Comments on: World press Photo Awards 2004

World press Photo Awards 2004

biffa — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 05:53:43 -0800

World Press Photo Awards 2004

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:26:13 -0800

The BBC's consice selection of entries.

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:27:51 -0800

...which I may say appears to have been sanitised a little, too.

By: TheGoldenOne

TheGoldenOne — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:28:03 -0800

Shweeeeet.

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:29:27 -0800

Contrast.

By: Popular Ethics

Popular Ethics — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:34:37 -0800

Thanks Biffa. These are powerful.

By: saladin

saladin — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:40:49 -0800

Careful, there's one NSFW one buried deep in there (in a National Geographic sort of way).

By: saladin

saladin — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:41:02 -0800

But altogether fantastic. Thanks, biffa.

By: matteo

matteo — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:48:50 -0800

thanks for posting this. first impressions: I am not as impressed as I was in the last few years, but there are some masterful images here and there: Jim Nachtwey's Vermeer-meets-Salgado shot, Berman's compassionate, eerily beautiful work deserved a shoutout, Inez & Vinoodh deserved one too but hi-contrast is tired, shattered glass is tired too. geometry mixes with sports very well but it's a cliche now -- enough already. I could do without some kids images -- it became too easy. this is heavy-handed but the Xmas-lights effect saves it a little for me. and Jim Goldberg would love this oh, and as Robert Delpire said, Zizola is Lewis Hine's brother. and Grarup is the new Peress some are excellent and Morris is always marvelous andthis is quietly heartbreaking but then we're all critics, aren't we. thanks for the post

By: mrs.pants

mrs.pants — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:49:03 -0800

This one is beautiful and terrifying. A wonderful moment.

By: matteo

matteo — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 06:56:09 -0800

and by the way David Hogsholt had already won the Ian Parry scholarship. maybe Eugene Richards has an heir now, who knows.

By: Smedleyman

Smedleyman — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 07:01:34 -0800

Niiiiiiiice

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 07:12:01 -0800

I like the pouty kid on the fourth-place podium. Cracks me up.

By: NinjaPirate

NinjaPirate — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 07:15:39 -0800

(I didn't understand why Morris was in there, but my favourites were the tired and heavy-handed)

By: dontrememberthis

dontrememberthis — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 07:18:37 -0800

these are great. Did anyone else notice the pop up you get when you try to save any of these images? (Right click and you'll see) I've never seen that before.

By: jacquilynne

jacquilynne — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 08:51:08 -0800

I've seen the right clicking disabled thing too many freaking times. I'm not sure if they've failed to notice, but my right click menu includes a wide variety of options including the ever popular 'back'. Disabling it, especially since that's such a weak form of copy protection, is just assholish.

By: Songdog

Songdog — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 09:45:24 -0800

There are always amazing photos here. I was astonished by Jahi Chikwendiu's sandstorm image. Thanks for the link, biffa!

By: matteo

matteo — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 09:57:15 -0800

(I didn't understand why Morris was in there heh. but as I said, we're all critics, so.

By: spock

spock — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:21:52 -0800

I don't know the criteria for judging this stuff, but I think there is a huge difference between picture of a sensational event and a sensational picture. I suppose the maximum impact comes from a sensational picture OF a sensational event, but I have perhaps more appreciation for a sensational picture of an unsensational event. Also, call me a cynic, but I have to wonder about whether some elements are staged. The blue dressed woman against the fires behind her just doesn't look "real" to me. This age of PhotoShop (unfortunately) makes many of us cast our eyes of doubt on the "pure photographic" aspect of what we are seeing today, as well. An impressive image is still an impressive image, but these are being presented as photojournalism, not art.

By: Ritchie

Ritchie — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 18:02:42 -0800

Looking at the faces in conjunction with this book is instructive - many examples of sadness, joy and fear to be found. It also makes a change from looking at a photo and seeing only composition, contrast and allusion.

By: cedar

cedar — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 20:12:48 -0800

Thanks, biffa. This is good.

By: madamjujujive

madamjujujive — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 07:49:13 -0800

Thanks, biffa - I like the variety - good way to find leads to explore individual photographers, too.