World Press Photo

©Pietro Masturzo

World Press Photo 2010

13 comments

  1. some very good photos/storys. thanks

  2. Yes, some very good pictures. The winner is weak to me.

  3. Kay, I do agree with you.

  4. the winner is not the typical WOW effect picture.

  5. When the failed revolution would had been financed and managed largely through the CIA.

    Would that change anything?

  6. I was surprised to see this heavy black vignetting and black overtones acceptable to the world press, but I guess it does not qualify for altering the photo. Apparently, this guy went too far : http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/behind-35/

  7. This Rudik is highly suspicious!!! I nowhere find a website and photos of him.

    Is he even a real photographer ?? ;)))

    I do like the comment of Craig Warga. Sums it up to me.
    http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/behind-35/#comment-67523

    Thank you Kay for the link to the image. It took me some minutes to find this foot.
    http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=873606

  8. The picture who won the premium award, the above posted, is no photograph it is a frame of a video file !!!

    Interview with the photographer of the picture above posted
    http://www.rearviewmirror.it/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=353&Itemid=80

  9. hard to believe…….wow! i’m losing respect for this World Press Award… or i just need to realign myself into the age of video. i’m very surprised.

  10. Very good argument here at the bottom text
    http://www.nppa.org/professional_development/self-training_resources/eadp_report/photo_changes.html

    And how can they award a video jpg ?

  11. Disqualified World Press Photo speaks out, says retouching was legitimate

    http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=873689