**Bob Blanchard** · 11-07-2008, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by ramón casares

I am sorry to disagree, but do you all really think that that particular Snow Leopard shot was pure luck? What about studying the subject to know where he will walk thru, don't we do that too? What about knowing where to locate the camera to get a plaesent composition and know where to locate the flashes and how to usde them to get good light, aren't those great photographer skills? I am sorry, but in a forum where Photoshop skills are celebrated with so much enthusiasm it is hard for me to understand what has happened here where suddenly if you are not there to press the trigger you are not a photographer but if you can save whites or ad a whole wing to a bird you are a great photographer... I use photoshop, I am not at all against it as I think it is a fundamental tool in digital photography, but infrared barrier is, to me, a much greater and hard to use tool that PS, you REALLY have to know a lot to work with barriers when with PS you can always go back and restart.. I am just trying to be coherent with myself here... I respectfully disagree with you, I think that winning shot it is the result of a LOT of a photographer hard work and skills.

Ps: Still, the image I really loved the best was Miguel Lasa's Polar Bear silhuette!

I definitely respect what you are saying, and I do believe that there is skill involved here. Of course it was not ALL luck. But I feel that this image was more luck than skill, and not the other way around. Of course we all know where to find the animals, and where the light needs to be....but that's only part of it. it's the pose, the composition, the subtle angles, the adjustments to changing light, etc. etc. that seperate the great photographers from the rest of the herd. Sorry, but you can't achieve those details remotely without luck. Just not possible. I feel that skill should be awarded, and luck should be envied ;)

Again, this photographer is obviously a good one (maybe even a geat one). He has certainly accomplished far more than I have....So who am I to judge? I congratulate and applaud that. I simply disagree with this award in this contest. Heck, I wasn't even competing in this one, so it shouldn't bother me as much as it does.

FWIW - I still suck at Photoshop, so I HAVE to rely on my photography skills to get it right out of the camera. Maybe as I ..."ahem"... evolve as a digital photographer, I'll become lousy with the camera, and better at Photoshop :D

**Ramon M. Casares** · 11-07-2008, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by Bob Blanchard

it's the pose, the composition, the subtle angles, the adjustments to changing light, etc. etc

But except for the pose, isn't the rest after months of study something you can foresee (light, comp, speed, ISO, etc) and so get the parameters right? He didn't had a SUPER camera or anything, that shot was taken wiht an Xt!!! That tells me a lot about skills more luck. Plus, pose is not luck? Sure? Didn't you ever get a great pose from a bird or animal just out of pure luck and you got it thanks to the camera continous burst? I know I did, so why is this case any different? That is way I think in photography skills and luck go together preety much as one thing, sometimes we have more luck than skills and somedays skill are all we need but, but these two things to me, go preety much toghether, such as in the snow leopard case and so many other cases that we can all see here in BPN and everywhere else. :)

Originally Posted by Bob Blanchard

Maybe as I ..."ahem"... evolve as a digital photographer, I'll become lousy with the camera, and better at Photoshop :D

Sadly, that is happening a lot, there are a lot of folks out there who relay on PS way to much in stead of getting better as photographers... :(

**Bob Blanchard** · 11-07-2008, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by ramón casares

But except for the pose, isn't the rest after months of study something you can foresee (light, comp, speed, ISO, etc) and so get the parameters right? He didn't had a SUPER camera or anything, that shot was taken wiht an Xt!!! That tells me a lot about skills more luck. Plus, pose is not luck? Sure? Didn't you ever get a great pose from a bird or animal just out of pure luck and you got it thanks to the camera continous burst?

We have all had "luck" shots. Heck, just last weekend I was working a group of Spoonbills, and they all took off suddenly. I knew that meant a Bald Eagle was flying over. I immediately grabbed my 40d which was lying next to me, and fired off about 4 frames at him on a prayer that one would come out. Sure enough, one did! The other three were oof. Now the BIG difference here is I won't be posting my Bald Eagle to any contests, trying to say what a great photographer I am. I know it was pure luck. I have no problem being transparent about such things.

Perhaps it's due to the fact that I shoot with a relatively slow full frame camera as my primary, so I HAVE to be somewhat frugal with my frame buffer, and wait on the right moment to start the sequence. In fact, many folks on this forum have been out in the field with me, and probably think I'm a bit nuts because of the way I talk to the birds while photographing them! I'm always speaking aloud things like "c'mon, turn that head....give me that catchlight!". LOL - It think half the time I get the shot because the bird's curiosity gets piqued from all my self-chatter :D They all have that "What the heck is he talking about" look on their face!:D Most of my composition time is spent moving a single focusing point around to firmly place it on the eye, with the bird framed where I want it. You sure won't do THAT with a remote trip camera! I believe that the luck ends when the animal presents itself. It is then up to the photographer to craft that lucky moment into a work of art. Most people NEVER achieve that (as evidenced by the plethora of boring wildlife images out there).

