/ NEW ARTICLE: UKC/UKH Mountain Photography Awards 2012
Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=5303
Looking up the Ogwen Valley to Tryfan , rule this out for any consideration in a serious competition,
this despite the fact that compositionally its very good .
Yes, one or two of these just don't look natural. And the black and white one with one coloured piece of clothing is,in my opinion just a silly gimmick. The Trango one is a very average shot. Many brilliant and much better photos than most of these on UKC every week I'm afraid.
That's a little bit harsh (particularly the Trango comment...) but I'd agree about the curse of photoshop - you do wonder what some of the original photos actually looked like. The "B&W plus a bit of colour" thing was a neat trick once upon a time but has been done to death now.
Still, plenty of absolutely stunning pictures among the winnners, and I'd second the comment about the number of brilliant photos on UKC every week.
> That's a little bit harsh (particularly the Trango comment...)
Sorry, I really don't see what is special about it. If I had got myself into that position, I would have been pretty disappointed not to have got a better shot than that.
Just an average bum shot really, but people seem to fall for the gimmickry.
There are only a couple of shots in there which look natural to me, the rest look like there out of some acid trip!
Over-saturating photos seems to be a bit like adding salt to your food, you need to keep adding more as you get more and more desensitised to it. It makes you wonder if the people creating/judging these shots spend much time in the hills, because they look so unnatural as to be comical.
Sorry to be down on these shots, but one wonders why people feel the need to make the hills look like they're 'on steroids' when they're amazing as they are.
There's been so many wonderful, professional quality landscapes on UKC/UKH in the past year that display fantastic light and composition but if no one votes for them they won't get a look in when it comes to the awards...
I meant it in the way a shallow man might fall for a woman because of their make-up, overlooking their true nature.
Yes, to continue my make up analogy: make up only looks good on a woman if you can't tell they are wearing it.
Half these photos are brazen tarts.
I would like to defend my photo that's in there, for it is untweaked, saturated or filtered in any way. It was shot in auto mode and thus it remained, because the light that day was awesome. Torridonian acid.
I do agree that some photographers seem to get too absorbed in post production to the point that they lose perspective on what the image was meant to be in the first place.
> I would like to defend my photo that's in there, for it is untweaked, saturated or filtered in any way.
Yes, that one rang true - a worthy winner.
You don't need to defend your photo Andy, it is a great photo as has been shown by the number of people who have voted for it.
They are all great photos in fact. A few (three I think) show some post-production but most are just great photos that earned their place in our annual awards.
There is a slight smell of sour grapes on this thread though.
Having been quite outspoken about the tarted up photos, can I just say it is not sour grapes at all. There would have been many very worthy winning untampered with photos amongst the thousnds on UKC and none of them would have been mine.
My comment was definitely sour grapes.
It's always going to be awkward posting an opposing opinion without appearing to piss on someone elseís fire, however thatís the nature of a public forum. So long as nobody is trying to be overtly offensive then why not debate issues?
Disappointing selection... Bit of a shame considering the quality of some of the work that gets uploaded to the site.
It is done on highest average votes with a factor for number of votes being included. It is quite complicated though.
With an average vote system, a photo receiving 1 vote of 5 would rate higher than a photo receiving 99 votes of 5 and 1 vote of 4 which obviously isn't satisfactory. Obviously you could put a threshold in of say 20 votes minimum, but is 20 votes of 5 really an indication of more popularity than 99 of 5 and 1 of 4?
What we actually use is a complex secret algorithm which is only know to the wizard Nick Smith.
Elsewhere on the site
A product review by James Turnbull. James Turnbull at Outside recently took the new Osprey Mutant 38 on a rigorous test in the... Read more
WINTERFEST 2014 at Outside in Hathersage 6th and 7th December 2014 Outside's ever popular Winterfest event is back... Read more
The British climbing scene is very exciting at the moment. It is quite clear that as a sport it is developing at a rapid rate and... Read more
2014 has been a bumper year for climbing publications. Here's a few of the ones that we have either read, or ones that we... Read more
Nick Livesey discovered the mountains of Snowdonia over a decade ago and finally moved there a year and a half ago, quitting a... Read more