Ah, I didn't realise it was snow - I thought you'd used a plug-in of some sort. The figure on the right makes the shot IMO.
and the site receives a small commission
I (didnt) Won Charlie Waites Landscape Photographer of the Year 2012 LPOTY
- Thread starter cannockwolf
- Start date
- Status
Ah, I didn't realise it was snow - I thought you'd used a plug-in of some sort. The figure on the right makes the shot IMO.
- Messages
- 323
- Name
- Alex Nail
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi Guys,
Someone just directed me towards this thread and I felt I had to comment. Apologies for the length of the post, but some of these comments obviously don't make me feel on top of the world. I feel like the point I was trying to make has been either misrepresented or misunderstood.
I hope when you read my comments you should know that I had no intention of upsetting David so please stop with the assumptions that I am out to lynch him! I tried to make this clear in my blog but it has fallen somewhat on deaf ears. I have made no personal comments against David (although I did say that he copied the image) or indeed the other photographers who have entered the competition. I have of course read many about myself, not least in this forum, I hope that can be avoided.
The intent of the blog (and the 2011 blog also referred to hear) was to raise what I believe are valid questions regarding image choice for the competition winners. I come from a standpoint of valuing landscape photography very highly and I have always hoped that it could be held with the same regard in the UK as it is in the US and Australia. The main barrier against this in the UK is that photography isn't viewed as art as it might be elsewhere. There are a number of things that are very important to photography in my opinion, and they are both hotly debated. The first is originality *the INTENT to create an original image* and the second is reality (which I won't go into since that wasn't what this blog was about, even if that was the thrust of my 2011 post). LPOTY forms one of the many faces of UK landscape photography (is there another competition with so much exposure) yet in my opinion it does not fairly represent the talented artists that enter and are rejected each year. There is always some outstanding work in the book, but mixed in there are a lot of shots which indicate a desire to show a range of abilities, not just 'the best' images, which hardly seems fair in a competition.
As artists, if we are to be regarded as artists, we need to be creative on some level. There are many creative choices we make before pressing the shutter button, even in a seemingly simple scenario like David's image. It's true that I research locations before I visit them, it's a good way of gauging photographic potential, its also true that I have framed some images in an identical way to images before me (though never intentionally, only as a by-product of the scene in front of me). Many of you rightly point out that this is inevitable unless we are to take intentionally compromised images or otherwise not visit 'honey pot' locations ourselves. Some people have drawn the conclusion that I believe that you can only be an artist if you put in a lot of effort. This is not the case. The comment at the end of my blog is merely to voice that the competition is be judged in a seemingly trivial way (and please I am not a lonely voice here) when so many people work so hard for their images.
So I've skirted the issue raised in the blog up to this point but here it is again. I believe that the winning image shows a level of influence passed which could merely be called 'inspiration'. For me there are too many creative choices that could have been made differently such as: focal length, camera position, crop, lighting, processing etc. It's just a bit to much for me personally. If we are all so open about this then why does the image description not mention the inspiration? It is not an issue I take with David (I even admire that he admitted his influence on his website), or his approach, but rather with the choice of the image as winner. If creativity is as important as I believe it should be in the competition then surely there are other entries (not entrants) that could be more deserving?
One thing I would like to ask you all; If you had shared my opinions on the image, how would you have expressed them? I chose my blog as medium because it was the best way to get my point across and also to raise it with a fair breadth of people. I wrote in I style that I hoped would reduce offence whilst still being direct enough to get my thoughts across. Should I have kept quiet to avoid ruffling feathers? This was always a 'lose lose' situation for me, I'm not completely detached from the fact that some would undoubtedly perceive me negatively for the criticism.
Of course even this post will be read in the context of sour grapes by some (most?) of you, but these are issues that I felt had to be raised with the undesired effect of 'collateral damage'. There are plenty of images in the book that I would have chosen over my own as winner though their creativity and emotional impact, but of course that matters little when people believe I am attacking David personally for winning the competition. Sometimes I wish we weren't all so attached to our art.
Alex
Here are some responses to the many comments on this thread:
Referring to me being a forum member:
[/QUOTE]
Whilst he isn’t necessarily attacking you, he does raise some interesting points but which are all moot really.
