Reading mode: Light Dark

Prestigious BBC nature photo contest controversy

Go to last post
J

Justme

Forum Pro
Messages
22,652
Solutions
2
Reaction score
1,323
Location
Ontario., CA
There have been allegations of cheating in the BBC Nature photo competition, one of the most prestigious of its kind in the world. It has to do with the winning photo. Investigation is still underway. Not sure if anything will come of it. You can read for yourself. The page is in Finnish so I ran it through google translate.

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.suomenluonto.fi%2Fbbc-luontokuvakisassa-epaillaan-huijausta&sl=fi&tl=en

--
--

--

I know you mean well but please do not embed my images into the forum. Thanks for respecting that.
http://www.pbase.com/golfpic/some_recent_shots
http://www.pbase.com/golfpic/a_red_fox_family

 
MusicmanUK said:
There's an English version of the story on the Finnish site itself

http://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations
Click to expand...
Maybe a tempest that shouldn't have escaped the teapot? On looking at the so-called evidence, I see a different wolf, with the tame one having more gray on the muzzle as well as a battered ear. As for suspicions raised because the wolf didn't "sneak" between the gate bars, I took another look at the size of the animal and the size of spaces between the bars. If that wolf is in pursuit of something on the order of a U.S. whitetail deer, it isn't going to slam on the brakes to slow down enough to "sneak" through anything. It would follow the deer over the fence while maintaining or increasing speed.

I could be wrong, but it strikes me that the evidence is beyond shaky.

--
Charlie Self



http://www.charlieselfonline.com
 
I hope you are right. This is an incredible shot and it would be very disappointing if the animal is found to be non-wild.

:)
Charlie Self said:
MusicmanUK said:
There's an English version of the story on the Finnish site itself

http://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations
Click to expand...
Maybe a tempest that shouldn't have escaped the teapot? On looking at the so-called evidence, I see a different wolf, with the tame one having more gray on the muzzle as well as a battered ear. As for suspicions raised because the wolf didn't "sneak" between the gate bars, I took another look at the size of the animal and the size of spaces between the bars. If that wolf is in pursuit of something on the order of a U.S. whitetail deer, it isn't going to slam on the brakes to slow down enough to "sneak" through anything. It would follow the deer over the fence while maintaining or increasing speed.

I could be wrong, but it strikes me that the evidence is beyond shaky.

--
Charlie Self



http://www.charlieselfonline.com
Click to expand...
 
The investigation is still ongoing. It's not only the wolf but the location/setting. They must have used Levels in PS to lighten the winning photo to show more the background and surrounding habitat. Some people are seeing good similarities in the two photos.
Smudger79 said:
I hope you are right. This is an incredible shot and it would be very disappointing if the animal is found to be non-wild.

:)
Charlie Self said:
MusicmanUK said:
There's an English version of the story on the Finnish site itself

http://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations
Click to expand...
Maybe a tempest that shouldn't have escaped the teapot? On looking at the so-called evidence, I see a different wolf, with the tame one having more gray on the muzzle as well as a battered ear. As for suspicions raised because the wolf didn't "sneak" between the gate bars, I took another look at the size of the animal and the size of spaces between the bars. If that wolf is in pursuit of something on the order of a U.S. whitetail deer, it isn't going to slam on the brakes to slow down enough to "sneak" through anything. It would follow the deer over the fence while maintaining or increasing speed.

I could be wrong, but it strikes me that the evidence is beyond shaky.

--
Charlie Self



http://www.charlieselfonline.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--

I know you mean well but please do not embed my images into the forum. Thanks for respecting that.
http://www.pbase.com/golfpic/some_recent_shots
http://www.pbase.com/golfpic/a_red_fox_family

 
My take is that this is an impossible rule to enforce.
The more regulations that are written, the more complex defining becomes.
The judges of the competition have dug themselves a hole.

Right or wrong, captive or wild, the photograph should speak for itself. Nothing else counts. That's my opinion.
 
I wonder how the photographer came to be standing next to this gate with his camera ready, prefocused, able to compose this shot just as the wolf was jumping over the fence chasing whatever he was chasing.
I dunno, I hope they find concrete evidence one way or the other.
--
Fiat Lux
 
I agree. Its clearly a totally different wolf.
Charlie Self said:
MusicmanUK said:
There's an English version of the story on the Finnish site itself

http://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations
Click to expand...
Maybe a tempest that shouldn't have escaped the teapot? On looking at the so-called evidence, I see a different wolf, with the tame one having more gray on the muzzle as well as a battered ear. As for suspicions raised because the wolf didn't "sneak" between the gate bars, I took another look at the size of the animal and the size of spaces between the bars. If that wolf is in pursuit of something on the order of a U.S. whitetail deer, it isn't going to slam on the brakes to slow down enough to "sneak" through anything. It would follow the deer over the fence while maintaining or increasing speed.

I could be wrong, but it strikes me that the evidence is beyond shaky.

--
Charlie Self



http://www.charlieselfonline.com
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/charleycoleman

http://www.new-oxford.com/users/charley.coleman
 
I also think that photographs should speak for themselves, however, the rules of the competition stated that captive animals should be clearly distinguished, as the organisers were going to show a preference for wild animal shots.

If it is deemed to be the same wolf and captive, it means that the entrant didn't disclose the fact it was a captive animal and therefore could be seen as cheating.

This is one of the best shots I've ever seen though, IMO, and I do hope it is legitimate and has not been entered under a false pretense.

:)
Rifleman1776 said:
My take is that this is an impossible rule to enforce.
The more regulations that are written, the more complex defining becomes.
The judges of the competition have dug themselves a hole.

