World Press Photo disqualifies photographer
Written by duckrabbitWorld Press Photo has disqualified a Ukraine-based photographer – Stepan Rudik – for altering his images “beyond the boundary of what is acceptable practice, BJP has learnt
Author — duckrabbit
duckrabbit is a production company formed by radio producer/journalist Benjamin Chesterton and photographer David White. We specialize in digital storytelling.
Discussion (11 Comments)
I saw the latest issue of the BJP, but i don’t understand the problem, this is the B&W picture of the hand right?
yeah,
I’m a bit confused about this. What is he meant to have done other than cropped and turned it black and white? i don’t know if I’m looking at the correct images….can someone explain?
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=873606
He removed a bit of foot from the picture …
You are looking at the correct pics. He p/shopped out a foot from the man behind. He tried to explain it by saying:
“The photograph I submitted to the contest is a crop, and the retouched detail is the foot of a man which appears on the original photograph, but who is not a subject of the image submitted to the contest.”
Poor explanation. There can be no explanation…change the content, end of. Even if that change is minor. And pointless.
Its a real shame, cause as David said it’s pointless!
ah yes, just spotted it.
so where do you stand on the cropping question when it’s this extreme David?
http://arafiqui.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/only-proving-a-point-while-making-an-idiotic-one/
Difficult one that….his crop is ridiculously extreme, but still only a crop…so has to be ok. I just think it’s lazy, but that’s a poor argument really. He can shoot how he wants, it’s up to him. Why not shoot everything on a 20mm and pull up in post?…
It must be shocking to non snappers though to see the difference between the original and the edited version…all ok as far as WPP go (and by extension the rest of the media really..apart obviously from the edited bit).TBH I think more damage will be done to his rep by seeing his extreme cropping and burning than by that wretched foot being removed, but I’m probably wrong. He may be hot property now..
The problem with the picture, for me, is that the crop gives you the impression that the photographer was close to his subjects. But when you see the rather boring and commonplace picture from the RAW-file, you realise that he wasn’t that close to the subject but that he faked this intimiacy by cropping.