False image denounced

[GrahamL]

According to the BBC website Nikon has had to take down an images that won a competition in Singapore. The winning photographer's monochrome image of a jet apparently flying across the top of a vertical access shaft was spotted by others after Nikon posted it as an obviously edited image. Then to cap it all someone noticed it was a very similar image to one that another Singaporean had posted a year ago on instagram. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-35457135

I guess this won't be the last but nice to know folk are on their toes in our global photographic community.

[Mike Farley]

There are two issues raised here. The first is whether manipulated images should be allowed in competitions. Combining elements from two or more shots to create a composite is nearly as old as photography itself and provided it contributes to the final result I fail to see the problem. Unless the competition rules prohibited such images, which they did not, the entry was as valid as any other and was obviously judged as such. What let it down was the poor quality of the Photoshop editing which was not picked up by those assessing the entries and the author's subsequent denial that the shot was not as seen. It was not purporting to be a documentary record but an artistic work and his motivation was possibly due to the frequently unjustified stigma attached to apparently straight shots which are anything but.

As to the matter of originality, clearly it would be unacceptable to take someoene else's picture and submit it as one's own, but that does not seem to be the case in this instance. A plane passing overhead which appears in a gap is becoming a familiar trope; the author could have found the scene for himself and unwittingly replicated another's work. Even if the photographer had been aware of the earlier shot and deliberately set out to duplicate it, while showing a lack of imagination it does not automatically disqualify it. Artists have always taken inspiration from each other, although admittedly a more or less straight copy is taking that to extremes and the author of the original work is understandably piqued. Maybe there are copyright issues, but given that the idea has been around for a whlle it would probably be difficult to make a valid case.

My view is that if Nikon initially thought that the shot was good enough to win, poor Photoshop work and all, they should have ignored the baying Internet mob and let the result stand unless it could be proved that the image was not the work of the entrant. As it is, no one comes out well from this incident.

[Mike Farley]

What The Duck

[Iggy]

A few years ago (2008) I produced a rather brash piece for a KCL Art for the Planet Competition focusing on saving the planet. Being no painter, it took me a month to come up with the idea of using the beautiful red brick buildings opposite where I worked as a backdrop. The montage involved 3 Guys building images, a low flying jumbo jet (one of 50 or more shot in Isleworth) and finished off with the Indian Ocean off Goa. To give it a bit of texture, I threw on a lot of fast drying acrylic paint on to the sea. Called it "Guys Campus underwater". The competition was judged by a panel of 5 that included the Director of the London Centre for Arts. Below is the image before it had the paint put on. I won the staff category and a prize of £500 and the image graced the Strand student common room for a year.

Previous photographic efforts at KCL included a self portrait at work that got me a five minute audience with Princess Anne!
Iggy

[Mike Farley]

Previous photographic efforts at KCL included a self portrait at work that got me a five minute audience with Princess Anne!

Darn, I have just used the second prize joke in another post and it is too soon for a repeat.

Belated congratulations for the wins.

[Iggy]

Thanks Mike. My photo shop skills today are much the same as in 2008!
Iggy

[Iggy]

"False image" is rather harsh if the photographer took all the images.
I am of the same opinion as Mike.
In any case we do all sorts of manipulations with our own images in Photoshop and Lightroom.
Those who have taken delivery of the CCC Anniversary Book as I did yesterday will have found a similar image here!
Iggy

[davidc]

Yeah this whole escapade hasn't gone unnoticed by myself. It's interesting, I posted my image (which appears in the book) on Singapore photo forums and suddenly there were dozens of similar ones. I have more than a slight feeling the guy copied my image but can't prove anything

[Iggy]

As Mike said:

Artists have always taken inspiration from each other

I am hoping to make a trip down to Singapore one of these days to attend AQUARAMA!
Iggy

[Mike Farley]

Yeah this whole escapade hasn't gone unnoticed by myself. It's interesting, I posted my image (which appears in the book) on Singapore photo forums and suddenly there were dozens of similar ones. I have more than a slight feeling the guy copied my image but can't prove anything

What surprised me about Nikon's choice of the winning image was not the poor image manipulation, but selecting a shot of which there are many examples. Mind you, that's not the first time a hackneyed* subject has succeeded in competitions and I doubt it will be the last. I would have thought that Nikon would at least have been aware of the possibility that the plane had been added and checked the quality of the post production work. And yes, I did think of your shot when I saw the winner's and wondered about the connection to Singapore; your comment about it being the inspiration for others makes sense of that.

* All credit to the photographer who takes the first one, though.