Photographer plans to burn pictures in protest at awards snub ONE OF the nation's most acclaimed young photographers has pledged to burn his folio of entries for the Scottish Photographer of the Year awards in a protest against the event's organisers.
Freelance photographer Roddy Mackay was told he was shortlisted for the Young Photographer of the Year category in the prestigious national awards at the end of February - only to be told soon after that judges had decided to withdraw the prize because the overall standard of entries in the category was "not good enough".
Mackay, 25, who was shortlisted for the award alongside Edinburgh Evening News photographers Ed Jones and Dan Philips and picture agency SNS Group's Craig Williams, said the judges' decision to withdraw the prize had damaged him "mentally and physically".
He said: "I've made a decision to burn my pictures and speak out publicly about their lack of support. As a young photographer I feel very, very passionately about the way I have been treated."
The Scottish press photography awards, to be held at a glitzy ceremony in Glasgow this Wednesday, are the most important industry prizes north of the Border. There were more than 3000 entries this year and 42 photographers have been shortlisted
A war of words has raged between the judging panel and the four nominees ever since it was revealed the award was to be withdrawn.
In an angrily worded email to the head of the judging panel Ken Lennox - a former Sun picture editor - the nominees asked the judges to understand how difficult it was to establish a career as a young photographer, pointing out the ways in which their decision to withhold the prize had damaged their fledgling careers.
Mackay said Lennox's reply accused them of being "arrogant" and "immature".
He said: "They left us no choice but to come across as arrogant and immature when we decided to defend our work."
A second nominee, who did not wish to be named, said he was worried about the damage the decision would do to his career.
He said: "If I could go back in time and not enter these awards then I would do that. As a photographer your reputation is key to getting work and being associated publicly with an award that has been withdrawn because of low standards has damaged my reputation."
Lennox, head of a judging panel that includes Sunday Times picture editor Ray Wells, said the entries were good but that none of them had "that extra something" that merited a prestigious national award.
He said they had announced a shortlist, then cancelled the award afterwards due to the way entries were judged on the internet before the judges met in person to decide an eventual winner.
Lennox added: "I replied to their
hot-headed email. There was certainly a
bit of arrogance there. The judges' decision was unanimous.
"I do not feel we should make an award unless we recognise someone that is exceptional.
"This is not an automatic prize."
|
|
Posted by: Cassie O'strump, Glasgow on 6:22am Sun 23 Mar 08
Pretentious nonsense!
This is like a huffy child who didnt win a prize at school sports. Are we likely to end up in an artistic wilderness because of this - I think not. A £100 digital camera with an auto shoot function and a 4GB memory card can make any one of us "photographer of the year". And if not ... there is always Adobe Photoshop to compensate for "artistic" inadequacies.
Pretentious nonsense!
This is like a huffy child who didnt win a prize at school sports. Are we likely to end up in an artistic wilderness because of this - I think not. A £100 digital camera with an auto shoot function and a 4GB memory card can make any one of us "photographer of the year". And if not ... there is always Adobe Photoshop to compensate for "artistic" inadequacies.
Posted by: Oscar on 8:37am Sun 23 Mar 08
Oh dear Cassie, you don't really get it do you?
Have a look at the young fellers work and then tell me you could do that with a digi camera.
http://www.roddymack
ayphotography.com/
Oh dear Cassie, you don't really get it do you?
Have a look at the young fellers work and then tell me you could do that with a digi camera.
http://www.roddymack
ayphotography.com/
Posted by: James McMuppet, Scotland on 2:12pm Sun 23 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Cassie O'strump[/bold] wrote:
Pretentious nonsense!
This is like a huffy child who didnt win a prize at school sports. Are we likely to end up in an artistic wilderness because of this - I think not. A £100 digital camera with an auto shoot function and a 4GB memory card can make any one of us "photographer of the year". And if not ... there is always Adobe Photoshop to compensate for "artistic" inadequacies.
[/quote] Yes, so long as theres a punter with a 1 sec explanation for the way the world works, we are in great shape.
Why bother going to university, why bother devoting your life to the art, why bother becoming a professional, just take the 50quid a week route and go to the pub, then you can discredit everything in your world you dont understand.
Bravo.
James McMuppet
Cassie O'strump wrote:
Pretentious nonsense!
