A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 17th 08, 04:56 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Cynicor[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 191
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

Technically, this is not digital because he took it with 35mm film, but
I can't believe that none of the judges at National Geographic caught
this disaster.

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...our-prize.html
  #2  
Old December 17th 08, 06:57 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Paul Furman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,367
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

Cynicor wrote:
Technically, this is not digital because he took it with 35mm film, but
I can't believe that none of the judges at National Geographic caught
this disaster.

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...our-prize.html


It was in the *viewer's choice* category.
  #3  
Old December 17th 08, 01:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Cynicor[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 191
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

Paul Furman wrote:
Cynicor wrote:
Technically, this is not digital because he took it with 35mm film,
but I can't believe that none of the judges at National Geographic
caught this disaster.

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...our-prize.html



It was in the *viewer's choice* category.


Fair enough. It shouldn't have been accepted into the contest in the
first place, in my opinion.

The photo itself is on the shooter's page:
http://www.usefilm.com/image/1443590.html

For some reason, every time someone makes obviously fake photo-art and
calls it a photograph, or uses eight-sided snowflakes, or a number of
other things that seem to bug only me, you get the predictable comments
like this one from his page: "i dont know why people talking abt rule.is
there any rule for art? if there have some rules than i will say
photography is not a art." It's part of the "stop pointing out this
sucks, you hater" rule.
  #4  
Old December 18th 08, 02:08 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Roy G[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 208
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping


"Cynicor" wrote in message
...
Paul Furman wrote:
Cynicor wrote:
Technically, this is not digital because he took it with 35mm film, but
I can't believe that none of the judges at National Geographic caught
this disaster.

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...our-prize.html



It was in the *viewer's choice* category.


Fair enough. It shouldn't have been accepted into the contest in the first
place, in my opinion.

The photo itself is on the shooter's page:
http://www.usefilm.com/image/1443590.html

For some reason, every time someone makes obviously fake photo-art and
calls it a photograph, or uses eight-sided snowflakes, or a number of
other things that seem to bug only me, you get the predictable comments
like this one from his page: "i dont know why people talking abt rule.is
there any rule for art? if there have some rules than i will say
photography is not a art." It's part of the "stop pointing out this sucks,
you hater" rule.




It is a really crap piece of photoshopping and should be a pretty poorly
placed entry in any photographic competition.

It could be described as a manipulated photograph, but whatever descriptor
is applied in front, it is still a photograph.

Roy G



  #5  
Old December 18th 08, 03:13 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Cynicor[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 191
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

Roy G wrote:
"Cynicor" wrote in message
...
Paul Furman wrote:
Cynicor wrote:
Technically, this is not digital because he took it with 35mm film, but
I can't believe that none of the judges at National Geographic caught
this disaster.

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...our-prize.html

It was in the *viewer's choice* category.

Fair enough. It shouldn't have been accepted into the contest in the first
place, in my opinion.

The photo itself is on the shooter's page:
http://www.usefilm.com/image/1443590.html

For some reason, every time someone makes obviously fake photo-art and
calls it a photograph, or uses eight-sided snowflakes, or a number of
other things that seem to bug only me, you get the predictable comments
like this one from his page: "i dont know why people talking abt rule.is
there any rule for art? if there have some rules than i will say
photography is not a art." It's part of the "stop pointing out this sucks,
you hater" rule.




It is a really crap piece of photoshopping and should be a pretty poorly
placed entry in any photographic competition.

It could be described as a manipulated photograph, but whatever descriptor
is applied in front, it is still a photograph.


Depends on the competition. I believe the rules in this one said "no
manipulation," which I usually think of as meaning "light
sharpening/contrast/saturation OK" but not "take the photo and then
paste in the sky and then paste it in again as a wrong-facing
reflection." On the other hand, he did leave the crooked horizon....
  #6  
Old December 18th 08, 04:12 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Paul Furman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,367
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

Roy G wrote:
Cynicor wrote:

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...our-prize.html


it is still a photograph.


It's two photographs faked together to look like *a* photograph.


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
  #7  
Old December 19th 08, 01:07 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:56:00 -0500, Cynicor wrote:
: Technically, this is not digital because he took it with 35mm film, but
: I can't believe that none of the judges at National Geographic caught
: this disaster.
:
: http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...our-prize.html

Well, it would certainly appear that the "photographer" has no conceptual
understanding of the geometry of reflections. I suppose we may conclude that
the judges don't either. :^|

Bob
  #8  
Old December 19th 08, 10:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Stephen Henning
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 149
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

In article ,
Robert Coe wrote:

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...ic-heres-your-
prize.html


It was a viewers choice award, not a National Geographic judges award.
When National Geographic asked the photographer to send the original, he
withdrew his photo. Case closed.

--
Pardon my spam deterrent; send email to
Cheers, Steve Henning in Reading, PA USA -
http://rhodyman.net
  #9  
Old December 19th 08, 10:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
RichA[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 336
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping


"Stephen Henning" wrote in message
news
In article ,
Robert Coe wrote:

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...ic-heres-your-
prize.html


It was a viewers choice award, not a National Geographic judges award.
When National Geographic asked the photographer to send the original, he
withdrew his photo. Case closed.


Reminds me of when "now next to dead" Time magazine gave all these awards to
absolute crap done with cellphones. There is no artistry or technical
quality involved with people just happening to be at the right place and
right time. So why an award? It's like calling people who were in a
bombing "heroes" when all they did was be there, unknowingly.


  #10  
Old December 20th 08, 02:31 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
savvo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 256
Default Nat Geo contest winner - with horrid Photoshopping

On 2008-12-19, Stephen Henning wrote:
In article ,
Robert Coe wrote:

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.c...al-geographic-
heres-your-prize.html


It was a viewers choice award, not a National Geographic judges award.
When National Geographic asked the photographer to send the original, he
withdrew his photo. Case closed.


I think NG withdrew the photo pending receipt of his negs. But the
effect is the same.

If only the liars around here were so easy to get rid of.

--
savvo orig. invib. man
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amazing Fireworks photography : Photo contest 2nd Place winner [PIC] Cathy Digital Photography 0 July 4th 07 05:52 AM
Digital Infrared Photography Competition February Winner and Grand Prize Winner Annika1980 Digital Photography 0 April 13th 07 03:52 PM
Digital Infrared Photography Competition February Winner and Grand Prize Winner Annika1980 Fine Art, Framing and Display 0 April 13th 07 03:52 PM
Digital Infrared Photography Competition February Winner and Grand Prize Winner Annika1980 Digital ZLR Cameras 0 April 13th 07 03:52 PM
HORRID Experience with Sony Imagestation! Ryan Digital Photography 11 February 21st 05 04:20 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.