Wildlife Photographer of the Year - Natural History Museum

[Peter123]

We were give tickets as a Christmas present and visited today.
Timed tickets so not too busy.

We visited a few years ago but overall felt the images were better this time.

Some impressive shots from young photographers and also some great images from people using bog standard kit lenses on their APSC cameras.

I felt the overall winner was thoroughly deserving, although IMO the mouse trying to catch a moth (to eat), taken from a low angle, was equally good.

One thing I noticed was that in the description of each image, the photographer highlighted how difficult it was to capture. From wading through swamps to photograph snakes, lying on their back at -10 degrees C., sliding down a clay slope and stopping just in time to take the shot, to digging a hide in moonlight to view animals early morning. So now you know what it takes.

Home | Wildlife Photographer of the Year | Natural History Museum

Explore the world's best nature photography. See galleries of images, find out more about the competition and about how to visit this year's exhibition.

www.nhm.ac.uk

 

[welshwizard645]

Not been a few years now but do plant to go to see this years

But this gets me everytime... I am on a good wage and do spend a fair whack on my camera gear and holidays but when I see the blurb and equipment list from a 10 year old with a D5/1Dx2 and 500 mm/4 lens I engage rant mode. When I was 10 all I had was a Boots 126 instamatic and had to beg for the flashbulb cubes.

And yet a fair amount of shots were taken with fairly inexpensive gear...and still excellent.

Some impressive shots from young photographers and also some great images from people using bog standard kit lenses on their APSC cameras.

 

[Deleted member 95430]

Not been a few years now but do plant to go to see this years

But this gets me everytime... I am on a good wage and do spend a fair whack on my camera gear and holidays but when I see the blurb and equipment list from a 10 year old with a D5/1Dx2 and 500 mm/4 lens I engage rant mode. When I was 10 all I had was a Boots 126 instamatic and had to beg for the flashbulb cubes.

And yet a fair amount of shots were taken with fairly inexpensive gear...and still excellent.

I feel image quality and sharpness are at the bottom of the pecking order in a sense that if they are sharp enough and quality enough for the image then everything is on the photographer to get the shot.

I bet you could have got something wonderful in that Boots 126

 

[delb0y]

I went to see the exhibition today at Nature in Art in Gloucester. Absolutely fabulous!

As others have said, above, it's amazing the lengths that some of these photographers have gone to to capture their images. My hour long stroll along the canal bank waiting on a cormorant doesn't quite compare...

The other thing that struck me is how, seeing these images in the flesh at a reasonable size, images that were impressive on screen become absolutely amazing. The flamingos appearing to be on a cloud looks interesting in the book, but in the flesh gives one goosebumps. But that's nothing compared to the winner of the photo-journalism category - Brent Stirton's "Ndakasi's Passing" brought tears to eyes when seen in the flesh.

I'm also pleased to see that there is a lot more importance apportioned to things other than sharpness, and although there were a few images that didn't do it for me, the good ones are simply jaw-dropping.