[Tweeters] Current Issue of Audubon Magazine-Photoghahy awards and Disqualification Discusion

ELIZABETH THOMPSON calliopehb at comcast.net
Sat Jan 25 17:16:19 PST 2014


Oh how I debate this with myself. I love photographing birds. I have had some really nice shots and some really bad ones. Mostly focus. I do crop my pics sometimes but that is all i have ever done. I recall last summer taking photos with a similar camera and lens as some other birder/photographers and my pics looked not so nice as theirs. We were at a birding outing at the same time.
I can only assume a couple things. Better at stabilization, better camera equipment or better at photoshopping.
More than likely the first two options.

Either way, I still take pictures of birds and every once in a while, I get a nice shot.
Happily birding,
Beth Thompson
Arlington, WA


On Jan 25, 2014, at 9:04 AM, ck park <travelgirl.fics at gmail.com> wrote:


> I suppose it depends on your definition of "photograph" versus "digital image".

>

> mine definition? if i clone away dust bunnies, crop, or maybe apply a bit of sharpness, to me it's still a photograph. the image is as i saw it.

> if, however, i alter the shape(s) of something, alter colours (obvious saturation, HDR, etc) and/or clone away distracting poles, buildings, trees, etc, what you would see is no longer as i saw it, and therefore, while it may be beautiful, interesting, etc, it is a digital image, an interpretation that is no longer a photograph.

>

> this definition is mine, and while shared by many, is not a universal definition. as well, some folks today believe "photograph" == "digital image", that there may be no inherent difference between the two.

>

> your mileage may vary.

>

> 00 caren

> http://www.ParkGallery.org

> george davis creek, north fork

>

>

> On 25 January 2014 03:04, <notcalm at comcast.net> wrote:

> Hello Fellow Tweeters,

>

> There is an interesting discussion regarding alteration of bird photographs and rules for the Annual Photo Contest in the current issue (January, 2014) of Audubon magazine. A great image was disqualified. I am interested in what Tweeter's community members think. I think it is an interesting question.

>

> Many of our best single images of birds and humans are now modified and enhanced to varying degrees. This a now a routine practice for images of female models in fashion magazines. The controversies in many fields, including bird photography include: when should it be disclosed; at what level of change, including enhancement; and what image enhancements should be considered in photo contests. The Audubon Editor asks for feedback.

>

> Thanks,

> Dan Reiff

> Mercer Island

>

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters




More information about the Tweeters mailing list