A step to far in landscape competition

[miketoll]

As the newspaper report stands without further clarification nothing makes sense.
The original winners image is better, no doubt about that.
The key is the phrase "but the level of manipulation means that the photograph gained an unfair advantage" So obviously some manipulation was allowed which begs the question what is too much? If a detailed list of allowed manipulation was given then no argument if the rules were broken. If no such detailed list was given then it means what amounted to too much manipulation was down to the whim of the judges on the day which is hardly fair. To my simple mind, without further clarification about the rules, if the amount of manipulation allowed was not tightly and clearly defined in the rules then the original winner should stand.

[Susan Green]

The point is not probably in manipulation, but the vinning price is very big, so depends....
I live in Italy and learnt not to trust anyone..... everything is possible... but this way it shouts a bit too much to me.... rather stop

Susan

[graham harcombe]

I find myself with a foot in both camps here. I did like the Lindisfarne picture very much and I do not like the newly promoted winner at all in fact in my view it is not landscape, however:

Extract from the competition rules:
"Banned editing procedures include removal of fences, moving trees and stripping in sky from another image. "

Apparently this is what Byrne did. The sky is false and therefore breaks the rules. He also says that he cloned out some unwanted boats and further states that, ‘I did not remove anything that was fixed down and if you stand in that spot my photo is what you will see.'

Interestingly, he admits to not reading the rules before entering the contest. Writing on his website after being stripped of his title, he said: ‘While I don't think what I have done to the photo is wrong in any way, I do understand it's against the regulations so accept the decision. I apologise for any inconvenience caused.'

What to say? He did break the rules and admits doing so. I say what a shame, it was a lovely image, he was not cheating, just ill-informed and I wish him well after his disappointment.

[miketoll]

Thanks Graham, I do agree with you. If he broke the competition rules then there is unfortunately no argument, he has to be disqualified. Great shame as the final image is superb.

[Susan Green]

I am glad I was not right here, so I appology. Fantastic image, it would make a nice print on the wall in any modern interior.

Susan

[gordon g]

I agree Mike - and very decent of him to behave as he has done after the event too, unlike the carry-on with the set-up shot for the wildlife POTY a while back.

[DigiDiva]

Originally Posted by miketoll

My guess is, having been to Linisfarne several times, that the upturned boats and the castle are from two different shots that have been brought together. Not sure of course, wish the judges had said.

My thoughts too. There's improving a photo with PS tweaking, and theres manipulation of more than one image into one. To me, that would be cheating, however, as we don't know what PS was carried out, its hard to comment for sure.