jkoch2: The peasants who demolished the Montogolfier balloon evidently have many descendents. Perhaps they should also turn their passions against another insidious invention, the camera, which steals people's souls, and captures their misfortunes or oddities for the sake of condescension, ridicule, gawking, voyeurism, or prizes.
Isn't their a bit of hypocrisy though? Who isn't captivated by landscape flyovers or candid shots of private things? The two magical powers people dream about most is the ability to fly or the ability to be invisible. Either power enables one to witness things one otherwise cannot.
Let the biggest liar be the first to say no. Be less touchy about motes in other's eyes and more wary of the logs stuck in our own.
drummercam: You never call anyone names? You never look at flyovers video, or dream of flying, do you? Photo awards aren't given to Lewkowicz or others who peer upon private suffering or violence, are they? Answer "no" to all three, and ... well, truth becomes putty.
The peasants who demolished the Montogolfier balloon evidently have many descendents. Perhaps they should also turn their passions against another insidious invention, the camera, which steals people's souls, and captures their misfortunes or oddities for the sake of condescension, ridicule, gawking, voyeurism, or prizes.
Tony Bonanno: Totally agree with this ban. Anyone who truly appreciates the purpose and mission of our National Parks would readily agree (I think). Unfortunately, there are many out there who think the parks are "playgrounds" to do as they wish or are simply unaware of the legislative mandates regarding our National Parks. Even the military has acknowledged that there are severe restrictions regarding overflights in National Park areas and have altered their training missions, etc. to avoid the air space over the Parks. I was wondering how long it would take before the "drones in the parks" issue hit the media. Someone mentioned wilderness areas. Same restrictions will apply to them also.
Perhaps rules covering "training missions" don't encompass initiation rites and cadet pranks like flying under cable lifts (Aviano) or the bridge over the Royal Gorge. Wink-wink.
drummercam: "a license that demonstrates basic capability to operate a drone safely"
Every driver in America has a license showing capability to operate a vehicle, and what, we have 55,000-some fatalities a year? Millions of fender benders? I've already had a quad that some chucklehead was flying miss me by less than a foot, and I'm simply no longer interested in someone else's toys in my face, just like I don't want some kid's radio-controlled car underfoot on a public sidewalk.
That chucklehead obviously attracted a chowderhead gawker very close. Drones, being scarce, tend to be something one looks for by choice. A fool (licensed or not) who lofts one in a crowded area isi begging trouble. But presumably a license would explicitly demand that operation not be near any people other than the operator(s).
Unleashed pets, hurtled balls or rocks, and errant bicycles certainly result in more public injuries or mess.
Aren't cameras are a public nuisance too? Fine or imprison people who photograph people in public without their written permission and due compensation. Phones exempted, of course.
imarollingstone: Great news. National Parks are not the place for this type of photography. There are plenty of places in Yosemite where you can get a birds eye view already. You just might have to hike a bit.
Hike, and then step back or lean, just a little further, just a little further, until ...
hydrospanner: I'd really enjoy being a drone ban enforcer.
As soon as there's reports of an illegal drone, you drive out to the location and blast it from the sky. Yep. That's the job for me.
In public areas, are gunshots less dangerous than drones?
Swarms of drones hovering over landmark vistas certainly could become a nuisance, as well as a danger. In addition to noise, people grossly underestimate the difficulty of navigation and recovery. However, thundering caravans of motor vehicles (bikes in particular) are also an annoyance.
Drone enthusiasts might seek authorization to fly over remote National Forests, or even BLM wastes, but audiences probably won't credit anything oother than flyovers of stuff they recognize immediately. In Colorado, where any sort of private tresspass is enforceable by gunshot, weed may be the only legal way to fly high.
Craig from Nevada: A step in the right direction.
The Yosemite Valley is one of the most overused pieces of national park in the US. They should ban automobiles and tour busses from the valley as the next step.
If you want an aerial view, go hike to Cloud's Rest or North Dome.
Hike early mornings only, or be at risk of afternoon lightning bolts.
alpha90290: If photographer want to take photos from the air, they should use a balloon. Tied the camera on a weather balloon with string and let it fly to mid air with hand holding onto the string.I remember seeing someone doing that but forgot where is the link.It is more quiet and cheaper than drone.
Balloons cannot be lofted in any wind, don't steer, and also get lost. Tanks of helium are expensive. Hot air balloons must be large and can be hazardous. Not a cheap substitute. Perhaps one could train hawks or geese to carry POV cameras, but they have minds of their own and their predations or honking can be disruptive.
