Misrepresentation in Photo Contest

Roman Kurywczak said:

OK....the main question here is to Ed....a bit off topic...you labeled it as "snitch" yet pretend to be concerned about the welfare of the wildlife....which one is it. To me snitch is cowardly (being from NJ)......telling authorities in what you believe in....is honorable. Which one is it Ed?
I also did ask Maxis for a clarification on NSN....so far no response.

Click to expand...

I simply mean that I chose to talk to the individuals involved rather than going to a third party. In my mind that is not cowardly but simply giving the offenders the opportunity to change their behavior without involving others. However, I will readily admit that it was probably not the correct way to handle the situation.
Mea culpa.

I really don't have a horse in this race and I know almost no one on this board except Artie. But it does seem inappropriate to keep raising issues around Maxis Gamez without allowing him to defend himself on this board. It also seems to me that the only reason this discussion was started was to highlight this person's difficulties.

I was raised that if I don't have something good to say, don't say anything at all. A great deal of this discussion seems very mean spirited and not in the overall best interest of this forum. I think many of the issues being raised are worthy of further discussion. But the continued abuse of someone that can't defend himself is inappropriate to say the least.

I just posted this at Maxis' "defense" on NSN here: http://naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=165813&p=1647691#p1647691

There is a spirited thread on BPN regarding this issue here http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php?p=377415&posted=1#post377415 and Lana Hayes was kind enough to provide a link to this BPN thread.

Some folks are concerned that Maxis does not have the opportunity to defend himself on the BPN thread (because he was banned for numerous and repeated violations of the forum guidelines). Several folks noted that Maxis "defended" himself on this thread.

Since he cannot participate on the BPN thread I gladly look forward to his answers to the following questions (all of which have been asked on the BPN thread) here:

#1: Did the contest rules state that photographers would be required to submit the RAW files for images making it to the final rounds?

#2: Assuming that the answer to that question is yes why did you refuse to submit the RAW files?

#3: Is it your contention that the wonderful image that you have posted above was not created at Fort DeSoto County Park?

ps: Good job on the image optimization of the image above. Looks as if you used a few Quick Masks; did you learn that technique from Robert O'Toole's APTATS CD?

Jeff Donald said:

I really don't have a horse in this race and I know almost no one on this board except Artie. But it does seem inappropriate to keep raising issues around Maxis Gamez without allowing him to defend himself on this board. It also seems to me that the only reason this discussion was started was to highlight this person's difficulties.

I was raised that if I don't have something good to say, don't say anything at all. A great deal of this discussion seems very mean spirited and not in the overall best interest of this forum. I think many of the issues being raised are worthy of further discussion. But the continued abuse of someone that can't defend himself is inappropriate to say the least.

Click to expand...

Hi Jeff, Maxis now has a chance to answer lots of our questions at the NSN post. See the link above. I am anxious to see what he has to say. Also as noted previously, Maxis was banned here for repeatedly violating the BPN Guidelines. And then he retaliated with a massive spam attack against BPN. He simply is not welcome here.

If he had read and followed the rules we would not be uttering his name here.

Ed Erkes said:

I simply mean that I chose to talk to the individuals involved rather than going to a third party. In my mind that is not cowardly but simply giving the offenders the opportunity to change their behavior without involving others. However, I will readily admit that it was probably not the correct way to handle the situation. Mea culpa.

Click to expand...

Good to see that you are admitting that you were wrong. Are you stating that you talked to the photographer who was violating the rules?

Ed Erkes said:

I'm not going to get into an argument with Art about what I should or should not have done at North Chagrin. You can't win an argument with Mr Morris anyway (I've tried in the past). I chose not tell the park officials of the rules violation at North Chagrin at the time partly because I did not want to be seen as a "snitch" and have park personnel confront several individuals in front of a large group of other photographers. Instead I spoke to one photographer in person that day and several others the next day. Unfortunately the words became heated and had no positive effect at all on the situation. I admit I probably should have handled the situation differently, but find it strange that Art should call my behavior (not reporting the incident to officials) "unconscionable", yet he did not seem overly concerned about the rules violations in the first place. He even suggested a way to attract the ducks that did not technically break the rules (but, in my opinion was also unethical and disruptive to other photographers). Oh. Oh. I've just started an argument. I'll go ahead and concede defeat.

Click to expand...

Hard to win an argument when you admit in advance that you were wrong.

And tossing some pebbles into the pond was not a violation of the posted regulations.

Lana Hays said:

Artie, Here's the link to the contest rules:
http://refugeassociation.org/contest/2009ContestRules2.html

Click to expand...