The way I see this debate is that it boils down to two possible points....Luck or Skill. I clearly feel that luck was the domintant in the case of this particular image (thus making it non-deserving of the award it received), and you feel that skill was dominant (making it a justified award). Clearly, the judges agree with you. I don't think that either of us will have much luck convincing the other to change his opinion, so I'm content to just "agree to disagree". Besides, it will give us something fun to debate while we're hanging out in the bar after some fantastic photo shoot one day!

I will say that I agree with you 100 percent on the Photoshop discussion, though! But alas....that's another whole debate to be had another day in another thread ;)

**Ramon M. Casares** · 11-07-2008, 10:39 PM

:)Good Bob I agree with you about being content to just agree to disagree, it is fun and always good to debate!

Ps: As I said, I don't think that the Snow Leopard shot would've been my overall winning choice at all (there were a few other I loved much more), but that said I clearly think that it is a deserved award.:)

Ken Watkins · 11-08-2008, 12:27 AM

The excuse that this was hard work by the photographer is interesting but does not hold up. Yes it is cold in the Himalayas, but when you have a large team of assistants to assist you and you are being paid to stay there then that is your choice, do not claim this as skill. How many of us could set up 14 IR triggered cameras (even if they were cheap models) and come up with such average images after 10 months speaks for luck rather than skill. Locally to me we have a research group studying Leopard called Cape Leopard Trust, they are doing very worthwhile research into an elusive animal and have "captured" many good images but I would not conceive that prior to now any would have considered they should be entered in a photographic competition
http://www.capeleopard.org.za/

At least nobody here has said it is a rare picture, of an endangered animal, there are in fact considerably more Snow Leopards than Tigers it is just that they are in areas where not many people go. Just google Snow Leopard, I do not think the judges did they just believed what they were told.

**Ramon M. Casares** · 11-08-2008, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by Ken Watkins

The excuse that this was hard work by the photographer is interesting but does not hold up. Yes it is cold in the Himalayas, but when you have a large team of assistants to assist you and you are being paid to stay there then that is your choice, do not claim this as skill.

So then, all of the photographers out there that can travel the world exclusively to take photographs are not great photographers but just lucky guys that can afford it, period? :)

**Arthur Morris** · 11-08-2008, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by ramón casares

So then, all of the photographers out there that can travel the world exclusively to take photographs are not great photographers but just lucky guys that can afford it, period? :)

Ramon, Your smiley face has confused me. What is it that you want to say? Is you commment intended to be serious?

Ken Watkins · 11-08-2008, 10:18 AM

Hi Artie,

Thanks for that I am confused by these comments as well. My simple point is that an image has no more merit because it was supposedly difficult to get. On another forum another "professional" photographer claimed that this image must be better than that of a common bird, because this subject is endangered. On that basis your winning image this year and that of Andy rouse last year have no merit because there are clearly lots of birds in each shot. Also perhaps I should enter pictures of Bontebok calves as there are only around 3,000 of them in the world, and a lot of them live in a game park near to where I live. The general public do not seem to be voting for it either.

**Arthur Morris** · 11-08-2008, 10:23 AM

Difficulty of attaining or creating an image is never a factor. All the matters is the image. Assuming that the photographer created the image...

Let's see what Ramon has to say...

**Ramon M. Casares** · 11-08-2008, 10:41 AM

Yes Arthur, it was serious, I just didn't want to "sound" mad or anything as I know that written words can usually be misinterpreted, that's whay I used a smiley face. I am having a good time debating this and I tend to get a little passionate about my opinions heheeh and I just didn't want to sound mad or anything.
As I said, I wouldn't have chosen the Snow Leopard shot as the overall winner either, but from that to thinking that was just a lucky shot there is a big difference...
For what matters I am the first one in loving and enjoying to see great artisitc shot of "common" wildlife, I don't think difficulty is a factor at all, artistic eye and photogrpahic skill are. And as I said. to me, luck and skill go by hand, here there is a lot of work put into this particular shot, and a lot of study about the subject and its habbits to achieve without even being there, a pleasent composition with a very nice technical execution, I loved the light in that shot, the snow in the air, the atmosphere in general, it could have been a common fox in stead of a snow leaoprd to me and I would have loved it any way, not to be the overall winner but to be awarded for sure. I insist on this quiestion, why is infrared barriers such a despicable tool? Why es luck such a despicable factor?

john crookes · 11-08-2008, 11:51 AM

Is not the award for Photographer of the year based on a collection of work rather than one picture.
If you read his bio and look at all of his work I believe he is very deserving of this award

http://www.stevewinterphoto.com/about/

Dave Courtenay · 11-08-2008, 01:12 PM

If you replaced the snow leopard with a fox or instance would it have still won?probably not so it won on the animals rarity value rather than photographic value-2 other images i dont understand are the hare in snow-the photographer admits he didnt intend to get a shot like this and resigned it to the bin and the Robin taken with a compact-Robins are the friendlist birds in the UK and will feed from the hand so to get one with a compact is no big deal and its not even a good image
Still some great work there but stuff that should have never got past the inital viewing

