Comments on: Winners of the 2013 World Press Photo Contest Announced – Some NSFW

By: David Tribby

David Tribby — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:07:00 +0000

the majority of these images are over manipulated for press photos. And No I could care less about the manipulation they did in the film days. It’s ridiculous. Its time outlets and contest put their foot down. This isn’t documentation of reality.

By: Aperiso Media

Aperiso Media — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 18:27:00 +0000

Wow.. some incredibly powerful images there!! Amazing!!!

By: suǝddıʃıɥԀ ǝʞıW

suǝddıʃıɥԀ ǝʞıW — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 01:23:00 +0000

And nobody notices the missing photo (3rd price winner Ananda van der Pluijm) and the photo that got the pretty obvious wrong byline (from the missing van der Pluijm photo).
I don’t know the photographer but it’s the 1st price Daily Life Stories: Mirella (71) takes care of her terminally ill husband with whom she shared 43 years of marriage.

But please, rant about Photoshop and don’t really look at the photos…

By: HeruLS

HeruLS — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 11:00:00 +0000

Great selection

By: Marcus Bailey

Marcus Bailey — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 01:03:00 +0000

I have to agree the post work on some of these images, particularly the overall winner is far greater than previous years. If the subject matter wasn’t so totally tragic on that particular image, you would swear it was staged. There seems to be light sources everywhere. I think post work is all part of creating an image but just surprised at the level in this category.

By: Shannon Carr

Shannon Carr — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 19:14:00 +0000

It’s certainly a debate that will rage on forever.. When does a photo transform into a digital image? When I say I can fix that later, I try to stop what i’m doing and get it right on the card… But then think wait a minute.. adjusting lighting, using filters and various in camera settings to alter the true image before it writes? Where is the line really?

By: Nick Carranza

Nick Carranza — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:28:00 +0000

I thought the same regarding post-processing. I was really surprised to see how much was obviously done to some of these images, and most surprised at how much was done to the Photo of the Year. It’d be nice to hear from the photographer or publication on their take on the subject.

By: Dan Evans

Dan Evans — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:17:00 +0000

Great photos as always. But, going through all of the photos, as a photojournalist who is a hardcore preacher of ethics, a lot of photojournalists are getting really loose with their use of photoshop.

By: Kyle Sanders

Kyle Sanders — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:35:00 +0000

I was directed to an interesting blog post ( http://blog.photoshelter.com/2013/02/why-do-photo-contest-winners-look-like-movie-posters/ ) from the RangefinderForum, and they make a good point – there is a lot more post processing these days, like it or hate it. I know that simply by the selection of film stock, you are making an editorial choice as well, but it is interesting to see how “finished” some of these images are.

You could, as an example, shoot a scene with Ilford Pan F 50 (a very fine grain film) for a very detailed, calm look. Shoot that same scene in TriX that has been pushed or developed hot, and you will have a much more grainy, “rough and tumble journalism” look. One you’d expect to use for a wedding, the other for a protest – and you’ve made an editorial choice that effects the final image.

By: Lorenzo P

Lorenzo P — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 09:00:00 +0000

Wow!!!