Thanks Lana, You are too good.

This is the relevant portion:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Limited image modifications are allowed.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The intent and effect of any modification must be to produce a more natural looking and accurate photograph.

Removing a turnstone and two Laughing Gull heads would seem to pretty much everyone to be more than a "limited modification." And in no way could removing three birds be considered to have made the photograph more accurate.
[/FONT]

Hey Jeff,
If you look at the 3rd post on NSN.....i asked Maxis to explain himself......as I remembered he was banned for breaking the rules....that IMO is offering him a chance and not being disrespectful at all and I did quote the above rule..."limited"....so my post at 12:42pm (it was actually 11:42 my time) there asking for a response directly from him......is totally appropriate...still no response from Mr. Gamez.

My $0.02

I am understand that Maxis did violate the contest rules, he also admitted himself, but the biggest lost is I think is that Maxis was (still into my eyes) one of the best new generation photographers. I hope that Maxis learns from his mistakes and keep up producing awesome images and with time redeem himself by keep working at the best of his abilities. I also hope that with time the nature photographers community forgive and forget...

It is hard to understand someones motivation, but, maybe ... there are some economical motivations, it seems that the photography business have become very competitive, mainly when the biggest source of income for photographers is by teaching classes, therefore winning a couple of contest can help an upcoming photographer establish his name...

I have to admit that I have become a lurker more than an active participant since this type of discussion drive me away from this awesome site....

Raul

BTW: I never have the pleasure to meet Maxis, I did exchange a couple messages on this forum when I was starting on the forum.

Hi Roman,

Thanks for the reply. It just seems inappropriate to me to keep asking questions and making statements about someone when they can't respond. Call it unfair, unjust, Un-American etc. Everyone deserves their day in court. It is immaterial that he was banned here for a previous violation of the forums rules. If there are questions that need to be raised and asked then do so on the forum that he can respond to. Why continue to stir the pot and raise questions here, when he can't respond? What good can come out of it? I understand that people are looking for answers, but raising the questions here when he cannot respond seems mean spirited to me.

Jeff Donald said:

Hi Roman,

Thanks for the reply. It just seems inappropriate to me to keep asking questions and making statements about someone when they can't respond. Call it unfair, unjust, Un-American etc. Everyone deserves their day in court. It is immaterial that he was banned here for a previous violation of the forums rules. If there are questions that need to be raised and asked then do so on the forum that he can respond to. Why continue to stir the pot and raise questions here, when he can't respond? What good can come out of it? I understand that people are looking for answers, but raising the questions here when he cannot respond seems mean spirited to me.

Click to expand...

Jeff, With all due respect, it seems that you might not be reading the posts above. Several folks have asked questions of Maxis on the NSN thread. So far, he has not responded. As one of the owners of this site we cannot allow access to someone who generated a malicious spam attack against BPN.

Maxis has the opportunity to defend himself on the NSN thread.

Hey Jeff,
I do relate.....That's why I made sure he had a voice and asked on NSN!... I hope he responds.
PS I was typing when Artie responded....read the posts carefully on NSN....Artie provide a link

Raul Quinones said:

My $0.02

but, maybe ... there are some economical motivations, it seems that the photography business have become very competitive, mainly when the biggest source of income for photographers is by teaching classes, therefore winning a couple of contest can help an upcoming photographer establish his name...


Raul

BTW: I never have the pleasure to meet Maxis, I did exchange a couple messages on this forum when I was starting on the forum.

Click to expand...

.. wonder how you feel about people doing felonies to support their families Raul? No parallels but the principle is the same.

And Jeff also....Fred Miranda site link where a contestent felt hurt/betrayed; http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/832639
and another wher Maxis posted an image; http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/831540
Like you....I feel he needs to speak up.....many opportunities B4 this.....silence. Maybe he is away.

This site, and the others have the moral high ground. What more can be gained by the continued asking of questions when no answers seem to be forthcoming. Ask you stated, Maybe he is away, would seem to be accurate because he has not posted on either Fred Miranda or NatureScapes since Friday.

While we wait for Mr. Gamez to reply, maybe the moderators could steer the discussion in a more enlightening and positive direction that would benefit the entire community here at BPN.

Jeff Donald said:

This site, and the others have the moral high ground. What more can be gained by the continued asking of questions when no answers seem to be forthcoming. Ask you stated, Maybe he is away, would seem to be accurate because he has not posted on either Fred Miranda or NatureScapes since Friday.

