The Pollux Awards – September Results, juried by David H Wells (CLICK HERE or scroll down to the end of this page to read the juror's statement)

Best Image of the Month:
Kamil Vojnar, France, from the series No Vacancy

Section Professional – Series

Category Abstract:

1^st Prize: Glenn deWitt, USA, Untitled


Category Children:

1^st Prize: Mary Turner, United Kingdom, Facing Eviction

Category Culture and Daily Life:

1^st Prize: Cristina De Middel, Spain, The Afronauts; Zambian Space Program

Digital Manipulation:

1^st Prize: Kamil Vojnar, France, No Vacancy

Category Humanitarian Documentary:

1^st Prize: Fausto Podavini, Italy, Mirella

Category Landscapes and Seascapes:

1^st Prize: Harold Ross, USA, Untitled

Category Sports:

1^st Prize: Lisa Wiltse, USA, A Winter’s Tale

Category Still Life:

1^st Prize: Jason Nichols, USA, Forks

Section Non Professional – Series

Category Architecture:

1^st Prize: Sandro Tedde, Italy, The Lido

Category Culture and Daily Life:

1^st Prize: Dorothée Rapp, Germany, Ombre di Venezia

Category Fine Art:

1^st Prize: Martin Gremm, USA, Untitled

Category Self Portrait:

1^st Prize: Heidi Lender, USA, The Photographer

Category Sports:

1^st Prize: Paolo Patruno, Italy, Unusual Gym

Category Still Life:

1^st Prize: Anna Zavileiskaia, Hungary, Life

Section Professional – Single Image

Category Abstract:

1^st Prize: CE Morse, USA, Olto #19

Category Advertising:

1^st Prize: Lennette Newell, USA, Olympic Start

Category Alternative Processes:

1^st Prize: Rasmus Linaa, Denmark, Mists by the Sea

Category Animals and Wildlife:

1^st Prize: Lennette Newell, USA, Geezz

Category Architecture:

1^st Prize: Alicia Moneva, Spain, Cutting the Sky

Category Children:

1^st Prize: Lisa Wiltse, USA, Children of Ulingan

Category Cityscapes:

1^st Prize: Louis Montrose, USA, Between the Cemetery and the Sea

Category Culture and Daily Life:

1^st Prize: Ken Sklute, USA, Heading Home

Category Digital Manipulation:

1^st Prize: Alicia Moneva, Spain, Incubated

Category Editorial and Current Affairs:

1^st Prize: Linda Naesfeldt, Norway, Cairo Prayer

Category Environmental Issues:

1^st Prize:  Alexandre Cortinhas, United Kingdom, The Glass

Category Fashion:

1^st Prize: Jack Dzamba, USA, Melissa

Category Figure and Nude:

1^st Prize: Peter Dazeley, United Kingdom, Angel

Category Fine Art:

1^st Prize: Ellen O’Connell, Switzerland, Hand

Category Humanitarian Documentary:

1^st Prize: Liz Loh-Taylor, Australia, They told me the hinguguay ate her

Category Landscapes and Seascapes:

1^st Prize: Rosa Isabel Vazquez, Spain, The Tree

Category Nature:

1^st Prize: Francisco Mingorance, Spain, The Ladies of the Sea

Category People:

1^st Prize: Liz Loh-Taylor, Australia, Angel on the Pier

Category Performing Arts:

1^st Prize: Tamas Boczko, Hungary, Ismael Ludman-Maria Mondino

Category Portrait:

1^st Prize: Rasmus Linaa, Denmark, Drawn Imaginery

Category Self Portrait:

1^st Prize: Misako Oba, USA, They Might Amputate My Pinkie 3 – Anguish

Category Sports:

1^st Prize: Lisa Wiltse, USA, A Winter’s Tale I

Category Still Life:

1^st Prize: Jason Nichols, USA, Drinking Glasses

Category Wedding:

1^st Prize: Ken Sklute, USA, Sensuous Curves

Section Non Professional – Single Image

Category Abstract:

1^st Prize: Aleksandr Korolev, USA, B2

Category Advertising:

1^st Prize: Susan Graham, USA, Just Kicking Back

Category Alternative Processes:

1^st Prize: Hugh Jones, USA, Spacetime Event 1

Category Animals and Wildlife:

