# Photo competition: winners gallery!



## editor (Dec 5, 2004)

I've now posted up a brand new section dedicated to the fantastic photo competition here

Thanks to Alef for the images (and nagging!) and hiccup for the archive pages - I hope that the gallery does justice to al the fine work. With luck, it'll soon get a good listing in google and help publicise the work.

Note: I've left the urban75 copyright notice in as a precaution, but naturally I'm not claiming copyright! If anyone gets in touch regarding using the images, I'll obviously contact with the photographer


----------



## alef (Dec 5, 2004)

Thank you, editor! Seeing all the winning photos together is a reminder of just how varied and quirky the styles and tastes in photography can be... which also reflects the make up of the Urbanite community (and people in general).

Credit and thanks for this winner's gallery is also due to wiskey, she's the one who first started collecting together these photos and half of these would have otherwise been lost. 

Also much appreciate hiccup's consistent work at collecting together the thumbnails:
http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/entries.html or now also
http://theskyisbig.co.uk/u75/archive/u75archive.htm

Personally I think I'm destined to forever be the "Jimmy White" of the photo competition but then that keeps me motivated to try harder each new month. Pleased to see that Paul Russell has finally won, he's the Urbanite here who clearly is out and about and snapping hardest, oh and also has oodles of talent! Now, hmmm, fast food, time to start thinking about greasy burgers and fries....


----------



## Loki (Dec 5, 2004)

Some top photos in that gallery!


----------



## wiskey (Dec 5, 2004)

thanks Mike, that looks cool. its a shame we dont have all the winners.

nice work alef.

wiskers


----------



## Dubber Dan (Dec 5, 2004)

Nice one Mike 

But there seem to be some months seem to be missing, ie. Aug (simply summer by Dubber Dan) and Sept (water by Skydancer) 2003 and the May and June 2004 are round the wrong way (also wrong on the archive of thumbnails).

Also the June 2003 pic is being reshaped to fit the window.  It shouldn't be so wide but should be more square

Other than that tops.  Tis really nice to be able to see the winning pics all together at last


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 5, 2004)

Nice to see them together. Didn't realise that (s)Kim won twice in row.


----------



## alef (Dec 5, 2004)

Paul Russell said:
			
		

> Nice to see them together. Didn't realise that (s)Kim won twice in row.



The first two times she entered as well!


----------



## Firky (Dec 5, 2004)

Thanks man.

Just makes the guilt of not donating worse - I will get around to it, promise! Just gotta get this uni lark out the way first.


----------



## Skim (Dec 5, 2004)

Thanks Mike – it looks great.


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2004)

Dubber Dan said:
			
		

> Nice one Mike
> 
> But there seem to be some months seem to be missing, ie. Aug (simply summer by Dubber Dan) and Sept (water by Skydancer) 2003 and the May and June 2004 are round the wrong way (also wrong on the archive of thumbnails).:


Right. I've added the new photos, updated the thumbnails, added the new pages, updated the index page -  but I don't understand how the 'May and June 2004 are round the wrong way'. According to the archive links here - http://www.hiccup.f2s.com/u75/may.htm - they're the right themes for the right months - aren't they?

And now my hangover's come back.


----------



## ill-informed (Dec 5, 2004)

thanks mike. An excellent addition to the site and you've made me even more determined to get a good picture for this month.


----------



## Firky (Dec 5, 2004)

I gotta get in again too after I got first and second place that time, it is my mission to do it for fast food


----------



## sajana (Dec 6, 2004)

Firky said:
			
		

> I gotta get in again too after I got first and second place that time, it is my mission to do it for fast food




the gallery is an excellent effort. only realised that it posts only the winner...  

which means now...one should be doing some extra effort to get on to the gallery???

Fine then.


----------



## editor (Dec 6, 2004)

sajana said:
			
		

> the gallery is an excellent effort. only realised that it posts only the winner..


There's links to _all_ the entries 
here 

If I had to post up every single entry from every month, I'd never finish the thing.