Someone just directed me towards this thread and I felt I had to comment. Apologies for the length of the post, but some of these comments obviously don't make me feel on top of the world. I feel like the point I was trying to make has been either misrepresented or misunderstood.
I hope when you read my comments you should know that I had no intention of upsetting David so please stop with the assumptions that I am out to lynch him! I tried to make this clear in my blog but it has fallen somewhat on deaf ears. I have made no personal comments against David (although I did say that he copied the image) or indeed the other photographers who have entered the competition. I have of course read many about myself, not least in this forum, I hope that can be avoided.
The intent of the blog (and the 2011 blog also referred to hear) was to raise what I believe are valid questions regarding image choice for the competition winners. I come from a standpoint of valuing landscape photography very highly and I have always hoped that it could be held with the same regard in the UK as it is in the US and Australia. The main barrier against this in the UK is that photography isn't viewed as art as it might be elsewhere. There are a number of things that are very important to photography in my opinion, and they are both hotly debated. The first is originality *the INTENT to create an original image* and the second is reality (which I won't go into since that wasn't what this blog was about, even if that was the thrust of my 2011 post). LPOTY forms one of the many faces of UK landscape photography (is there another competition with so much exposure) yet in my opinion it does not fairly represent the talented artists that enter and are rejected each year. There is always some outstanding work in the book, but mixed in there are a lot of shots which indicate a desire to show a range of abilities, not just 'the best' images, which hardly seems fair in a competition.
As artists, if we are to be regarded as artists, we need to be creative on some level. There are many creative choices we make before pressing the shutter button, even in a seemingly simple scenario like David's image. It's true that I research locations before I visit them, it's a good way of gauging photographic potential, its also true that I have framed some images in an identical way to images before me (though never intentionally, only as a by-product of the scene in front of me). Many of you rightly point out that this is inevitable unless we are to take intentionally compromised images or otherwise not visit 'honey pot' locations ourselves. Some people have drawn the conclusion that I believe that you can only be an artist if you put in a lot of effort. This is not the case. The comment at the end of my blog is merely to voice that the competition is be judged in a seemingly trivial way (and please I am not a lonely voice here) when so many people work so hard for their images.
So I've skirted the issue raised in the blog up to this point but here it is again. I believe that the winning image shows a level of influence passed which could merely be called 'inspiration'. For me there are too many creative choices that could have been made differently such as: focal length, camera position, crop, lighting, processing etc. It's just a bit to much for me personally. If we are all so open about this then why does the image description not mention the inspiration? It is not an issue I take with David (I even admire that he admitted his influence on his website), or his approach, but rather with the choice of the image as winner. If creativity is as important as I believe it should be in the competition then surely there are other entries (not entrants) that could be more deserving?
One thing I would like to ask you all; If you had shared my opinions on the image, how would you have expressed them? I chose my blog as medium because it was the best way to get my point across and also to raise it with a fair breadth of people. I wrote in I style that I hoped would reduce offence whilst still being direct enough to get my thoughts across. Should I have kept quiet to avoid ruffling feathers? This was always a 'lose lose' situation for me, I'm not completely detached from the fact that some would undoubtedly perceive me negatively for the criticism.
Of course even this post will be read in the context of sour grapes by some (most?) of you, but these are issues that I felt had to be raised with the undesired effect of 'collateral damage'. There are plenty of images in the book that I would have chosen over my own as winner though their creativity and emotional impact, but of course that matters little when people believe I am attacking David personally for winning the competition. Sometimes I wish we weren't all so attached to our art.
Alex
Here are some responses to the many comments on this thread:
Referring to me being a forum member:
Because at that point it wasnt being presented as the best UK landscape photograph of the year, things would be slightly different. There is a paragraph in my blog that should give you an indication of what I think of the image: "Both shots are great. I really like them. Dramatic light, strong composition and a pleasingly abstract nature to the upside down hulls. Though I would not have picked these images, they are good shots, in fact I think they would be hard to improve upon (save perhaps a lighter hand with the sky darkening but that’s my personal taste.) I can understand why David entered the image, he probably hoped like the rest of us that it would get into the book and the exhibition. I can’t say I criticise him at all, afterall he is not alone in drawing inspiration from others and why shouldn’t he produce a similar image?"