While we wait for Mr. Gamez to reply, maybe the moderators could steer the discussion in a more enlightening and positive direction that would benefit the entire community here at BPN.

Click to expand...

Hi Jeff,

Here is the message that I sent Maxis via his web site:

Hi Maxis, There is a thread involving the disqualification of your images in the NWRA contest here:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php?t=49270

Several folks are concerned that you are not able to defend yourself there. I would be glad to post your answers to the various questions that have been posed or to post any defense that you may wish to offer. Please e-mail me at the address above if you wish.

Please note also that Roman K and I have posed several questions for you on the similar NSN thread. We all look forward to hearing you.

Sorry that I did not think of that sooner. On a related note, there are two relevant life-concepts that might be applicable here:

1-You shall reap what you sow.
2-What goes around comes around.

As for steering the thread in a more positive direction I have clearly stated my thoughts above as have others. To summarize: do what you want to an image, let folks know what you have done, and read and abide by the rules of any contests that you enter (and any groups that you choose to join).

Arthur Morris said:

Jeff, With all due respect, it seems that you might not be reading the posts above. Several folks have asked questions of Maxis on the NSN thread. So far, he has not responded. As one of the owners of this site we cannot allow access to someone who generated a malicious spam attack against BPN.

Maxis has the opportunity to defend himself on the NSN thread.

Click to expand...

You and I come from similar backgrounds, having both been (actually still are) teachers in our the pasts. I caught a student cheating once (submitted prints that he didn't print) and had him expelled from college. I'm sure this was a life changing event for him. In some ways I probably ruined his life, I think it's said that the average college graduate makes over $1 million more in his lifetime than the average high school graduate. I'd like to think that I changed that student in a positive way and the lessons he learned have benefitted him the rest of his life. Maybe he's gone on to be a successful photographer, I don't know.

I would just like to see this whole life changing event ultimately be a positive one for Mr. Gamez. Hopefully he will learn some ethics along his way and become a productive member of the photographic community.

Alfred Forns said:

.. wonder how you feel about people doing felonies to support their families Raul? No parallels but the principle is the same.

Click to expand...

I agree the principle is the same, when people violate the law, they are punish, and eventually they are re-integrate to the general community, I am only wish that the penal system was better, since the re-incidence ratio is too high. So I feel in the same way, Maxis was punish, I hope he learns his lesson and eventually could re-integrate to the nature photography community (as I mentioned before).

I think that the punishment should by according the "crime"... here I got no answers, although it seems that the punishment was that his work was removed from the contest, and the honorary mention publicly removed.

My points is that there are not many young photographers that have the skills and the passion to carry the torch when our senior members are not going to be able or willing to make the sacrifice to make awesome pictures.

Saludos, Raul

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_162680.asp

The news made the Chattanooga paper

Here it is straight from Mr. Evan Hirsche, President of The National Wildlife Refuge Association. He was kind enough to answer these questions for me.

James Shadle's Question
Evan Hirsche's Answer

The NWRA disqualification of Mr.Gamez has become a very active thread on birdphotographers.net. Most of the discussion revolves around the rules violation of digitally adding elements in post processing. Do you consider removing an element and replacing it with a sampled area as "adding an element"?
In the case of Mr. Gamez' photo, he clearly added an element that hadn't existed in the original. It may construed as removing an element (in this case birds that existed in the original), but the removal necessitated adding something in their place. We may decide to clarify further in the future, but the intent is clear and there should be no confusion by photographers.

If can tell me, were any images disqualified because their location was misrepresented?
Concerning misrepresentation of location, Mr. Gamez image of a snowy plover chick taken on Egmont Key caught our attention because refuge biologists have no documented nesting of snowy plover chicks on Egmont in recent history. When I explained that fact to Mr. Gamez, he said that he was simply confused and that he takes so many pictures, he's not always sure where he took them. Perhaps, but then he shouldn't enter photos in a contest that have a specific location requirement if he's not sure where he took them.

Our members are also interested in why you named the photographer.
We chose to name Mr. Gamez to send a clear message to photographers that if they enter, their images will be scrutinized and they will be called out if we determine they've willfully violated the rules. Further, we wanted photographers who take pains to follow the rules to know that their integrity is valued and appreciated.

Our contest has a purpose - to collect first-rate images that illustrate the magnificent natural treasures conserved by our national wildlife refuges. If we end up using images in program and marketing materials that are not taken on refuges or create an artificial scene, then our integrity as an organization is compromised and our cause suffers.

Evan,
Thanks for taking the time to set the record straight.
All the best,
James