My narrative would have gotten no further than: "Stepping onto the ice, a crack rippled under my feet, and down I plunged into the frigid depths."
mcshan: Whenever DPR posts a story about photos winning awards it is always the same handful out here that wrap their arms around the results and lecture others on how to define art. Art is very subjective. Award winning? Milli Vanilli won a Grammy as best new artist in part for their singing.
If the "award" in this story was titled "best Photo by a Soccer Mom" would the photos be heralded in the same way? I am not so sure.
It is nice that Sony gives out awards but in the end it really doesn't mean much.
No one every got fired for being the 100th in line to agree with the rest and bestow an award. No one ever got hired for being the schmuck contestants that weren't pre-vetted as flavor of the month.
Mapel: This is very interesting... and that tree is really huge!
City photos taken in the 1850s would have shown streets with hardly any people at all. The film (or light sensitive plate) was that slow.
If I had to pick the "best" of 140,000 photos, I confess I might have to start by dumping 99.9% to reduce the heap to the 25 to 50 that my poor mind might be able to assess with care. So, yes, I would probably throw out all the pictures of pets, wild animals, muscle autos, cycles, air shows, seacoasts, weapons, flowers, sports, sunsets, touchdowns, and whatnot that the DOWG* crowd savors, but whose culinary equivalent would be a Big Mac with fries.
Art, like religion, pierces complacency and makes us humble.
But let's also be honest that most photography is staged, selective, and impossible to separate from bias and the whim of taste. No different than music, food, or camera brands.
* Disgruntled Old Wood Guys
Back in 1912, rich benefactors donated "trophies" or "oddities" to museums for visitors to gawk at. Everyone wore hats and jackets, even indoors.
Today to cut and remove of an ancient Sequoia specimen for museum display would rank as "arborcide." Everyone wears sunglasses or ear-pods, and fiddles with their phone, even indoors.
The photos in the -20 Celsius underground tomb will survive 500 times longer than in NYC? What does that mean? The Lascaux and Altamira paintings have lasted over 17,000 years. Would paper prints outlast metal oxide pigments on rock?
The Hon. Charles Rangel (House, NY 13th District) has been in office longer than that!
dstanton: I have been to Whittier, Alaska, several times. It's hard to describe the town and the individuals who live there. Never thought of doing that...
Jen did a great job to bring the story and images together.
In fact I may have met Jen while I was there shooting images of marine resources for a non-profit (2012 and 2013). Staying there is amazing; the surrounding mountains, the sound (bay) and the marine life is hard to ignore. And the people are both friendly and a bit scary. Not much of a town there to visit. But the views are wonderful.
The winning piece will need an accompanying narrative or text. "Not Much of a Town" is a great grab of a title. But to explore the life of those scary people may have to depend more on fiction than interviews. Don't you think?
jaaboucher: Duke's Documentary Studies program has turned out some amazing graduates lately. I can't wait to see who wins this!
A UNC graduate documentary about the Tarheel FB team will have a fair chance, surely.
Dis hear po' guy lyke Sony, but tink da a65 iz mo' beddah bung fa buck.
jackf00: Still neither Final review nor First impression review of the already shipping GH4 flagship from Panasonic.Shame on DPReview !!While most of competitor site of DPReview have already posted at least a long Preview or a Review, DPReview still don't go further than a single short and poor half page "quick summary" of the GH4 new Panasonic's flagship , three month after annoucement and now after it is released and shipping.What a pity !
Not first time for Panasonic products, as DPReview provided the final Review of GH3 only 7 monthes after announcement and 5 monthes after release !Same for GX7 and generally speaking for every Panasonic product !
What's the reason ? Come on DP Review, be more professional !
Full reviews are not cost-efficient. They draw no more "hits" than the previews, or even a copy of the manufacturers' announcements. At best, they merely attract a handful of owners who complain the review is not positive enough, or trolls who "diss" the brand altogether.
George Veltchev: This crap does not work at all, let me tell you ... one of my top images has received more than 2500 like/favorite marks in 500px for a period of 12 hours !!! ( an image of a charging elephant bull ) The same image has been visited more than 18 000 times, reached 98.9 % on the chart after that ... and here at MIT algorithm it has received a pathetic score of 3. something ! Looking at these melancholic goats above I can clearly say that your seemingly complex mathematical approach is nothing short than a thin-walled soap-bubble ....
Perhaps visits to one's own pictures were discounted from the test data.