----------



## suzi (Dec 6, 2004)

hullo mike, long time no see


----------



## Firky (Dec 6, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> There's links to _all_ the entries
> here
> 
> If I had to post up every single entry from every month, I'd never finish the thing.



ah go on.... go on go on go on go on go on










go on


----------



## boskysquelch (Dec 6, 2004)

Firky said:
			
		

> ah go on.... go on go on go on go on go on
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah 'kin delegate the job to Firky...kin students an' their life's sooooooooooo boring bollackas...make him make him make him!  

Chuffed to see "my" eyes...big chuffed in sad times...big big chuffed!


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 6, 2004)

*Best winner evah*

Best winners evah

My vote:

Squelch -- 1. http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp014.html

Dubber Dan -- 2. http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp004.html

Wiskey 3 -- http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp001.html

or is this a voting step too far?!


----------



## boskysquelch (Dec 6, 2004)

Paul Russell said:
			
		

> Best winners evah
> 
> My vote:
> 
> ...





awwwwwwwwwwwwwr...I'm gonna have _Paully Russell_ tatted over me heart!


----------



## Dubber Dan (Dec 6, 2004)

Not so much me but more my missus.  I'm the one you can see.  But cheers for that Paul


----------



## editor (Dec 7, 2004)

Paul Russell said:
			
		

> Best winners evah
> My vote:
> Squelch -- 1. http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp014.html


That's a truly fabulous photo.


----------



## editor (Dec 7, 2004)

You lot may be interested in this!
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2413610
(Offline photo exhib)


----------



## Firky (Dec 7, 2004)

*puncation is for losers*




			
				squelch said:
			
		

> Yeah 'kin delegate the job to Firky...kin students an' their life's sooooooooooo boring bollackas...make him make him make him!
> 
> Chuffed to see "my" eyes...big chuffed in sad times...big big chuffed!



d'd do it, I don't mind  

student life is so fkin BORING it hurts


congrats on the bestest photo in the history of double you double you double you dot urban seventy five dot com


----------



## miss direct (Dec 7, 2004)

Wow those are great, really inspirational. Thank you for making the gallery as I wasn't even aware of this.


----------



## bosco (Dec 8, 2004)

thanks for this mike. it's great looking back at some of the lovely photos from over the years. 





btw - i've finally got my hands on an old mac to use with that film scanner, so i'll be able to scan the 2 or 3 photos of mine that somehow managed to win a couple of years ago. 
i'm probably too late though. poor wiskey has given up nagging me about it.


----------



## wiskey (Dec 10, 2004)

i have not - just not done it for the past week or so 

your one of the bay deserves to be up there mate so sort it out!!

thanks paul 

wiskers


----------



## dlx1 (Dec 11, 2004)

yes good to see the over the year. Like to think I getting better :\


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 12, 2004)

Cheers Mike, top effort as usual.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 13, 2004)

Thanks Mike for that gallery.  Urban75 goes from strength to strength.  An international photo competition has been an asset to the site since it was started and deserves to be flagged up.

Hocus Eye


----------



## jiggajagga (Feb 20, 2005)

sorry


----------



## lobster (Mar 10, 2005)

Here is my first attempt
35mm film ilford 400 , scanned at snappy snaps
resized with Picasa


----------



## alphaDelta (Mar 10, 2005)

Is that Paris, and did you mean to post on the competition thread?


----------



## lobster (Mar 10, 2005)

yep its paris
i put it on the wrong topic


----------



## Firky (May 18, 2005)

I'm going to have to ask for my photograph to be removed as it is no longer hold the rights for it.

Thanks for voting and what not though, and thanks to ed' for hosting it on a very popular website


----------



## Firky (May 18, 2005)

Does anyone know who came second in this comp:

http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp016.html

You're now the new winner - congrats  !


----------



## alef (May 23, 2005)

Firky said:
			
		

> Does anyone know who came second in this comp:
> 
> http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp016.html
> 
> You're now the new winner - congrats  !



