Fake winning photo on the world's largest nature photo competition?

[frici]

The world's lagest nature photo competition is the BBC Wildlife Photographer of the Year (WPY).
This years winner is José Luis Rodriguez from Spain with the "The storybook wolf".
His photo was choosen from the over 43 000 entries.

The photo is currently being investigated because of a suspected fraud.

http://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations (http://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations)

[jgrussell]

Ouch. If that turns out to be true, what a shame...

[Tom Reichner]

If the allegations are true, then I think it's great that this guy got found out. I do hope that they do a very thorough investigation.

[Karl Johnston]

The wildlife reserve looks too low for a fence. While the background looks similar, look at the rocks - they don't have any resemblance at all.

[JaredLloyd]

A similiar thing recently ocurred in the National Wildlife Refuge Association's photo competition as a Florida based photographer was exposed for fraud. When quesitoned on the matter by the judges of the compeition, he refused to answer the questions and instead ask that his photographs be withdrawn from the competition.

[sue.t]

Interesting. I'm wondering why a wild wolf would jump the gate when it would be much easier to simply scramble over the rocks. However, a tamed/trained wolf would jump if that is what it was trained to do.

Another "hmmmm" is why is the wolf jumping so high to clear that gate? One of my dogs is a jumper ... takes on anything, including a 14' jump from the sundeck to the ground ... and she is expert enough to clear other jumps with the minimum required effort. When in the forest, when she leaps over obstacles her body posture is very different than the wolf in the picture.

AND ... just what is that wolf looking at as it jumps? It's not intensely focused on a target at all ... the eye and face are relaxed.

I'm not sure the two wolves pictured are the same beasts, but I'm not sure the wolf jumping is a wild wolf. And, yes, I've seen numerous wild wolves in numerous circumstances because I lived in the Yukon for 15 years.

[Tom Reichner]

A similiar thing recently ocurred in the National Wildlife Refuge Association's photo competition as a Florida based photographer was exposed for fraud. When quesitoned on the matter by the judges of the compeition, he refused to answer the questions and instead ask that his photographs be withdrawn from the competition.

What type of fraud? Captive animals being passed off as wild ones?

[frici]

the "winner" has been diqualified.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8470962.stm

[Pete W]

All those Highly Commended must now be wondering if they could have won.....

[FSUnoles]

yea this is horrible, how could you accept an award knowing you set it up

[throughlens]

not good... but I don't think that's the first one, neither the last one...

[Lowner]

I see the jumping wolf is still (today) labelled as the winner in the travelling exibition.

Sad as this particular issue is, there are some amazing images on show. My wife read how many entries there were, something over 400,000 would you believe. I've ordered the exhibition brochure, £3.50 well spent.

[Methodical]

Arrrgh I can't see the picture here at work. There is a picture right.

[bobt0248]

I live in Detroit where the exhibit is now at the Detroit Zoo. I have viewed it twice and there are some wonderful pictures. The wolf picture in question was not my favorite. I will have to visit the exhibit again to see if the picture has been taken down.

Bob

[Rhodri.Lew10]

I have to admit that the instant I saw that Wolf photo in a UK National newspaper, my first instinct was that it was set-up. How on earth would a wild Wolf react to a burst of flash in it's face for a start.

[Remington]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/20/wolf-wildlife-photographer-award-stripped


Stripped of the title....

EDIT:

OOPS sorry didnt see someone else posting this above... I'd been following this for a while..

[nzvegan]

As someone else mentioned - my first instinct was also - why would a wild animal expend energy jumping over a fence, when it could quite easily scramble through one of the large gaps in the fence...or onto the stone wall and over...

Anyway - what a jerkhole.

[AdamJL]

I have to admit that the instant I saw that Wolf photo in a UK National newspaper, my first instinct was that it was set-up. How on earth would a wild Wolf react to a burst of flash in it's face for a start.

And of course there's the fact that the shot HAS BEEN TAKEN TWICE by the same photographer.. With a different camera

(note the position of the wolf in this image compared to the one which lost the WPotY title.. and compare the top left section of sky. One's very pink, one has no pink).

Glad he lost his title, and I hope he learns a lesson from this.

[danmix]

here's a copy of the judges report for those who are interested

http://www.deepgreenphotography.com/blog/bbcwolfinvestigation.pdf

Cheers

Daniel

[Tom Reichner]

here's a copy of the judges report for those who are interested

http://www.deepgreenphotography.com/blog/bbcwolfinvestigation.pdf

Cheers

Daniel
I'd say the evidence against him is rather conclusive.

[Lowner]

I have not read the original competition rules. Even if they specifically rule out "tame" wild animals, I'd say a few more images in that exhibition are suspect.

In this case the photographer went beyond what the judges considered acceptable, but where is the line drawn between acceptable and unaccceptable? I encourage "wild" birds into my garden with offerings of sunflower seeds, peanuts and other goodies. This has brought hawks because they prey on the other species. Am I breaking the rules if I luck into a stunning image by doing that?

The rules of any competition are as artificial as that image. "No post processing" is a classic in a lot of rules and recently prevented a news photographer from winning because he had the temerity to very simply remove a small blurry dark shadow from an insignificant portion of the image. Trust me, every image bar none receives some post processing, whether it happens in the camera, or after the event, its ALWAYS there. Jpegs are post processed, they have to be or the files would be a RAW like digital nonsense.

