I thought the whole thing was a little fishy from the get-go. In all my life I have never seen a canine of any type jump over a fence when it could effortlessly slip through, or go around one. Except for trained and obedient pets, of course.
It is interesting that they are continuing without a winner. IMO, they should promote everybody one ranking from where they previously stood. I feel bad for the person who was one spot shy of winning a prize and getting their honestly earned recognition.
Posted by Katja Rosvall on January 21, 2010 at 2:10 AM
And here a more complete story, an older article about the allegations and a new one about the decision:
what a shame - now there was the overall winner taking his image on FILM (!) and then it turns out it was all a fake...
kind of ironic too, considered its always the digital photogs who are accused of cheating.
and: I think Floris' winning images looked pretty faked, too - too beautiful to be real...
georg
Posted by Jim Salge on January 21, 2010 at 7:03 AM
I have been in awe of this shot since the winners were announced...is a beautiful and technically perfect shot, truly a dream shot even if set up. I don't think that this takes much away from the mood in shot itself...it's the photographers vision of a storybook wolf...
However...honesty and playing by the rules is something that needs to be respected and valued. It's a shame such a beautiful shot is tarnished by the photographer's lack of discretion.
Posted by Carl Donohue on January 22, 2010 at 6:47 PM
Posted by Stan Rose on January 23, 2010 at 2:17 PM
Oh cmon Carl--that would be better if the wolves were jumping over the moon and not just the fence!
Im amazed Rodriguez is still denying things--his rep is ruined, youd think he'd at least try to gain some sympathy with a full out mea culpa. "The most significant case of fraud in the history of nature photography" Those are pretty strong words. For his 15 min of fame, he ends up with a lifetime of infamy. Ironically, his name will be much better known than it would have been. There is something very troubling about that--the whole fame at all costs mentality that dominates our society.
Posted by Daniel Ewert on January 23, 2010 at 3:21 PM
Very sad, but I'm glad the organizers took action here.
I have not read the full story yet, but two things
- first, great to learn that these judges take their job very seriously and not only try to detect
PS-trickery (like blending in that wolf - that would be something I thought is done by judges) but
also such kind of fakes
- since I have not read the story-BUT: I hope that there is 100% evidence that this is a trained wolf.
Posted by Jeff Loomis on January 27, 2010 at 12:37 PM
If the allegations are proven true, this is a sad turn of events indeed. His deception opens the door for everyone's work to be questioned and viewed with suspicion. We don't need any bad press and, in my experience, nature photographers are among the most honest and self-regulated groups there are.
Plus, as Jim notes, this is an incredible photograph. The guy has talent and should have been happy to present his work with full disclosure about how he achieved it (obviously not in that competition though). The lure of fame and fortune should never out-weigh your personal integrity.
Posted by Jim Hackley on January 29, 2010 at 1:36 PM
I remember reading about the winner and was somewhat surprised at their choice. The original story on the BBC website along with the winning picture stated the wolf was baited over a long period of time to be coaxed into the enclosure and that the photographer had envisioned this type of shot. It was surprising to me after all the years of seeing stunning wildlife image (actually in the wild) from this BBC contest that this was the choice they made.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 30, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Well Jim, the rules allowed for baiting as long as it was disclosed, so there was no reason for the judges not to make that choice, if they thought it was the best photo. Of course, the rules didn't allow for the use of a captive/trained wolf.
the rules didn't allow for the use of a captive/trained wolf
The rules did allow for captive animals, provided they were labelled as such. A captive animal carried less weight than a wild one, though. The rules have now been changed, and no captive animals are allowed at all.
Posted by Douglas Graham on February 10, 2010 at 7:29 PM
I think the rule for no image manipulation and no captive animals should be applied to any natural history photography contest. But thats the photojournalist coming out in me.
Discussion
13 replieshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8470962.stm
It is interesting that they are continuing without a winner. IMO, they should promote everybody one ranking from where they previously stood. I feel bad for the person who was one spot shy of winning a prize and getting their honestly earned recognition.
http://www.suomenluonto.fi/bbcs-nature-photo-competition-judge-admits-winner-photo-investigated-due-to-fraud-allegations
http://www.suomenluonto.fi/maailman-suurimman-luontokuvakilpailun-saantoja-muutettiin
kind of ironic too, considered its always the digital photogs who are accused of cheating.
and: I think Floris' winning images looked pretty faked, too - too beautiful to be real...
georg
However...honesty and playing by the rules is something that needs to be respected and valued. It's a shame such a beautiful shot is tarnished by the photographer's lack of discretion.
This one's better:
the 2nd version.
Cheers
Carl
Im amazed Rodriguez is still denying things--his rep is ruined, youd think he'd at least try to gain some sympathy with a full out mea culpa. "The most significant case of fraud in the history of nature photography" Those are pretty strong words. For his 15 min of fame, he ends up with a lifetime of infamy. Ironically, his name will be much better known than it would have been. There is something very troubling about that--the whole fame at all costs mentality that dominates our society.
Carl: that is hilarious!
- first, great to learn that these judges take their job very seriously and not only try to detect
PS-trickery (like blending in that wolf - that would be something I thought is done by judges) but
also such kind of fakes
- since I have not read the story-BUT: I hope that there is 100% evidence that this is a trained wolf.
Plus, as Jim notes, this is an incredible photograph. The guy has talent and should have been happy to present his work with full disclosure about how he achieved it (obviously not in that competition though). The lure of fame and fortune should never out-weigh your personal integrity.
The rules did allow for captive animals, provided they were labelled as such. A captive animal carried less weight than a wild one, though. The rules have now been changed, and no captive animals are allowed at all.