Personally I don't feel that anyone is responding out of jealousy (though of course everyone wants to win) and I don't think anyone is being irrational either.
You can read into my blog post what you like, but that is a misrepresentation of what I said. It is true that I value images that I feel are totally original and hard to make more than roadside shots. However whilst I think those images may be 'better' I don't use the opposite logic that easier images are therefore bad. In fact sometimes on Dartmoor I will see a shot of a heavily photographed location that I know like the back of my hand that shows a spark of creativity, those images I admire even more.
The slanging is one sided, I take issue with the competition, not with yourself. Once again I apologise for the offence that has been caused as a result of my blog.
Personally I don't really think anyone has been slagging you off. I've received private emails and messages regarding this and still people are complaining about the competition. Yes the originality of your image is called into question, and by association you obviously are accused of creating an image that isnt creative (or even copied, depending on the opinion of the individual) but I think people are remaining civil.
[/QUOTE]
This is a more eloquent way of stating the issue
It's definitely true that had you not freely admitted the influence this never would have come about. I don't actually look to find fault in the winners, I only notice really obvious issues. I only arrived at your website because someone told me who won via Facebook and I set out to find the image. The thing is the mention on your website suggests the influence and on comparing images we see that they are in fact rather similar. The connection is naturally made that the image you took was essentially out of desire to take the same shot.
Agreed, that's the last time I publicly challenge the status quo.
I didn't say or imply that.
I'm obviously regretting posting the blog at this point, I obviously don't like being regarded in this way. The problem is not if anyone thinks 'they can do better' its whether that would even matter. Do the selections really represent the best of UK landscape photography? People do share their rejected images and there are plenty of astonishing and/or inspirational images that have been rejected in favour of honey pot shots indistinguishable from the many others of the same subject that are surely submitted. Again, this isn’t to say that the photographers are at fault, just the selections. LPOTY is a business first and a showcase of the best UK talent second in my opinion.
The thing is I am really deconstructing the competition, not the images. It would be almost impossible to criticise the competition image selections without referring to the images. The inevitable result is I come across as bitter.
Whilst he isn’t necessarily attacking you, he does raise some interesting points but which are all moot really.
I agree
This is slightly off topic, but the point was that the image was selected despite breaking the rules, a scene that is totally impossible is presented as real and selected as a winner. I think this will erode peoples already dubious belief that photos represent reality and that is the great power that photography has over other arts; believability.
I'm not trying to prove anything, but I would love the competition to change so that: 1. The rules are followed and enforced 2. The winning images represent the best of UK Landscape Photography 3. That faked images don't trump real ones 4. That creativity and imagination are encouraged.
- Messages
- 1,941
- Name
- Jacob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
alexnail said:
Well done Alex for coming out and explaining your thoughts behind the competition. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with questioning the competition which does appear to stand as a representation of the best in UK landscape photography.
I think for this reason your blog post was entirely justified however it maybe that some parts could have been written a little more eloquently. Surely it is justifiable for someone to question the originality of the winning image (which represents the best landscape image of the year) when it was clearly stated on the winners website that the image was a copy of a similar shot taken 15 years ago?
I don't want to take away from what is still an incredible set of images (I believe some of the others are better than Lindisfarne) that required a top set of skill to capture. However I still agree with Alex when he says that there is a difference between inspired shots and blatant copying. For me this image was shot/processed and cropped virtually identical, that is too far.
Again it's nothing to take away from a great achievement and an even better prize money cheque but its definitely something that the judges should consider for the future. Events over the last few years are starting to lose the competition any legitimacy in the eyes of many photographers. Hopefully the judges will sit down and re-evaluate the competition so it can truly be a showcase of ALL the best landscape photography in the UK
- Messages
- 1,386
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
There's also some merit in people being perceived as being a little 'miffed' in that you blogged about the winner before it had been officially announced due to the publishers and/or Amazon issuing the book whilst it was still under embargo. However, I appreciate that that alone doesn't detract from the sentiments and concerns expressed
I hadn't seen the post and comments on Alex's blog until now. It isn't the only place that it is being discussed. It has certainly caused some controversy, with more than a few people considering it a 'copy' of the original.
I'm not sure I would be comfortable doing it but each to their own.