This is like a huffy child who didnt win a prize at school sports. Are we likely to end up in an artistic wilderness because of this - I think not. A £100 digital camera with an auto shoot function and a 4GB memory card can make any one of us "photographer of the year". And if not ... there is always Adobe Photoshop to compensate for "artistic" inadequacies.
Yes, so long as theres a punter with a 1 sec explanation for the way the world works, we are in great shape.
Why bother going to university, why bother devoting your life to the art, why bother becoming a professional, just take the 50quid a week route and go to the pub, then you can discredit everything in your world you dont understand.
Bravo.
James McMuppet
Posted by: Alberto on 2:25pm Sun 23 Mar 08
...."that judges had decided to withdraw the prize because the overall standard of entries in the category was "not good enough".
Maybe - maybe not, who knows - but that's their decision!
One, even more baffling aspect of such a decision creating this ruling - I have not yet heard of it applying to the most 'farcical' award competition of the day 'Politician of the Year!' and they already get such astounding rewards - win or lose - even if they are 'Not really Bovvered!'- which seems very obvious for many - as long as they don't cancel the Celebration event - that's what really matters about the whole thing!
...."that judges had decided to withdraw the prize because the overall standard of entries in the category was "not good enough".
Maybe - maybe not, who knows - but that's their decision!
One, even more baffling aspect of such a decision creating this ruling - I have not yet heard of it applying to the most 'farcical' award competition of the day 'Politician of the Year!' and they already get such astounding rewards - win or lose - even if they are 'Not really Bovvered!'- which seems very obvious for many - as long as they don't cancel the Celebration event - that's what really matters about the whole thing!
Posted by: Roddy Mackay, Central Belt on 11:33pm Sun 23 Mar 08
Hi Folks,
Firstly let me clarify what seems to be a huge gaffe on the part of the journalist at hand here that what was actually quoted to him was that I was '[italic]burning my bridges[/italic] ' by speaking out over the awards not burning my pictures, I'll be making that quite clear in a seperate e-mail.
By making a decision to publicly question why no award has been made on this occasion I am quite sure that there will be implications for my future entry into such competitions, but a decision that indicated that no further reference was to be made to the young photographer category in the awards after having already publicly shortlisted four photographers is something that we found difficult to reamin silent on, interestingly enough it was not we who were responsible for the story being made more public.
In reference to a claim that a 100 quid digi camera and a cf card can produce great quality imagery then I think you might want to try that out at your earliest convenience, I'd be curious to see the results...
In addition to carrying a camera the photographer carries a responsibility to convey a story truthfully and adequately, professionals are skilled at controlling moments and capturing them in way that regular punters are not. People are professionals for reasons and each profession has a right to defend their work and passions they carry for it respectably, not just as in this occasion.
The decision to not award is also not to be taken as a decision to question that the judges ought to reward us specifically as individual photographers but that the withdrawl of the support of the award makes it even more difficult for emerging photographers to develop through appropriate channels when citizen journalism poses a real threat to the professionals in the industry.
A suggestion of burning my work as a response would quite easily be seen as immature, and I would never for a moment even consider it. But more importantly for the reason that it is work that has been worked hard for and most importantly of all is the result of subjects being prepared to open themselves up in front of the lens as the subjects of the images, to which I, and others like me are continually grateful.
Thanks for the defense Oscar, feel free to drop me an e-mail.
Hi Folks,
Firstly let me clarify what seems to be a huge gaffe on the part of the journalist at hand here that what was actually quoted to him was that I was '
burning my bridges ' by speaking out over the awards not burning my pictures, I'll be making that quite clear in a seperate e-mail.
By making a decision to publicly question why no award has been made on this occasion I am quite sure that there will be implications for my future entry into such competitions, but a decision that indicated that no further reference was to be made to the young photographer category in the awards after having already publicly shortlisted four photographers is something that we found difficult to reamin silent on, interestingly enough it was not we who were responsible for the story being made more public.
In reference to a claim that a 100 quid digi camera and a cf card can produce great quality imagery then I think you might want to try that out at your earliest convenience, I'd be curious to see the results...
In addition to carrying a camera the photographer carries a responsibility to convey a story truthfully and adequately, professionals are skilled at controlling moments and capturing them in way that regular punters are not. People are professionals for reasons and each profession has a right to defend their work and passions they carry for it respectably, not just as in this occasion.
The decision to not award is also not to be taken as a decision to question that the judges ought to reward us specifically as individual photographers but that the withdrawl of the support of the award makes it even more difficult for emerging photographers to develop through appropriate channels when citizen journalism poses a real threat to the professionals in the industry.