Dave

**Ramon M. Casares** · 11-08-2008, 01:52 PM

Dave I didn't like hte Hare shot either, it as it was not intended to come out like that by the photographer, still, this is Art, and it is subjective, there's no right or wrong just and only "likes and dislikes", as I said before, the snowleopard wouldn't have been my overall winning choise, there were other TERRIFIC images that I liked better, still, as I said already too, infrared barriers are a great photographic tool to me and I just don't understand why everybody despic their use.
Probably if in stead of a Snow Leopard that would've been a Fox, I might have not won at all, but bottom line, it is a Snow Leopard and it came out (to me) to be a fantastic shot and as the photogrpaher intended regarding light, comp, etc, not like the Hare shot... that was just a "lucky" shot as the photogrpaher didn't inteded to take that shot with that atmosphere and effect, but still, all is subjective, that's what art is all about.

john crookes · 11-08-2008, 03:05 PM

Ken said

"At least nobody here has said it is a rare picture, of an endangered animal, there are in fact considerably more Snow Leopards than Tigers it is just that they are in areas where not many people go. Just google Snow Leopard, I do not think the judges did they just believed what they were told"

according to the WWF there are between 3000 to 6000 snow leopards in the wild and according to the same source there are 5000 to 7500 tigers in the wild

Add inn the habitat and a photo of a snow leopard is much more elusive than a photo of a Tiger.

Most of the photos in print are of captive Snow leopards

The highly acclaimed documentary Planet Earth took an extremley long time to capture its footage of a Snow Leopard and almost gave up in its endeavors

I think Steves persitence and willingness to pursue this creature paid off with what i believe is the most stunning image of this creature to date

**Andy Biggs** · 11-08-2008, 03:52 PM

Very well said, John. Very well said. But the thread seems to be about whether Steve's use of camera traps were within the guidelines of the competition rules. Only they can comment on this. I can see both sides. I do think it was a worthy winner of the overall contest, as I think it is a great photograph of a threatened species.

Alfred Forns · 11-08-2008, 10:16 PM

I think it would be helpful if the judging guidelines would be clear. I like to think it should be the image itself that counts and not the trouble you went to make the image. I do agree the winner made the the best image of this species to date.

**Arthur Morris** · 11-09-2008, 12:52 AM

Originally Posted by ramón casares

So then, all of the photographers out there that can travel the world exclusively to take photographs are not great photographers but just lucky guys that can afford it...

OK, Ramon says that the above is a serious statement. I would argue that his statement is convoluted at best If not ridiculous).

#1: Most but not all of the photographers that travel the world, like Art Wolfe, Frans Lanting, and Andy Rouse to name three, are great photographers. Each of them has worked incredibly hard and deserve all the honors they have been accorded.

#2: They are able to travel the world for various reasons. Neither luck nor personal wealth has anything to do with their success and their ability to travel the world.

The issue that I originally raised is that the creation of the WPOTY winning image had everything to do with luck and craft than with artistic vision and skill.

**Arthur Morris** · 11-09-2008, 12:56 AM

Originally Posted by Andy Biggs

Very well said, John. Very well said. But the thread seems to be about whether Steve's use of camera traps were within the guidelines of the competition rules. Only they can comment on this. I can see both sides. I do think it was a worthy winner of the overall contest, as I think it is a great photograph of a threatened species.

Welcome Andy. The issue that I originally raised had to do with whether the top prize should have been awarded to an image created when the photographer was not present. The question of whether it was created within the guidelines was a secondary issue.

I so think that it is a great image but do not think that it was worthy of the top prize since the photographer had zero to do with the composition and zero to do with capturing a dramatic pose...

Ken Watkins · 11-09-2008, 02:42 AM

One thing is for certain, the selection of this image has caused a lot of controversy, I and some others believe that this was the intent of the organisers.

I for one am happy to share the views of Art, Andy Rouse and the majority of contributors to this thread.

In relation to more recent postings I hope this helps

There are as far as I am aware no guidlines, the full rules for the 2008 competition can be viewed at
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-...ntry/Rules.jsp

As far as I am aware the winner is determined from one image rather than a portfolio. There was a portfolio category for Young Photographers (Eric Hosking Award) , but this does not seem to be in the 2008 results.

As for the comparative rarity of the subject, I and others do not think this should have any value in determining the quality of the image. Having checked with SnowLeopard.org and TigerWatch.org I can confirm that the figures given above by John Crookes are correct, I was therefore slightly incorrect in making my comparison.

Cliff Beittel · 11-09-2008, 09:43 AM