Right or wrong, captive or wild, the photograph should speak for itself. Nothing else counts. That's my opinion.
Click to expand...
 
Ah. Well, that answered that. Thanks. So somewhere there ought to be a picture of whatever the wolf was chasing to clear this whole thing up.
Caat said:
arizonadesertrat said:
I wonder how the photographer came to be standing next to this gate with his camera ready, prefocused, able to compose this shot just as the wolf was jumping over the fence chasing whatever he was chasing.
I dunno, I hope they find concrete evidence one way or the other.
--
Fiat Lux
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/charleycoleman

http://www.new-oxford.com/users/charley.coleman
Click to expand...
--
Fiat Lux
 
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/photo.do?photo=2554&category=56&group=4

For those interested.

I follow this competition quite closely and have entered the last three years. Its generally of an excellent standard, although every year there are a handful that make you think "excuse me? how did that get selected?". This isn't one of those.

Edit: although personally I think the use of camera traps is a bit iffy. Nevertheless a stunning shot in it's own right. The competition, I think anyway, allows a little too much freedom in the rules - one year a ferret had been bribed with toast, another a shot of a swallow was taken through a window frame which had been placed by the photographer in the swallows regular flight path, and another year a photo of a heron feeding was shot from under the water but in face said water was a fish tank on stlits, sure the heron was wild but.....

--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/charleycoleman

http://www.new-oxford.com/users/charley.coleman
 
Caat said:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/photo.do?photo=2554&category=56&group=4

For those interested.

I follow this competition quite closely and have entered the last three years. Its generally of an excellent standard, although every year there are a handful that make you think "excuse me? how did that get selected?". This isn't one of those.

Edit: although personally I think the use of camera traps is a bit iffy. Nevertheless a stunning shot in it's own right. The competition, I think anyway, allows a little too much freedom in the rules - one year a ferret had been bribed with toast, another a shot of a swallow was taken through a window frame which had been placed by the photographer in the swallows regular flight path, and another year a photo of a heron feeding was shot from under the water but in face said water was a fish tank on stlits, sure the heron was wild but.....

--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/charleycoleman

http://www.new-oxford.com/users/charley.coleman
Click to expand...
Bribing a ferret with toast.............how low can people go :)

Shay
 
shay guevara said:
Caat said:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/photo.do?photo=2554&category=56&group=4

For those interested.

I follow this competition quite closely and have entered the last three years. Its generally of an excellent standard, although every year there are a handful that make you think "excuse me? how did that get selected?". This isn't one of those.

Edit: although personally I think the use of camera traps is a bit iffy. Nevertheless a stunning shot in it's own right. The competition, I think anyway, allows a little too much freedom in the rules - one year a ferret had been bribed with toast, another a shot of a swallow was taken through a window frame which had been placed by the photographer in the swallows regular flight path, and another year a photo of a heron feeding was shot from under the water but in face said water was a fish tank on stlits, sure the heron was wild but.....

--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/charleycoleman

http://www.new-oxford.com/users/charley.coleman
Click to expand...
Bribing a ferret with toast.............how low can people go :)

Shay
Click to expand...
ha! Indeed! :D

It was a good shot though.

edit: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/prevPhoto.do?photo=2321&year=2007&category=9

--
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/charleycoleman

http://www.new-oxford.com/users/charley.coleman
 
The stonework surrounding the wall gap in the park in Madrid (assuming the wooden gate had been removed after competition photo was taken) looks completely different, to me. I can't find a single individual stone that seems to correspond in the two photos, although the curved tree trunk looks similar.

I could take ten photos of broken-down gaps in stone walls in partly wooded areas within five miles of where I live (in Ireland).

If the competition winner could go back and take a verifiable photo of, or bring an independent witness to, the original gateway where the photo was taken - then it would be egg on the face of whoever is ammassing this evidence.
 
The so called "evidence" is a joke.

The second wolf, Ossian, is vaguely similar because its of the same species.

The place in Madrid is vaguely similar because it has rocks and trees. Note the comment, "the skyline is very similar". Cmon...

--
My Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36164047@N06/
 
Rifleman1776 said:
My take is that this is an impossible rule to enforce.
The more regulations that are written, the more complex defining becomes.
The judges of the competition have dug themselves a hole.

Right or wrong, captive or wild, the photograph should speak for itself. Nothing else counts. That's my opinion.
Click to expand...
As a trained photography judge who has participated in nature competitions, it's the nature story that should take precedence and not it's pictorial quality. The competitions I'm involved with have rules that are governed by the PSA (Photographic Society of America) and FIAP (Fédération Internationale de l'Art Photographique).

Based on the article in the OP, it seems their entry form requires you to specify if it ISN'T genuine wildlife...to me this is backwards because if you forget which may have been the situation in this case, you get into trouble. Our own forms are the opposite of that in which we have a checkbox where you can specify if it is genuine wildlife...of course in that case it would definitely be cheating if you check the genuine wildlife box.

The competition itself is at fault here (if they do require the entrant to specify if it's not genuine wildlife). Having been involved in a yearly international salon we've had a lot of language issues with entrants not understanding the entry form and the rules. When running an international competition you have to make things as simple as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

xpatUSA2
Stupid Internet.
Replies
7
Views
61
xpatUSA2
xpatUSA2
C
Found a new Batis 40mm Hands-on Review
Replies
1
Views
93
goodbokeh
goodbokeh
G
The Siena International Photography Awards for 2018
Replies
1
Views
51
abruzzopat
A
L
What happened to the original C1 film styles?
Replies
3
Views
66
myotisone
M
C
Painting or Photography?
Replies
7
Views
10
cf782
C

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top