A suggestion of burning my work as a response would quite easily be seen as immature, and I would never for a moment even consider it. But more importantly for the reason that it is work that has been worked hard for and most importantly of all is the result of subjects being prepared to open themselves up in front of the lens as the subjects of the images, to which I, and others like me are continually grateful.
Thanks for the defense Oscar, feel free to drop me an e-mail.
Posted by: Mitchell Franz, Texas, United States on 4:13am Fri 28 Mar 08
As a fellow young photographer, even younger perhaps as I am a senior in high school I understand valuing your work immensely. I will not get into that because Mr. Mackay didn't that good enough previously.
I will address just getting a camera and a memory card and going out snapping holly ho....try it and let me know how it goes. Post them online at flickr or somewhere so we can see...there are free options out there so don't complain about having to pay to host then repost to this board with a link. (I am calling you out.)
Photography is more than picking up a camera and snapping away. True photographers take into consideration and think about LIGHT, COMPOSITION, THE MOMENT, and other aspects. You can have a great photo with bad technical qualities. There is so much there beyond what you even think. It is like any other service, you wouldn't tell a cook how to cook or a cab driver how to drive (you might, Cassie). You are going to respect their knowledge and ability for their service they are providing.
On the subject of Photoshop, most photojournalists aren't going to use it for what you think of it as because of ethics (something you might know about). If Photoshop is being used it is for resizing the image, adjusting the levels and curves of lighting slightly, and attaching ITPC information (look it up). They aren't using it for blemish removal to create something that wasn't originally there. As a photojournalist you are basically a story teller, preserving memories and the moments. If a photographer went back and took something out or put it in, then that wouldn't be telling it accurately.
Now on the award, I do not know him but I assume he is upset simply because of the way things were done and what was said (maybe you can understand it this time if I break it down for you). They said they didn't give an award because the work was "not good enough". Now what does that say about these guys? They put hardwork and dedication into this and to be shot down. It is one thing to not place, and maybe even receive a critique because everyone can use them, but to shortlisted and then no one receive it is [bold]"arrogant" on the judge's part[/bold] . They never should have outspoken like that.
Mr. Mackay and the others I applaud your efforts, keep it up. Also by Mackay and the others standing up for what they believe in and know is right, they are the true journalists. We are suppose to keep people on their toes and report the malfeasances.
[bold]Again well done guys.[/bold]
As a fellow young photographer, even younger perhaps as I am a senior in high school I understand valuing your work immensely. I will not get into that because Mr. Mackay didn't that good enough previously.
I will address just getting a camera and a memory card and going out snapping holly ho....try it and let me know how it goes. Post them online at flickr or somewhere so we can see...there are free options out there so don't complain about having to pay to host then repost to this board with a link. (I am calling you out.)
Photography is more than picking up a camera and snapping away. True photographers take into consideration and think about LIGHT, COMPOSITION, THE MOMENT, and other aspects. You can have a great photo with bad technical qualities. There is so much there beyond what you even think. It is like any other service, you wouldn't tell a cook how to cook or a cab driver how to drive (you might, Cassie). You are going to respect their knowledge and ability for their service they are providing.
On the subject of Photoshop, most photojournalists aren't going to use it for what you think of it as because of ethics (something you might know about). If Photoshop is being used it is for resizing the image, adjusting the levels and curves of lighting slightly, and attaching ITPC information (look it up). They aren't using it for blemish removal to create something that wasn't originally there. As a photojournalist you are basically a story teller, preserving memories and the moments. If a photographer went back and took something out or put it in, then that wouldn't be telling it accurately.
Now on the award, I do not know him but I assume he is upset simply because of the way things were done and what was said (maybe you can understand it this time if I break it down for you). They said they didn't give an award because the work was "not good enough". Now what does that say about these guys? They put hardwork and dedication into this and to be shot down. It is one thing to not place, and maybe even receive a critique because everyone can use them, but to shortlisted and then no one receive it is
"arrogant" on the judge's part . They never should have outspoken like that.
Mr. Mackay and the others I applaud your efforts, keep it up. Also by Mackay and the others standing up for what they believe in and know is right, they are the true journalists. We are suppose to keep people on their toes and report the malfeasances.
Again well done guys. 
Comment | Read Comments (6)
Print this story
Email to a friend