I'm not sure I would be comfortable doing it but each to their own.
Alex, if I shared your views I would have addressed my comments and concerns to the organizers and judges of the competition - have you done this?
As I said in my comment on your blog, lighten up. I'll say too, let it go, at least on forums,twitter and your blog. Be big enough to let it go or take your criticisms and opinions to the people who, if they value them, can act accordingly - but then that won't get you publicity.
Caroline
- Messages
- 323
- Name
- Alex Nail
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks Caroline. There is so much I would like to disagree with there! Surely you can understand why I am replying to this thread? It seems there was A LOT of misunderstanding...
This year I did not take my concerns to the organizers, but I have done so in previously. You can understand why they might be unapologetic about their choice of winning image. Any concession on their part would have looked bad, so I didn't bother. The organizers will be aware through use of the hashtags on Twitter I am sure. I would also be surprised if they are not aware of this thread.
Beleive me, know one wants to let this go more than me, but comments like 'but then that won't get you publicity' are hard to let go.
- Messages
- 661
- Name
- Mark Littlejohn
- Edit My Images
- No
That is the first bitter comment I've read here and rather unjustified I think. I don't think Alex was being personal in any respect of his argument whereas you certainly are.
I don't see anything wrong with debating the merits of an image. If we all just said "Great image" every time we saw a picture the world would be a tad boring. In the day of the internet and the digital camera its extremely hard to take any image with any degree of originality. I live near Ullswater and I don't think there is a picture there that hasn't been done before. It all comes down to our own vision of what we take and our processing and processing of it. In this case I like Davids darker and more mysterious processing which gives the boats a distinctly different feel. His only mistake (in my opinion) was to remove reference to Peter Clark from his website. I can understand his feelings when he did but I think its good that Peter has been re-credited with the inspiration.
I still think Delamere Forrest is the better picture and I'm more than a tad envious of Davids black and white processing technique.
- Messages
- 16,938
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Why do people over involve themselves in these matters? It's between the OP and the guy who wrote the blog, otherwise, you either like the images or not.
I wouldn't even post my thoughts on the main image as I'd be attacked, but I really like the others. Well done OP.
I wouldn't even post my thoughts on the main image as I'd be attacked, but I really like the others. Well done OP.
- Messages
- 21,339
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Interesting thread.
On the boats issue I think I prefer Peter Clarks version as being a bit lighter but the OP has his own processing style as seen in Delaware forest which is very good.
I actually prefer copse out of the four images, very Michael Kenna. I like Marias tree but find the background a little strange.
Copying the shot is an interesting discussion, especially as I'm currently covering morales in photography as part of my course. There's the obvious and famous edited photos such as Brian Walski and Adnan Hajj but that's reportage.
What's acceptable in producing a fine art image, such as these landscapes? Certainly they've been processed beyond how they naturally appeared but is that wrong?
There's two interesting points raised. Firstly Maria's Tree
I have no idea what the rules were for the competition but would like to discuss this purely as an image. Even if this was a combination of two images, one to get the best angle of the tree, the other for the power station in the landscape, as a piece of art would this be wrong? The lighting on the tree is different to the power station, but that could be due to distance, clouds etc. What is is thought is a powerful juxtaposition between the shape of the tree and the shape caused by the power station and smoke plume. Also nature v man (and possibly mans damage to nature), which makes it a powerful image.
Secondly the controversial boats. At first glance it looks like the processing is similarly dark, the angles look similar, however if you look closely there's enough differences to suggest the image was influenced, not copied.
But then, at which point do we not copy ideas. Who hasn't seen images and mentally stored them to try, be it in the same location or elsewhere? On my course we are constantly being told to research other photographers. I saw a stunning exhibition of Michael Kenna's work in Verona this year and would have said if asked that Copse was a piece of his work.
It's said there's no original photos left on this world, so is it wrong to copy or reference others work? I guess it comes down to how closely it's copied, both in the composition and processing and then peoples perception of whether it's flattery, deception or possibly laziness. However as mentioned by the OP, sometimes scenes just have that one composition.
Well done OP on the win. At the end of the day it's the judges decision and all photography/art is subjective, that's what makes it varied, interesting.
