What’s it all about…?

Why do photographers do what we do?

I guess the same motivation applies with any profession: we want to make money, win recognition and do something we enjoy.

Every now and again, though, I’m taken by surprise when someone has a very different idea of what it’s all about.

This often comes when I’m at a photography exhibition and I look at an image and think to myself, “Why on earth is that on display?!”

Yes, photography is subjective, but it seems to me that when it comes to subject matter and composition, gallery owners and competition judges are often on a different planet!

I took my girlfriend Miriam to the Travel Photography of the Year awards ceremony at the FUJIFILM House of Photography in London in January 2020.

My close-up of half a leopard’s face (see above) had been shortlisted, and I thought it would be a fun night out - and a chance to show off to Miriam!

However, as each award was announced, I began to realise that I’d never win anything that night.

The judges seemed to be concerned with criteria that were completely alien to me as a photographer, and it was a little dispiriting.

Miriam was very supportive and said she thought my picture was the best in the exhibition (thanks!), but what good was that when the prizes kept going to somebody else…?

When I take wildlife shots, I want to celebrate the power, beauty, humour and/or cuteness of the animal, and the aesthetic appeal of the image is vitally important.

However, the prizewinners at the TPOTY awards didn’t seem to display any of those qualities!

To be fair, I wouldn’t expect pictures in the photojournalism category, say, to share the same qualities as my own, and there’s a clear imperative for ‘newsworthiness’ that doesn’t apply to pictures that are supposed to be framed and put on the wall.

However, I still believe that a picture has to ‘stand on its own two feet’ as a picture.

Even if it’s making a point about conservation or poaching or a similar issue, the image itself has to have visual impact.

Again, ‘visual impact’ is very much a subjective judgment, but my point here is that I seem to have very different criteria to the judges of certain competitions.

For another example, take the Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition (WPOY).

I’ve visited the exhibition at the Natural History Museum a few times, and I’ve always been disappointed.

They make a big deal about the power of ‘storytelling’, but what kind of a ‘story’ can a photograph tell, after all?

It’s hardly going to be War and Peace, is it…?!

When I first visited the WPOY exhibition, the judges had chosen 150 images out of 50,000 entries from around the world, and I only really liked 12 of them.

That’s an appallingly low number!

These were supposed to be the very best wildlife shots taken by the very best wildlife photographers on the face of the earth, and yet I had a hundred of my own five-star photos on my laptop at home that I thought were far better than most of the ones on show.

How can that be?

I guess it’s partly the subjective nature of art, but it’s also about a disconnect when it comes to what is valued.

As I say, what I appreciate in a wildlife image is power, beauty, humour and/or cuteness, but the WPOY judges seemed obsessed with novelty!

That also came at the expense of traditional rules of competition.

The 2016 WPOY winning image showed an orangutan from the top of a tree looking down. Yes, it was an imaginative approach, and the animal was endangered, but does that mean the eyes didn’t need to be sharp…?!

Again, the 2018 winner showed a couple of snub-nosed monkeys sitting on a rock. Yes, it was an unusual subject, but why was the tail cut off, and why didn’t the shot follow the rule of thirds…?!

In the latest exhibition, for instance, there were lots of pictures taken in China.

Now, I’m sure it’s a great place to go, and there are some very photogenic animals and landscapes there, but why did they have to dominate the exhibition?

It’s almost as though novelty beat every other virtue.

I’d expected to see several spectacular ‘kill shots’, but there was only one - and that was taken in South America!

What about Africa? Is a cheetah kill somehow ‘hackneyed’? Just because the judges have ‘seen it all before’, what about the punters coming to that exhibition in the hopes of seeing stunning action shots?

Just because something’s already been done, does that mean it’ll never win another award?

That’s ridiculous!

Do people disregard portraits of men and women just because Rembrandt painted so many good ones?

No, of course not.

And yet that’s the kind of argument I hear even when I speak to wildlife photographers themselves like Paul Goldstein and Andy Skillen.

“Yes, but it’s been done before…”

To which I can only say, “so what?!”

I appreciate the. need to show imaginative composition and to ‘work the scene’ to find a better angle or a more original viewpoint, but discarding a whole continent or genre just because it’s been ‘done before’ is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Perhaps I should confess a couple of things to help you understand my point of view.

• I generally don’t like other people’s pictures.

• I’m not an environmentalist.

These two facts might explain a lot of the problem!

The fact that I don’t like other people’s pictures sounds bad, I must admit, but it’s not for want of trying!

As I say, I’ve been to plenty of photography exhibitions, but I just end up feeling disappointed.

I guess I have my own way of viewing the world and my own aesthetic principles, but it’s just a bit sad to see that so few other people seem to share them!

Having said that, I’ve won quite a few international awards including the Sunday Times/Audley Travel Big Shot competition, so what I’m saying doesn’t apply in all cases, but WPOY is a nut I just can’t crack.

In particular, it exposes my lack of interest in environmentalism.

To enter WPOY, you have to provide a ‘story’ to go along with each image, and these are shown in the exhibition at the Natural History Museum.

Unfortunately (for me), an awful lot of the stories revolve around scarcity and global warning and climate change and general doom and gloom!

That’s not my perspective on wildlife at all.

I want to celebrate the power, beauty, humour and cuteness of Nature rather than mourn its passing.

No, I don’t want to see a man-made mass extinction, but I don’t think that’s going to happen, and it’s a bit tiresome to see a shot of a polar bear winning a competition just because it fits the prevailing political narrative!

I think it’s possible to love wildlife without being an environmentalist.

I know a lot of photographers use their images to highlight what they see as critical environmental issues, but that’s just not me.

I don’t want to make people angry or upset when they see my images; I want them to go ‘Awww!’ or ‘Wow!’

Maybe that makes me an exception, but there’s nothing much I can do about it except write articles like this.

If you disagree with me, then apologies for the rant, but if you’re on my side, then you’re welcome to browse this site to see all my best images, knowing that none of them has ever won WPOY…!

If you’d like to order a framed print of one of my wildlife photographs, please visit the Prints page.

If you’d like to book a lesson or order an online photography course, please visit my Lessons and Courses pages.