Overall I enjoyed the series, for a first season it did a good job. Refreshing to watch a program aimed at photography. I feel it a few tweaks could improve it:
1. Introduce a "masterchef" style challenge in a real life situation, such as covering an event using reportage and proving and editor the images, going through the cut process and making it in to a publication by a deadline. Who gets published wins the task. I think that would be really interesting to see the process and put them under pressure.
2. Where's the wildlife section... I mean proper wildlife shooting, long lens/macro, behavioural stuff that takes skill on the camera, real patience, good research and an appreciation for the environment. Not just sending them to a zoo to shoot.
3. Make one of the judges/experts join in on the task and present "how it should be done" after the contestants have. Got bored of hearing how good the pro is and how Mr Judge (you know who) kept banging on about how they have missed the point... Well show us then!
4. Maybe and element of viewers voting, who ever reaches the final their public votes, over the series, count towards the final decision. Because David Lachapelle showed, that the images they had hammered, others can see in a different light, and once he explained why you could see past the negativity from the judges.
Hats off to Sky Arts though, I would love to see more "real photography" on the box, As the other judge said in the final "an image doesn't have to carry a political, emotional message" to be great.