Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 14 May 2013 (Tuesday) 15:24
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "Is this photo a composite?"
Yes. The evidence is clear.
5
27.8%
No. It´s just a regular photo well edited.
13
72.2%

18 voters, 18 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is this contest-winning photo a composite?

 
Alex_Venom
Goldmember
Avatar
1,624 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
May 14, 2013 15:24 |  #1

Today I came across this award-winning photo that someone claims to be a fraud. There is a lot of evidence and explanations in the link below:

http://www.hackerfacto​r.com …ves/549-Unbelievable.html (external link)

(just sroll to "And the award goes to")

What do you guys think? Is it a composite? Or is it original?
I think it can be a composite, but the result is perfectly achievable with some dodge and burning as well....

EDIT: just for comparison, this is a 2012 photo that won the Nat Geo contest and was disqualified because of a cloned plastic bag:
http://www.digitalcame​raworld.com …test-winner-disqualified/ (external link)


Photography is about GEAR and not talent or practice. Practice won't make you a better photographer. Expensive equipment will. =D
"Nobody can buy a scalpel and become a doctor, but anyone can buy a camera and become a photographer."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
j-mar
Member
Avatar
235 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
     
May 14, 2013 15:36 |  #2

I don't know if it's a composite, but like you say that lighting is a little too good to be true - very theatrical and I like it. For a contest I can see how that would be worth debating and rules need to be followed, but end of the day, if a picture tells a story and is captivating, I don't really care how the artist achieved it (okay I care, but wouldn't slight it because of it lol!). Whether we use lighting gear, reflectors, or other tricks of the trade to optimize our images, there's always some degree of light manipulation in a scene. It's a great capture any way you slice it.

EDIT: and I don't mean to be disrespectful of any of the subjects by saying the photo is "great" and that "I like it", I'm just commenting on the technical aspects of the photo. This is obviously a very powerful and emotional subject.


5D Mark II | S100
Gear List
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark0159
I say stupid things all the time
Avatar
12,899 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 264
Joined Mar 2003
Location: Hamilton, New Zealand
     
May 14, 2013 15:48 |  #3

the photo doesn't follow journalism standards. there is no way that a camera would take a photo like that.

There's def some editing taking place and if your trying to capture the moment as it was this photo isn't a true presentation of the moment in time.

it doesn't stop it from being a good picture tho.


Mark
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/52782633@N04 (external link)
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 17-40mm f/4L USM, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM | Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 Di VC USD | Canon Speedlite 550EX -|- Film | Canon EOS 3 | Olympus OM2 | Zuiko 35mm f2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,922 posts
Gallery: 148 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 4057
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
May 14, 2013 15:58 |  #4

This quote is from the link the OP provided; it basically sums it up very well:

This year's "World Press Photo Award" wasn't given for a photograph. It was awarded to a digital composite that was significantly reworked.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Thomas ­ Campbell
Goldmember
Avatar
2,105 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kingwood, TX
     
May 14, 2013 16:11 |  #5

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15931964 (external link)
This quote is from the link the OP provided; it basically sums it up very well:

This year's "World Press Photo Award" wasn't given for a photograph. It was awarded to a digital composite that was significantly reworked.

Only it is wrong. The NPPA reviewed the RAW files and admitted that it has been dodged and burned expertly, it is not a composite image. Only a masterfully edited picture where no information has been removed or added. The feeling of the final edit is the same as the original image, only with a more aesthetically pleasing edit.


Houston Wedding Photographer (external link)
Houston Sports Photographer (external link)
Current Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
koala ­ yummies
Senior Member
736 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 202
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Los Angeles
     
May 14, 2013 16:15 as a reply to  @ Thomas Campbell's post |  #6

So the RAW files were actually submitted and reviewed? The article linked says the photographer forgot to bring them (with skeptical quotes placed around the word forgot, in the article).


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
armis
Senior Member
899 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 19
Joined Jan 2012
     
May 14, 2013 16:20 |  #7

Heavy RAW conversion but not a composite.

Let me try and prove it. I took the second reference picture (external link) and opened it in ACR to try and see if I could get a similar look as the first.

Here's what I got in about 10 minutes (external link), ACR only. (screengrab to show no foul play (external link))

Definitely not the same, but I'd say it's close enough not to crucify him. Notably, the shadows fall the same way as on the winning pic: sun on the right side shining on the left wall, but faces illuminated from the left and shaded on the right. Doesn't really surprise me: I saw the same in Italy. Narrow streets with a wall catching the sun and reflecting part of that as soft, diffuse light that seemingly came from the wrong side.


Fuji X-E2, 18-55 and 55-200 zooms, Samyang 12
www.wtbphoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
splathecat
Member
57 posts
Joined Feb 2013
     
May 14, 2013 16:32 as a reply to  @ koala yummies's post |  #8

Tall poppy syndrome. As far as I'm concerned this is like all those 9/11 truth conspiracies where a guy with some 'technology' takes apart a video and finds a few vague discrepancies and then acts like the only person on earth who can see it.