And well done TP on an interesting thread. I'd be interested on peoples views on the morales of photography and where peoples lines would be.
On the boats issue I think I prefer Peter Clarks version as being a bit lighter but the OP has his own processing style as seen in Delaware forest which is very good.
I actually prefer copse out of the four images, very Michael Kenna. I like Marias tree but find the background a little strange.
Copying the shot is an interesting discussion, especially as I'm currently covering morales in photography as part of my course. There's the obvious and famous edited photos such as Brian Walski and Adnan Hajj but that's reportage.
What's acceptable in producing a fine art image, such as these landscapes? Certainly they've been processed beyond how they naturally appeared but is that wrong?
There's two interesting points raised. Firstly Maria's Tree
Also love Ria's tree and have photographed it many times myself and know that from that angle, the power station should be behind you and to the right
I have no idea what the rules were for the competition but would like to discuss this purely as an image. Even if this was a combination of two images, one to get the best angle of the tree, the other for the power station in the landscape, as a piece of art would this be wrong? The lighting on the tree is different to the power station, but that could be due to distance, clouds etc. What is is thought is a powerful juxtaposition between the shape of the tree and the shape caused by the power station and smoke plume. Also nature v man (and possibly mans damage to nature), which makes it a powerful image.
Secondly the controversial boats. At first glance it looks like the processing is similarly dark, the angles look similar, however if you look closely there's enough differences to suggest the image was influenced, not copied.
But then, at which point do we not copy ideas. Who hasn't seen images and mentally stored them to try, be it in the same location or elsewhere? On my course we are constantly being told to research other photographers. I saw a stunning exhibition of Michael Kenna's work in Verona this year and would have said if asked that Copse was a piece of his work.
It's said there's no original photos left on this world, so is it wrong to copy or reference others work? I guess it comes down to how closely it's copied, both in the composition and processing and then peoples perception of whether it's flattery, deception or possibly laziness. However as mentioned by the OP, sometimes scenes just have that one composition.
Well done OP on the win. At the end of the day it's the judges decision and all photography/art is subjective, that's what makes it varied, interesting.
And well done TP on an interesting thread. I'd be interested on peoples views on the morales of photography and where peoples lines would be.
- Messages
- 7,882
- Edit My Images
- No
If I had written my thesis in the way the second photo had been influenced by the first I'd be in the dock for plagiarism
- Messages
- 2,138
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This thread is excellent, and thanks Alex for posting.
I went and read the blog post and was amazed that a 'straight' copy of a fifteen year old photo actually WON the competition. It is as if the judges aren't really clued up on the history of landscape photography ... what kind of people are they?
Both versions are beautiful, great photos. Really great photos. I'm sure if I had a mind to I'd love to have a go at making another one, just for the exercise. I'd be way to embarrassed to enter it into any competitions though!
No earthly way such a straight copy should be winning a major prize : and there's no way to sugar coat that.
It is a brilliant copy, it really is.
I went and read the blog post and was amazed that a 'straight' copy of a fifteen year old photo actually WON the competition. It is as if the judges aren't really clued up on the history of landscape photography ... what kind of people are they?
Both versions are beautiful, great photos. Really great photos. I'm sure if I had a mind to I'd love to have a go at making another one, just for the exercise. I'd be way to embarrassed to enter it into any competitions though!
No earthly way such a straight copy should be winning a major prize : and there's no way to sugar coat that.
It is a brilliant copy, it really is.
- Messages
- 21,339
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Straight copy?
It's close but taken at different times of the day, at a slightly different angle, the lighting is different and the castle/mount is more prominent in the earlier image. The earlier image feels more balanced, with the sky leading the eye around the frame. The second one concentrates more on the boats with the dark sky around the mount almost hiding it.
I think I also like the processing on the first image, the second feels a little dark to me.
But then it's hard to tell properly on such small images. I bet they look fantastic reproduced large, but that's why I went on the side of influenced (albeit heavily) rather than copied.
But is it morally wrong? Is the issue it won a competition or that the image was copied. For a competition win, that's the judges decision and whether it's right or not would depend on the rules of the competition. You can't deny that there's three images processed similarly with copse as a complete opposite.
