National (Aust) Photographic Prize 2010

Kguru · 03-04-2010, 06:16 AM

What do you think of this $25,000 winning photo?
Zareth 2009 by Scott Bycroft | National Photographic Portrait Prize 2010 | News.com.au

I'm sure several dozen talents in this forum can do better than that

(btw, click Next to see the other entries)

MRRiley · 03-04-2010, 08:25 AM

#38 "Brian and Gene 2009" should have won.... But I suspect a bias...

Mike

Kguru · 03-04-2010, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by MRRiley

#38 "Brian and Gene 2009" should have won....
Mike

I like #17 Owen Yalandja -- perhaps it got disqualified on Portrait ground

rawr · 03-04-2010, 12:54 PM

I'm not that impressed with #1. It's poorly composed for one thing - eg there's a big garbage bin right behind the subject.

MoiVous · 03-04-2010, 07:14 PM

Its interesting flicking through the images - I'm not sure they meet the criteria for a portrait IMHO.

Several are OOF on the subject (eg Moonbird boy) - I would have thought a portrait should at least have that.
Quite a few exhibit poor composition and cropping (eg Daniel at thirteen and Transition have their heads partially cropped) - not sure that these work
Distracting backgrounds in a few and don't seem to fit the context (eg David Carter)

Zavier has an interesting face, and the composition draws you to his eyes - and the bin is at least OOF - though quite apparent. Not perfect though.

Having seen many interesting, well composed portraits here and in exhibitions, it makes me wonder what the judges looked for.....

The images in large size are here: http://www.portrait.gov.au/site/exhibition_subsite_NPPP2010_9.php

Although I shouldn't really comment - I didn't enter anything

Christopher M.W.T · 03-08-2010, 02:10 PM

It's an Aborigine with curly hair.....big whoop.

To be honest I didn't like any of them, well 16 was ok otherwise....actuallyI really hated them all.

**Kerrowdown** · 03-17-2010, 04:45 PM

There are certainly a few interesting characters among the subjects, but IMHO the images don’t really do them justice in all cases.

Why can I never find folk like that..................................

saien · 03-18-2010, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes

To be honest I didn't like any of them, well 16 was ok otherwise....actuallyI really hated them all.

I have to say I'm also not particularly enamoured of any of them at all.. I like Paul Capsis' expression though

wjt · 03-18-2010, 07:25 PM

Much better portraits on this site really. I liked number 24 and 38 more than the others. None of then really had a wow factor.

**RobA_Oz** · 03-18-2010, 07:47 PM

Interesting how banal many of these are. There are a few I quite like, 17 most of all, as it tells a big story (but probably only to Australians).

London to a brick that most, if not all, were shot on the big two's equipment, which just goes to prove the point that's been made here umpteen times about the photographer's eye being the most important part of the picture-making process.

**jbinpg** · 03-19-2010, 08:30 PM

Remember this is Nat Geo bucking up for the prize money. So the subject must be looking at the camera and the eyes have to be in razor sharp focus. The winning photo fits the profile.

03-04-2010, 07:14 PM	#5
MoiVous Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 677	Its interesting flicking through the images - I'm not sure they meet the criteria for a portrait IMHO. Several are OOF on the subject (eg Moonbird boy) - I would have thought a portrait should at least have that. Quite a few exhibit poor composition and cropping (eg Daniel at thirteen and Transition have their heads partially cropped) - not sure that these work Distracting backgrounds in a few and don't seem to fit the context (eg David Carter) Zavier has an interesting face, and the composition draws you to his eyes - and the bin is at least OOF - though quite apparent. Not perfect though. Having seen many interesting, well composed portraits here and in exhibitions, it makes me wonder what the judges looked for..... The images in large size are here: http://www.portrait.gov.au/site/exhibition_subsite_NPPP2010_9.php Although I shouldn't really comment - I didn't enter anything Last edited by MoiVous; 03-04-2010 at 07:43 PM. Reason: Added link to full size images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Thematic Hand held shootout-with prize	charliezap	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	66	07-15-2010 02:29 AM
Picture of the Week 103: February 21, 2010 to March 7, 2010	Tamia	Weekly Photo Challenges	55	03-07-2010 05:50 AM
Picture of the Week 100: January 31, 2010 to February 14, 2010	Peter Zack	Weekly Photo Challenges	93	02-14-2010 12:43 PM
People 2nd Prize	eccs19	Post Your Photos!	7	10-28-2009 07:59 PM
Nobel Prize	graphicgr8s	General Talk	314	10-21-2009 03:37 AM

03-04-2010, 06:16 AM	#1
Kguru Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Perth - WestAust Posts: 602	National (Aust) Photographic Prize 2010 What do you think of this $25,000 winning photo? Zareth 2009 by Scott Bycroft \| National Photographic Portrait Prize 2010 \| News.com.au I'm sure several dozen talents in this forum can do better than that (btw, click Next to see the other entries)

03-04-2010, 08:25 AM	#2
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	#38 "Brian and Gene 2009" should have won.... But I suspect a bias... Mike

03-04-2010, 11:26 AM	#3
Kguru Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Perth - WestAust Posts: 602 Original Poster	Originally posted by MRRiley #38 "Brian and Gene 2009" should have won.... Mike I like #17 Owen Yalandja -- perhaps it got disqualified on Portrait ground

03-04-2010, 12:54 PM	#4
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	I'm not that impressed with #1. It's poorly composed for one thing - eg there's a big garbage bin right behind the subject.

03-08-2010, 02:10 PM	#6
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689	It's an Aborigine with curly hair.....big whoop. To be honest I didn't like any of them, well 16 was ok otherwise....actuallyI really hated them all.

03-17-2010, 04:45 PM	#7
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	There are certainly a few interesting characters among the subjects, but IMHO the images don’t really do them justice in all cases. Why can I never find folk like that..................................

03-18-2010, 01:34 PM	#8
saien Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Hobart, Australia Posts: 79	Originally posted by C.W Tsorotes To be honest I didn't like any of them, well 16 was ok otherwise....actuallyI really hated them all. I have to say I'm also not particularly enamoured of any of them at all.. I like Paul Capsis' expression though

03-18-2010, 07:25 PM	#9
wjt Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Perth Photos: Albums Posts: 371	Much better portraits on this site really. I liked number 24 and 38 more than the others. None of then really had a wow factor.

03-18-2010, 07:47 PM	#10
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Interesting how banal many of these are. There are a few I quite like, 17 most of all, as it tells a big story (but probably only to Australians). London to a brick that most, if not all, were shot on the big two's equipment, which just goes to prove the point that's been made here umpteen times about the photographer's eye being the most important part of the picture-making process.

03-19-2010, 08:30 PM	#11
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546	Remember this is Nat Geo bucking up for the prize money. So the subject must be looking at the camera and the eyes have to be in razor sharp focus. The winning photo fits the profile.