You did! http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2095038&postcount=158


----------



## Paul Russell (May 24, 2005)

Firky said:
			
		

> I'm going to have to ask for my photograph to be removed as it is no longer hold the rights for it.



Why did you give away the rights to your own photo??

I hope they gave you a lot of money!


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 13, 2005)

Ive just noticed my name is down as winning twice, when in fact the link to the first entry is someone else's photo, and I didnt win that month


----------



## alef (Jun 14, 2005)

Barking_Mad said:
			
		

> Ive just noticed my name is down as winning twice, when in fact the link to the first entry is someone else's photo, and I didnt win that month



Couldn't find it at first, only could see this one:
http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp018.html

But then spotted the webpage title is wrong on one of Paul Russell's. I've been sending the editor the new wins every few months, will include the correction next time.


----------



## Jo/Joe (Jun 26, 2005)

A lot of great photos, well done you lot.


----------



## Firky (Sep 9, 2005)

alef said:
			
		

> You did! http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2095038&postcount=158



Oh? Nevermind  

(Sold the rights to the national trust paul, for next to nowt)

Do I email Ed' with this month's winner then or does he do it......

Oi Ed, you reading this? What do I do?


----------



## editor (Sep 9, 2005)

Can someone send me the June and July winning pics please?


----------



## Firky (Sep 9, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Can someone send me the June and July winning pics please?



sent them to contact at urban75 dot com


----------



## D (Sep 10, 2005)

I just looked in the gallerz for the first time.  INcredible pictures! Reallz stunning work.


----------



## Soreenkid (Sep 13, 2005)

Need a big update, though, all I can see from 2005 is:

URBAN75 PHOTO COMPETITION LISTING

Feb 2005 Hair, ta daaaa! - tribal_princess
Jan 2005 Solitude Lady in Tiananmen Square


----------



## editor (Sep 20, 2005)

Photo winners gallery updated!
Great pics too 

Big thanks to alef for the work!


----------



## paolo (Mar 3, 2006)

I assume that the gallery copyright message saying all pics are (C) Urban 75 (none are labelled 'otherwise') is a mistake and that the photos are actually copyright of the photographer?


----------



## alef (Mar 3, 2006)

The first post in this thread explains it.




			
				editor said:
			
		

> Note: I've left the urban75 copyright notice in as a precaution, but naturally I'm not claiming copyright! If anyone gets in touch regarding using the images, I'll obviously contact with the photographer


----------



## alef (Mar 4, 2006)

Winners' gallery has just been updated, now includes Snadge's lighthouse, Iemanja, and Robster:
http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/thumbs.html


----------



## lighterthief (Mar 7, 2006)

Nice, thanks alef


----------



## girasol (Mar 7, 2006)

alef said:
			
		

> Winners' gallery has just been updated, now includes Snadge's lighthouse, Iemanja, and Robster:
> http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/thumbs.html



Fame at last!   

Thanks, alef!


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 7, 2006)

Iemanja said:
			
		

> Fame at last!
> 
> Thanks, alef!



An a very evocative and purdy shot it is toooo.  

*adds a downer>>>>

but wtf????  



> Note: this photo was digitally enhanced


 <<on snadge's shot...

is that supposed to be a joke(sic!)?


----------



## girasol (Mar 7, 2006)

squelch said:
			
		

> An a very evocative and purdy shot it is toooo.
> 
> *adds a downer>>>>
> 
> ...



thanks   

oh, yes, I just noticed that too... Haven't lots of photos been digitally enhanced?  Not sure that needs to be there...


----------



## mauvais (Mar 7, 2006)

I don't agree with that either  

Snadge won the competition and won it with everyone aware of what had been done to it.


----------



## wiskey (Mar 7, 2006)

oh i dont know, there is a difference between a little tweaking and making it look fantastic. 

and no, they havent all been digitally enhanced, all my winning entries were 35mm film scanned in and no playing about (this may be why i havent won for ages)

<edited cos i ust realised you said 'lots of' not all. but my point stil stands>


----------



## Derian (Mar 7, 2006)

What a brilliant way to start the day, browsing through the winner pics   



(I don't like the digitally enhanced comment either, fwiw)


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 7, 2006)

I'd like to report many of the above posts for using the Editor's real name in this thread.












