POTY 2011: First details

[wavemachine]

I did think of having a go (not that I thought I would get very far but would be good for my photography) and could just about swallow the entrance fee but then to drop the prize down in value seems really unreasonable. Competing for a big prize makes the event more prestegious, 10K would buy a lot of high end kit as well where as £1500 would get a decent camera body or a lens or two.

There was probably a lot of money made to more than cover the costs by sponsorship alone to me the combination of dropping prize + entrance fee = greed.

To me the whole event has been de-valued.

[Marcus Hawkins]

Hello everyone

Digital Camera magazine will be providing full details regarding the 2011 competition and responses to your questions on the new Photographer of the Year website which goes live on the 14th of March.

Marcus

[jinky]

That`s good Marcus. Was hoping someone would

[salsayegh]

When can we submit our photos ?

[yeomanss]

Originally Posted by Stormsong

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. So, from the largest photographic contest of its kind in the world to . . . . how many people are going to pay? I am unemployed and can't even pay attention, so how am I going to enter? Before you say I can use a credit card, I don't have one. SO seriously, how am I and others like me going to enter? And taking other currencies into consideration, and the exchange rate, it may just become quite costly to enter. Shame on you DC!

Regards,
Denise

im a carer and to be honest i cant afford this either ,especially when im up against photographers with FAR better equipment ,i have a 400D and a sony A100 for god sakes !

[karenoliver]

Originally Posted by yeomanss

im a carer and to be honest i cant afford this either ,especially when im up against photographers with FAR better equipment ,i have a 400D and a sony A100 for god sakes !

A top camera doesn't always mean you will get a better shot than someone with a cheaper model. A more expensive camera might perform better at higher ISO or with continous shooting but at the end of the day its the subject matter and composition. Some of my favourite shots are ones I made with my iphone.

Karen

[HinFrance]

Originally Posted by karenoliver

A top camera doesn't always mean you will get a better shot than someone with a cheaper model.
Karen

It's an interesting and noble sentiment Karen, and completely misguided.

Michael Schumacher would still have won F1 championships if he'd been driving a Fiat Punto? Don't be soft. Could you have taken this year's winning picture with a jesus phone and no expensive airline ticket? Not a prayer. All other things being equal, the equipment is what will make the difference.

You need the talent, and you need the kit, but most of all you need luck

[Cutter]

Originally Posted by HinFrance

It's an interesting and noble sentiment Karen, and completely misguided.

Michael Schumacher would still have won F1 championships if he'd been driving a Fiat Punto? Don't be soft. Could you have taken this year's winning picture with a jesus phone and no expensive airline ticket? Not a prayer. All other things being equal, the equipment is what will make the difference.

You need the talent, and you need the kit, but most of all you need luck

Ditto

[Drew Smith]

To a large extent I agree with Karen.

Are we saying that all photographs taken 20, 30, 40 or 50 years ago were poor by today's standards?

I have a incredible book showcasing the works of the Photojournalists from Life Magazine - some of the images are stunning and many of them taken with not much more than a cardboard box with a hole in it by today's standards.

Yes, I agree that standing in the gloom of twilight trying to capture some fast paced action or other, you are more likely to succeed with a higher spec'd camera than not.

But having top of the range equipment doesn't guarantee a good shot just as having an entry level camera doesn't mean your images can't be award winners.

[karenoliver]

Originally Posted by HinFrance

It's an interesting and noble sentiment Karen, and completely misguided.

Michael Schumacher would still have won F1 championships if he'd been driving a Fiat Punto? Don't be soft. Could you have taken this year's winning picture with a jesus phone and no expensive airline ticket? Not a prayer. All other things being equal, the equipment is what will make the difference.

You need the talent, and you need the kit, but most of all you need luck

Hi Howard,

Interesting comparison but I beg to differ. Motor racing depends on speed and ability whereas photography depends on creativity and artistic expression. If you are talking about the technical quality of an image (megapixels, noise levels, colour rendtion etc.) then obviously the more expensive cameras will be better than the cheaper ones. But I am referring to artistic expression which I believe is independent of the camera. Quality for me is more about composition, creativity and capturing an extraordinary moment so the that viewer is engaged on a cognitive and emotional level. You can achieve this with either a cheap camera or an expensive one. Looking through last years winners and runners-up in DPOTY 2010,the winner was using a Canon 40D. The second place Adrenaline shot was made with a Canon 550D. Third placed Travel winner used a 6 megapixel Panasonic compact.

I don't think anyone should be put off entering competitions because of the model of camera that they own. If they capture a moment in time that is truly spectacular or have a subject whose portrait tugs at our emotions in some way they should enter it because the photograph itself will speak, the camera model used will be secondary and insignificent.

Interesting debate though ;-)

Karen