I'm a long term fan of Nadav Kander and saw a post today on his Instagram account regarding the rejection of an image shortlisted for the World Press Photo portrait prize.
It's a remarkable image of Adam Pearson who has neurofibromatosis - it was commissioned for the cover of The Guardian weekend magazine if I recall. The basis for rejecting the image was on the grounds of Photoshop. The application had been used to post process cracking (shown on Nadav's Instagram).
Simply put, the backdrop was old and the paint had given way. I assume that it had done so in such a way as to draw attention and distract from the subject so homogenising the background made no material impact to the veracity of the image. Cloning distracting elements is no different to dodging and burning - age old practices originating in the dark room and widely accepted as artistic decisions, not manipulation or misrepresentation of truth in the image.
Whilst I really do get it that swapping heads to other bodies or adding bullet holes to a picture taken that reports or purports to tell the truth should not be allowed, I did not think a competition that applauds, hopefully supports, good photography would disqualify this picture. To have rules are one thing, but in the art sector to not push hard against a world run by graphs and numbers and use judgement to not blanket process a rule is disappointing - Nadav Kander
I'm aligned with his view and I think most professionals would be too. It remains a shame that judges should take such a binary view on what is an easily defensible decision. It clearly doesn't impact the materiality of the image. But then again, photographic competitions are subjective beauty parades.