Where do I report to?


----------



## wiskey (Mar 7, 2006)

Minnie_the_Minx said:
			
		

> I'd like to report many of the above posts for using the Editor's real name in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




 

whats your point??


----------



## snadge (Mar 7, 2006)

neither do I but I suppose that's the way it goes.

I would be happy with digitally mastered, enhanced makes it sound as though there is stuff in the picture that has been added when there isn't.


----------



## wiskey (Mar 7, 2006)

snadge said:
			
		

> I would be happy with digitally mastered, enhanced makes it sound as though there is stuff in the picture that has been added when there isn't.



yeas i spose thats true. maybe 'touched up' or something?


----------



## Biddlybee (Mar 7, 2006)

Got to agree with most here - the 'digitally enhanced bit' on snadge's pic should be taken off.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 7, 2006)

wiskey said:
			
		

> whats your point??




Nice pictures wiskey


No point.  Just minxing


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 7, 2006)

*_mustn't bite...mustn't bite...mustn't bite!!!!..._AAAAAAAAAAARGHHHH!!!!!>>>puts boots on to go stand infront of a wave!


----------



## Firky (Mar 7, 2006)

BiddlyBee said:
			
		

> Got to agree with most here - the 'digitally enhanced bit' on snadge's pic should be taken off.



Agreed.


----------



## alef (Mar 7, 2006)

snadge said:
			
		

> neither do I but I suppose that's the way it goes.
> 
> I would be happy with digitally mastered, enhanced makes it sound as though there is stuff in the picture that has been added when there isn't.



OK, I'll send the editor an updated page with "digitally mastered". I thought it was only fair to have some kind of note on it since it has been manipulated to a large extent. If you prefer "mastered" to "enhanced" so be it...


----------



## lighterthief (Mar 7, 2006)

My two cents - the note should be completely removed.


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 7, 2006)

I  give  up


----------



## mauvais (Mar 7, 2006)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

> I  give  up


Ah, your point's too cryptic to understand anyway


----------



## editor (Mar 7, 2006)

To be honest, "digitally mastered" not only sounds ultra-wanky, it doesn't really make sense. I don't know what went on with the image, but I'd say phrases like 'digitally processed' or 'adjusted' make more sense.


----------



## Firky (Mar 7, 2006)

Remove it completely?


----------



## wiskey (Mar 7, 2006)

adjusted is good


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 7, 2006)

wiskey said:
			
		

> adjusted is good



Putting ALL things aside...  ,,it simply doesn't feel in-keeping with the _spirit_ of things..I know you ALL know what "I" mean so I won't repeat myself agin..but it ain't right! 

*label one you have to label them all as far as I'm concerned...I jus "feel" this wasn't _the way_ to do it, generally and specifically.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 8, 2006)

I guessed that was what you meant, but I did briefly wonder if you were just anti-PS   . Anyway, I agree entirely - not really in keeping with the spirit of it all to start adding caveats & clauses.

If you're going to insist on doing it, do it to mine as well please.


----------



## wiskey (Mar 8, 2006)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

> Putting ALL things aside...  ,,it simply doesn't feel in-keeping with the _spirit_ of things..I know you ALL know what "I" mean so I won't repeat myself agin..but it ain't right!
> 
> *label one you have to label them all as far as I'm concerned...I jus "feel" this wasn't _the way_ to do it, generally and specifically.



i dunno what you're on about?

seriously.


----------



## Derian (Mar 8, 2006)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

> Putting ALL things aside...  ,,it simply doesn't feel in-keeping with the _spirit_ of things..I know you ALL know what "I" mean so I won't repeat myself agin..but it ain't right!
> 
> *label one you have to label them all as far as I'm concerned...I jus "feel" this wasn't _the way_ to do it, generally and specifically.



I agree. All or none sort of thing.