I've taken a photo in a similar situation and it produced very similar, theatrical lighting effects, all you need is a well placed cloud so the light is diffuse. Chuck it through a few slight changes in camera raw and you can have that finished image. I'm unconvinced he even needed to break out a Lightroom.

Man scored some lucky lighting and now Cpt. I'm Smarter than Everyone Else is trying to take him apart on this blog.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,600 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 149
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
May 14, 2013 17:38 |  #9

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #15932019 (external link)
Only it is wrong. The NPPA reviewed the RAW files and admitted that it has been dodged and burned expertly, it is not a composite image. Only a masterfully edited picture where no information has been removed or added. The feeling of the final edit is the same as the original image, only with a more aesthetically pleasing edit.

...yep. The original can be seen here:

http://blog.photoshelt​er.com …nt-and-the-truth-matters/ (external link)

Not a composite. If you read the bloggers front page: he is now trying to redefine layers as a composite.


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
splathecat
Member
57 posts
Joined Feb 2013
     
May 14, 2013 20:53 |  #10

banquetbear wrote in post #15932270 (external link)
...yep. The original can be seen here:

http://blog.photoshelt​er.com …nt-and-the-truth-matters/ (external link)

Not a composite. If you read the bloggers front page: he is now trying to redefine layers as a composite.

Pussyfooting around the issue is what this blogger is doing. All digital files are a digital reproduction of the actual image. If you choose Faithful color over Neutral or Landscape, it will look totally different. If I switch color algorithm, have I deliberately set out to be untruthful? Have I doctored the image?

Blogger tries to be smart, and gets caught out. End of.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,394 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1687
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
May 14, 2013 21:13 as a reply to  @ banquetbear's post |  #11

Plus the blogger is wrong about the sunlight. He commented that the sun is illuminating the wrong side of the people's faces - but he missed out on important facts. The tall walls on the (photo) right stops the sun falling on the (photo) right of the men's faces. However it does hit the light coloured wall on photo left.... which acts like a giant reflector and bounces it back at the men's faces. You can clearly see that this effect is most prominent with the men close to the wall and reduced with those further from the wall.


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,394 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1687
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
May 15, 2013 04:08 as a reply to  @ Dan Marchant's post |  #12

I will go with the WPP and their experts over this blogger
http://www.worldpressp​hoto.org …sen%E2%80%99s-image-files (external link)


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,600 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 149
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
May 15, 2013 06:13 as a reply to  @ Dan Marchant's post |  #13

...I just ran one of my photos through the bloggers "forensic analysis process."

The original:

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7285/8741236792_cda552c687_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/40982470@N04/8​741236792/  (external link)
DSK_April-16-2011_13 (external link) by Big Mark Photography Wgtn (external link), on Flickr
The "analysis":
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7288/8740108629_e0b15a982a_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/40982470@N04/8​740108629/  (external link)
054b617e594fdf6aed135c​4e3813ad5fecf5a330.143​9819-ela (external link) by Big Mark Photography Wgtn (external link), on Flickr

Apparently that white line on the ground and the "rainbowing" that you see, if I can understand his process correctly, means that my photo is also a fake. Which comes as a surprise to me as I don't remember faking it.

I just ran one of my blog posts through his "gender guesser." It said I'm a "weak male." Well I guess he got that one right!

www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1624
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
May 15, 2013 09:40 |  #14

Well I tried it with two images. One is a composite, the other is not. So which one is which?

1

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8244/8645364410_e65e5650ab_o.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alan-evans/8645364410/  (external link)
Hey-Diddle-Diddel! (external link) by alan-evans (external link), on Flickr

With this result

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7288/8741647260_2438b0b22e_o.png
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alan-evans/8741647260/  (external link)
07363968b8a11d8112e171​1a5b248bf8ecb70630.138​809-ela (external link) by alan-evans (external link), on Flickr

Or

2
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8266/8644269131_1c7d8c9b9b_o.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alan-evans/8644269131/  (external link)
Sbach 300 (external link) by alan-evans (external link), on Flickr

with this result

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7293/8741647102_d3c67e2aa3_o.png
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alan-evans/8741647102/  (external link)
a098c6408d4093969c6d44​94559571b826e457b4.879​68-ela (external link) by alan-evans (external link), on Flickr

Alan

My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
50,039 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6763
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
May 15, 2013 11:29 |  #15

I would have voted for "inconclusive"

I particularly disagree with his his entire section of lighting on the buildings and faces. I find the assumption of how light is going to behave in that alley way very much an assumption.

Lastly, it IS an amazing photo, and very politically charged, so charged in fact that I'd rather not consider taking a side here.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,904 views & 0 likes for this thread
Is this contest-winning photo a composite?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is smartlogg1
648 guests, 258 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.