It's close but taken at different times of the day, at a slightly different angle, the lighting is different and the castle/mount is more prominent in the earlier image. The earlier image feels more balanced, with the sky leading the eye around the frame. The second one concentrates more on the boats with the dark sky around the mount almost hiding it.
I think I also like the processing on the first image, the second feels a little dark to me.
But then it's hard to tell properly on such small images. I bet they look fantastic reproduced large, but that's why I went on the side of influenced (albeit heavily) rather than copied.
But is it morally wrong? Is the issue it won a competition or that the image was copied. For a competition win, that's the judges decision and whether it's right or not would depend on the rules of the competition. You can't deny that there's three images processed similarly with copse as a complete opposite.
Alex
Fair response to my comments and i accept your arguments and points. I think this thread, for me, is case of agree to disagree.
Alex has his opinions, others have theirs, and the judges have theirs also.
Personally i would like to see this thread archived. I think those who want to congratulate the OP should do, those that want to have a debate about inspiration vs copy should have a seperate thread for just that.
Its a shame to see a great shot, a prize winning shot, be pulled down into a quagmire of debate that should be kept seperate.
I hope we can all now park this and enjoy the OPs work.
Kind Regards
Fair response to my comments and i accept your arguments and points. I think this thread, for me, is case of agree to disagree.
Alex has his opinions, others have theirs, and the judges have theirs also.
Personally i would like to see this thread archived. I think those who want to congratulate the OP should do, those that want to have a debate about inspiration vs copy should have a seperate thread for just that.
Its a shame to see a great shot, a prize winning shot, be pulled down into a quagmire of debate that should be kept seperate.
I hope we can all now park this and enjoy the OPs work.
Kind Regards
- Messages
- 21,339
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Is not photography art? Doesn't all art provoke debate, discussion, by it's very mature of being subjective?
Why should the thread be closed? There's often discussions about critique being just 'nice shot' and it would be a shame if this thread was stopped for having anything else unit other than nice shot comments.
I think the OP should be thoroughly congratulated, not only for his images, his competition win (and the prize money ) but also for publishing such thought provoking images. Surely that is a sign of good or great art?
Why should the thread be closed? There's often discussions about critique being just 'nice shot' and it would be a shame if this thread was stopped for having anything else unit other than nice shot comments.
I think the OP should be thoroughly congratulated, not only for his images, his competition win (and the prize money
) but also for publishing such thought provoking images. Surely that is a sign of good or great art?
- Messages
- 2,138
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think neither is the issue.
That photo is marvellous and good enough to win competitions!
Everyone should copy great photos : I'm sure its an excellent way to improve.
Is not photography art? Doesn't all art provoke debate, discussion, by it's very mature of being subjective?
Why should the thread be closed? There's often discussions about critique being just 'nice shot' and it would be a shame if this thread was stopped for having anything else unit other than nice shot comments.
I think the OP should be thoroughly congratulated, not only for his images, his competition win (and the prize money
Fair point - but i think you have misinterpreted what i was suggesting.
I wasnt suggesting that the subject of copy / imitate / inspiration shouldnt be discussed. Perhaps its better in its own thread rather than hijacking a thread which was simply started for a guy to share his winning pics.
Its gone off topic slightly and is more about what constitutes inspiration as opposed to being about the OPs entries, methods, whats he going to spend all his winnings on, has he had lots of commercial interest etc etc.
After all, this is just the beginning for him i suspect. There will be alot of interest and it would be good to know how all this pans out for him over the coming months. Quite exciting for him i imagine. Good luck to him and i hope that he enjoys it all. Great images and processing.
Last edited:
OP
cannockwolf
<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
- Messages
- 2,858
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks for posting Alex, not all the comments you quoted me on were aimed at you or your site, the other sites I wouldn't post on as as theres only one loser in a witch hunt!
I don't mind this discussion it's civilised and has reasoned views, I really don't mind people not liking my processing it's personal preference, but a lot of posts around the web are actually saying I shouldn't be allowed to take the shot!
Also people have posted on other sites that they are identical in crop, comp and processing style yet they prefer the original??? if they are identical how can they prefer one or the other?
I don't mind this discussion it's civilised and has reasoned views, I really don't mind people not liking my processing it's personal preference, but a lot of posts around the web are actually saying I shouldn't be allowed to take the shot!