Oooh, new username


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 8, 2006)

wiskey said:
			
		

> i dunno what you're on about?
> 
> seriously.



You'd put this poor image down for being,,,_"adjusted"_...Goth Heffer at Carn Euny  


*rubs n buffs Nu Name Tag...


----------



## Firky (Mar 8, 2006)

you're mad as a shit house rat, you know that? if you were a lass I would. Totally. But you'd just break my head


----------



## wiskey (Mar 8, 2006)

who said anything about putting an image down ffs? 

i dont think i ever said it was a bad image, i said i chose not to vote for it because i felt it was over photoshopped for a photography competition. but everyone else liked it and it won. but they all voted it to win knowing it was PS'ed, why shouldnt future people who look at it be given the same information?

fuck it, you know what i think paul has the right idea.


----------



## Firky (Mar 8, 2006)

I don't think he meant 'down' in that context, dude. At least that is not how I read it.


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 8, 2006)

wiskey said:
			
		

> who said anything about putting an image down ffs?
> :::::::
> fuck it, you know what i think paul has the right idea.



now then!  no neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed!...no neeeeeeeeeeeeed!  


I'm not being specific...I agree with people knowing/learning/understanding...but believe that this appears to single out the image in a demeaning way...why not have _Note:The teeth are not real _on my Old Age pickee...?

snizz'zzzzn't personal wiskey or alef or anyone come to that...'cet me...I jus feeel it ain't right...can the Winners give up a one liner to describe how they produced their capture maybe?


----------



## wiskey (Mar 8, 2006)

well if thats the case fair enough. 

but i think you're right, i'm just narky huh. 

i hereby bow out gracefully.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 8, 2006)

Mine was Photoshopped. There was no fuss about that.






			
				me said:
			
		

> Edit: meant to add that I altered the levels a bit; specifically I made a new layer with the foreground beacon object, left that pretty much as it was, and made the sky layer a bit more contrasty to bring out the colour.


If this is the path people want the competition to follow, though it seems they don't, then change the rules. You can't really start tacking little notes onto things later - it's just not in keeping with the sense of fair play.


----------



## strung out (Mar 8, 2006)

I agree, either have the note for everyone, or for no-one at all*. Seems a bit wanky just to have it added on that one entry.

*preferred choice


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 8, 2006)

wiskey said:
			
		

> well if thats the case fair enough.



honestly m'lady..  



*their jus all jealous on me, snadge n riot sky's(  ) PS buffness anways!!!  ,,,spshlly that mavis and the _kisser_!  

KnowwotImean? 


**but fairdoes it's still Alef's call but I hope somewhere in this he understands what I'm trying to say also...mate it jus _jumps_ out toooo much? 

And tbh with, snadge's pickee in particular I know the shot could have been done with just a 25 dernier stocking on the lens,a polarizer, & a blimmin good meter reading, for film.


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 8, 2006)

mauvais mangue said:
			
		

> Mine was Photoshopped. There was no fuss about that.


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 8, 2006)

Anyways...I'm going to see this now...before I go bye_byes...








N_Nx


----------



## mauvais (Mar 8, 2006)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

>


All I ever wanted was a little bit of a fuss


----------



## boskysquelch (Mar 8, 2006)

mauvais mangue said:
			
		

> All I ever wanted was a little bit of a fuss



I 0wnz fuss...it ain't what it's cracked upto be...  ,,,stick with yer spreadsheets mate!  

*pulls boots on...


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Mar 8, 2006)

personally i think the notice should be removed it's a good photograph and it won... that's the end of it surely... 

It implies it won on some sort of technicality by which it has won, rather than it's the populist choice....

I have been one of the biggest anti proponents of shopping stuff for the photo comp but the prevailing attitude has been for some time that it's allowed. 

The why's and what fors of why you should or shouldn't shop a shot is for another thread, but unless there is to be some kind of explaintion of what techniques have been used in all the photos then it's not needed...