It's time judges the world over came to terms with the digital age and came up with sensible rules. If I'd taken that wolf shot, I might well have entered it myself and probably not even bothered with reading the rules. I suggest is was a simple mistake on his part to start with, until he realised his mistake and started getting defensive.

[TooManyShots]

If I were the judge, I would ask the candidate to submit EXIF data! Did he use a kit lens to capture it? Wide angle? I don't see how you can use a wide angle to capture a wild animal while you are behind the camera!!! Unless it is remote triggered or motion triggered. If a large sum of money is involved, I would at least pay a visit to the shot location. I would ask him what the subject was doing at that time.

[Tom Reichner]

If a large sum of money is involved, I would at least pay a visit to the shot location. I would ask him what the subject was doing at that time.
I agree. It is inconceivable to me that an organization as huge as the BBC would not have an investigative / verification process in place for the image that is the overall winner.

So much is at stake - including their reputation - that you think they'd fly a group of their personnel to the photo location and conduct an interview with the photographer. I would have thought that something like this would have already been the normal protocol that was in place for years.

So, they investigate after they have named him the grand champion? Makes no sense at all.

[Overread]

I honestly thing things like "no post procesing barring the basics" is something that is simply used as a light benchmark point because drawing a finer line is very hard to perform without getting overly complex. Sure we can all debate and come to an agreement with a specific example of a shot, but often as not for a wider context such as rules for a competition its very hard to pin down things to exact points not to perform. You might say no use of certain tools but macro shooters would be up in arms if they could not use the heal tool whilst it might prevent others from cloneing and correcting problems to a far larger extent with the image.
I think its a mine field to be honest and something that needs to be done on a picture by picture basis - not too bad if you whittle things down to a few winning choices after submission,

However this is where I am surprised as well as the lack of communication between the photographer an the BBC. It seems that barring the photo and the little comment not much more was given over at the start and not much more asked for after it was selected to win. Of course this is only going on what we have been shown
As for showing the shoot location that is a sticky point - most of us might be able to show where we took a shot, but maybe not always specifically in a field or woodland environment - especailly a year or two down the line.
Also some photographers might be disinclined to show specific areas where they shot certain animals as a protective factor - either to protect their own interests in capturing further shots or simply for protection of a rare/endangered species that might come under threat if its location were more wildly known of (eg in the UK a white hart will not often be shown in an easily identifiable situation nor will its location be openly revealed so that hte animals is not put under hunting pressure)

For the record before this event went public zoo/captive animal shots were allowed, but it was noted that they would recive lesser attention (ie you'd have to get an outstanding shot and even then might not make much more than an honourable mention as an award). Whilst the use of an animal actor was strictly prohibited. Now there is a policy on no captive animals to be used in the next competition - however that does raise the all important question of just where the line between captive and wild is.

As for the example of lures the animals are still very much wild, but you have brought them under limited control by use of the lure to draw them out for the shot. A very valid method for many animals and as the example of the wolf over the fence showss the BBC had no problem with the use of a lure in the aquiring of the shot (under the understanding of its original explination).

[Lowner]

I tend to dislike the sort of rule where everything is left to the judges discretion. To much room for corrupt behavior by those in power. I don't believe its rocket science to come up with an acceptable set of "generic rules" that everyone can be comfortable with.

[Overread]

True, but you have to balance complex rules with judges - at some point no matter how many rules its all in the judges hands at the end of the day as to what shots win and lose - so one has to trust them to do their job from the start.

Also more complex rules can be very confusing and deture many from entering a competition if they are too restrictive or hard to understand. Of course simple rules can be as well - no major editing can open up a whole world of questions as to what it actually means, but having the judges give the final word at least lets the chance for more images to go through that might otherwise be turned away by a more complex rule setup.

[InternetJunky]

True, but you have to balance complex rules with judges - at some point no matter how many rules its all in the judges hands at the end of the day as to what shots win and lose - so one has to trust them to do their job from the start.

Also more complex rules can be very confusing and deture many from entering a competition if they are too restrictive or hard to understand. Of course simple rules can be as well - no major editing can open up a whole world of questions as to what it actually means, but having the judges give the final word at least lets the chance for more images to go through that might otherwise be turned away by a more complex rule setup.
At issue here is that the photographer lied about the circumstances behind the picture, so it really doesn't matter how many/few rules there are. More rules just mean more things to lie about.

The only way to deal with this is have an open contest where any type of picture goes, and no text is submitted with the picture so it is only based on the merits of the picture (and not based on something like wild -vs- captured animal).

[Lowner]

I tend to agree, leave it wide open and the best image gets the prize. Any amount of manipulation (either in shooting or later) being fair game.

Maybe with a statement of what the judges have been told by the sponsor. Put the boot on the other foot in other words, make the judges and sponsor come under scrutiny.

[arentol]

I tend to agree, leave it wide open and the best image gets the prize. Any amount of manipulation (either in shooting or later) being fair game.


Well, that was far from the best image, and I say that without having seen any of the other images. I just know that since I have seen a dozen images here in these forums in the last week that were better there is no way that was the best in any competition.

The ONLY reason it won was because it was supposedly a capture of a wild animal doing something you would never expect to be able to catch it doing.

Take away the 'wild' part, and then suddenly it is just an average picture of a tame animal, which would never win anything.

[photo kid]

pretty sad when competitions turn into this. its a wonder why anyone would host one full stop.

[Lowner]

Are you kidding? It's getting more publicity than the organisers could have ever dreamt of.