Archived and Closed
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members. The community moderator provided the following reason for archiving: Not a problem
That said I see some very interesting trends in a lot of the categories that I personally believe should not be occurring.
An example would be the Nature/Weather category. If you look at the majority of the images they have nothing to do with weather. Nice images to be sure but they're putting scenic shots in the category and they have nothing to do with it. This skews the scores as real weather shots are competing against unrelated images. The rises and sets around the world every day, this is not weather. Weather represents an event outside the norm.
This also applies to images that are relying on the heavy use of HDR. I love HDR but don't think images that are created purely as photographs and rely on the photographers skill to create the image should be competing against images that have been drastically manipulated to enhance shortcomings or alter the dynamic range. Images that have been altered and enhanced in this fashion are no longer photographs but graphics and thus should be in their own category. We should be competing against images that reflect the pure quality of the photograph itself. There are categories that exist for heavily modified images under Photoshop.
Photography is the creation of an image as it exists, heavy manipulation moves the image into another realm entirely and should be viewed as an artistic rendering.
In policing the categories more closely it would allow photographers to compete on the merits of image integrity and not on their ability to manipulate and enhance an image to the point where it is more art than photography.
Just a thought but if you look at the images I've submitted in the last 24hrs you'll see that HDR and heavily enhanced images do that precedence over raw talent.