My 2 pence


----------



## snadge (Mar 20, 2006)

well must admit I'm suprised this debate is still pulling people in....

as long as the entrant states that it has been " fiddled" with, vote on the merits of the picture, not a distaste of what I feel some people see as an unfair advantage.


This rule should also apply to darkroom enhanced photo's using film, which there have been a few of with no disclaimer at all.......

go figure.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 21, 2006)

*[will edit to links later]*

Here's something for you...

I went back to my first D70 shots the other day, which are JPEGs. I didn't really know what I was doing at the time (if I had, I'd have shot RAW) and they're particularly flat, D70 trademark images.

Here's one:

http://wapoc.com/crap/orig1.jpg

Here's the same image, post processed:

http://wapoc.com/crap/replacement1.jpg

Mainly all I did was set the grey point and play with curves. There's a bit more to it than that, but not much.

Here's another:

http://wapoc.com/crap/Random2_sm.jpg

and the original:

http://wapoc.com/crap/lazare.jpg

The processed versions might not be to everyone's tastes but I'm sure you agree that _something_ needed doing, and that they're not inherently completely crap shots in the first place if they can be turned into these.


----------



## Firky (Mar 23, 2006)

"Note: this photo was digitally enhanced"

Still there, man. 

http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/comp016.html

My photo was 'digitally enhanced' (what an awful term), I knocked out the colour and gave it a night-vision-like greenish tint.


----------



## Firky (Jun 18, 2006)

wrong thread


----------



## editor (Jun 18, 2006)

mauvais said:
			
		

> H
> http://wapoc.com/crap/Random2_sm.jpg
> 
> and the original:
> ...


I prefer the original, to be honest, maybe with just a _slight_ tweak of the levels (or maybe in B&W).


----------



## alef (Nov 9, 2006)

The winners' page has been updated, now including up to October:
http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/thumbs.html

Five out of the past eight have been b+w...


----------



## alef (Dec 10, 2006)

cesare said:
			
		

> I didn't even realise that gallery existed alef  Nice work with all the links - just had a look at 11 going on 17 which I think is one of my favouritest of bosky's pics ever
> 
> 
> Doesn't detract from your post firks, that was loads of work and easy to read and posted just at the right moment for the thread (as I started to derail it with topics done before d'oh), thanks again



I have had the impression that few people notice this sticky! Agree with you that squelch/bosky's winning portrait is exceptional, it's grown on me with time. 

Princess by Barking Mad has always been one of my favourites, although I think the original entry was a lot larger making the tiara more pronounced.

In January we can have a best winner of 2006 poll...


----------



## cesare (Dec 10, 2006)

My post arrives on a different thread   

Best of 2006 sounds good ...


----------



## Firky (May 27, 2007)

Oohh its all been updated


----------



## alef (Jul 25, 2007)

I'm trying to now keep these updated each month. But I've run out of energy for helping with the thumbnails...


----------



## alef (Sep 1, 2007)

The past entries page now makes it easy to see all the previous themes:
http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/entries.html


----------



## alef (Nov 13, 2008)

Updated to include recent wins:
http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/thumbs.html

List of all winners and themes:
http://www.urban75.org/photos/comp/sitemap.html


----------



## blueplume (Jul 3, 2011)

i'm wrong


----------



## alef (Jul 5, 2011)

I update the winners' gallery about every 3 months...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Mar 30, 2014)

.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Mar 30, 2014)

editor said:


> I've now posted up a brand new section dedicated to the fantastic photo competition here
> 
> Thanks to Alef for the images (and nagging!) and hiccup for the archive pages - I hope that the gallery does justice to al the fine work. With luck, it'll soon get a good listing in google and help publicise the work.
> 
> Note: I've left the urban75 copyright notice in as a precaution, but naturally I'm not claiming copyright! If anyone gets in touch regarding using the images, I'll obviously contact with the photographer



Just noticed an error in the Winners Gallery: the winner was joint, between Clare and Stowpirate, April 2012: but the photo included is one of mine.


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 17, 2017)

Is it worth keeping this as a pinned thread?


----------