Also people have posted on other sites that they are identical in crop, comp and processing style yet they prefer the original??? if they are identical how can they prefer one or the other?
OP
cannockwolf
<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
- Messages
- 2,858
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Please don't say that, i'll be getting conspiracy accusations saying i stole it from Kenna.
on a serious note Ill look him up as ive not heard of him... honest!
OP
cannockwolf
<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
- Messages
- 2,858
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Well done
cheers mate
OP
cannockwolf
<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
- Messages
- 2,858
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
sh#t i just googled him and found this pic
http://sevsone.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/michael_kenna_04.jpeg
I am really doomed aint I
http://sevsone.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/michael_kenna_04.jpeg
I am really doomed aint I
OP
cannockwolf
<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
- Messages
- 2,858
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
thanks.
Ive just checked out Michael Kenna and i do like his stuff right up my street, he can be quite dark to, although a lot of people would call this over processed lol
thanks for pointing him out
Ive just checked out Michael Kenna and i do like his stuff right up my street, he can be quite dark to, although a lot of people would call this over processed lol
thanks for pointing him out
Congratulations!! LOVE the second image.
Also love Ria's tree and have photographed it many times myself and know that from that angle, the power station should be behind you and to the right
Manipulation of images is allowed in at least one of the categories so I'd guess that is the category it was entered into. If the cooling towers make it into the shot then I'd have expected the other towers around it to be in the shot as well so I would say it has been manipulated to that extent. Maybe David could clarify.
OP
cannockwolf
<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
- Messages
- 2,858
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
i edited the roof tops out but that is the position of the towers if you stand there you will see them
- Messages
- 24
- Edit My Images
- No
Next best thing is using google street view
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=ru...4MnNCPVy8c5IAQdSQ&cbp=11,114.84,,2,-4.47&z=13
- Messages
- 21,339
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Part of the blurb I read from his exhibition mentioned him using long exposures to get his effect. Something to think about?
Go take your mind off it by taking an image of a wolf jumping a gate or something
Last edited:
- Messages
- 661
- Name
- Mark Littlejohn
- Edit My Images
- No
Michael Kenna has been asked about plagarism a few times - the points he raises are here
There are an awful lot of mono long exposure folk out there who do exactly the same thing. I don't think you can accuse them all of copying. If its a style we like then sooner or later pictures are bound to overlap.
Personally I find Kenna a wee bit dry. Horses and courses. We all like something different. I like Michael Levin a lot and there are a lot of people producing similar images. Hardly surprising as he runs a number of workshops. If you pay to go on one of his workshops and like that style it would be more of a surprise if you suddenly started doing colour pictures of flowers.
I like the quote on David Clapps site
"Tries not to look at other successful peoples work in fear of losing personal identity."
There are an awful lot of mono long exposure folk out there who do exactly the same thing. I don't think you can accuse them all of copying. If its a style we like then sooner or later pictures are bound to overlap.
Personally I find Kenna a wee bit dry. Horses and courses. We all like something different. I like Michael Levin a lot and there are a lot of people producing similar images. Hardly surprising as he runs a number of workshops. If you pay to go on one of his workshops and like that style it would be more of a surprise if you suddenly started doing colour pictures of flowers.
I like the quote on David Clapps site
"Tries not to look at other successful peoples work in fear of losing personal identity."
- Messages
- 323
- Name
- Alex Nail
- Edit My Images
- Yes
David did clarify:
I hope David was crossing his fingers when he wrote that.
- Messages
- 21,339
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That's brilliant and I'll nick that reference for my next learning log entry - ta. Very interesting, especially the big about standing on tripod holes. I wonder if gps locational info (such as now found in the mapping of Lightroom ot through other websites) is also to blame?
Last edited:
Part of the blurb I read from his exhibition mentioned him using long exposures to get his effect. Something to think about?
Go take your mind off it by taking an image of a wolf jumping a gate or something
Ouch.
I missed that post but was more thinking about the other towers as opposed to the whole thing.
- Messages
- 5,311
- Name
- Kevin
- Edit My Images
- No
Always a joy viewing your work, a massive well done and deserved winner!
Kevin
Kevin
OP
cannockwolf
<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
- Messages
- 2,858
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
nope dont need to ta
- Status