1^st Prize: Stephen K Hall, USA, Morning respite, Baboon family, Kenya

Category Architecture:

1^st Prize: Alex Attard, Malta, Service Station

Category Children:

1^st Prize: Maximo Panés García, Spain, Le Petit Enfant

Category Cityscapes:

1^st Prize: Liz Miller, USA, Untitled

Category Culture and Daily Life:

1^st Prize: Anna Zavileiskaia, Hungary, Moscow (metro Arbatskaya)

Category Digital Manipulation:

1^st Prize: Karen Divine, USA, Graduation

Category Environmental Issues:

1^st Prize: Jose Zamora, USA, Spring

Category Fashion:

1^st Prize: Jean-Luc Rateau, USA, Read my Lips

Category Figure and Nude:

1^st Prize: Leszek Paradowski, Poland, Hear the Silence

Category Fine Art:

1^st Prize: Tom Bell, USA, Antigua Window

Category Humanitarian Documentary:

1^st Prize: Benjamin Genet, France, Sharp look among the crowd

Category Landscapes and Seascapes:

1^st Prize: Emil Stojek, Poland, Lines of Defense

Category Macro and Micro:

1^st Prize: Hugh Jones, USA, Manarola Cinque Terre Italy 2

Category Nature:

1^st Prize: Nenad Saljic, Croatia, Mercedes

Category People:

1^st Prize: Dorothée Rapp, Germany, Louvre dream (Paris pas vu)

 Category Performing Arts:

1^st Prize: Maximo Panés García, Spain, The Show Must Go On

Category Portrait:

1^st Prize: Beatrix Jourdan, Senegal, Puma

Category Self Portrait:

1^st Prize: Leszek Paradowski, Poland, The Time Has Stopped

Category Still Life:

1^st Prize: Margrieta Jeltema, Italy, Enchanted Flowers

Category Wedding:

1^st Prize: Cecilia Ling, USA, Waiting

Juror's Statement (David H Wells)

I enjoyed jurying the WPGA competition immensely.  It gave me a window into the incredibly varied universe of different ways photography is practiced today. Though I work as an editorial photographer, I enjoyed seeing work beyond my own specialty. I tried to evaluate the work on the most basic level, asking myself over and over, is this image compelling me to consider something differently than before I saw the image? Another way of approaching the work was to ask, does this work provoke an emotional, intellectual or psychological reaction in me beyond my simply recognizing what I am seeing?

As I looked through the work, I was reminded that, as an educator I always approach anything I do in the world of photography as a teachable moment and this was certainly one.

As someone who studied the history of photography, I know the incredible diversity of image making styles and strategies that have been used throughout the history of the medium. It was thrilling to see so many of those different styles and strategies being so widely applied in the work I reviewed.  Though I do not know for certain, but I am assuming, most of the work I was reviewing involved digital capture (and most likely digital post-production and output.) The pleasant surprise is the fact that so many photographers have mastered digital imaging to the point where they can make images with dozens of different stylistic approaches very easily.  

Unfortunately, some of the imagery announced itself as digital in an obvious and problematic way. However, in most of the work, whatever digital imaging techniques were used looked to be done so in support of the image and the message, rather than overwhelming it.  

Some work showed an extraordinary commitment to a given subject matter, to a stylistic approach or to both.  The winners were usually obvious, in the sense that they utilized many of the more successful imaging strategies that I will explore below.  In some way, the really weak work was equally easy to spot and discard.  For me, the hardest part was the work that was in the middle, the work that kept prompting me to say to myself “almost.”

I was keeping notes as I viewed, re-viewed and then judged and then finally scored the work. My process was to look at all of the work in one category, so I knew everything that had been submitted. Then I went through and accepted or rejected the work in that one category. Then I went to do something else, to let that work slowly fade in my mind’s eye.  Then I would revisit the work to rate the accepted images, starting by looking at all of the work in a category, so I knew all the work that I had accepted. Then I went through and scored the work.  

The notes I made as I went through this process are things I would tell anyone considering submitting work for a photo contest:

·      Look objectively at the categories and place your work where it goes based on your first, visceral reaction to the work. (Or, you might ask someone you respect, what is his or her first reaction to the work.)  Do NOT over-intellectualize the categorization by focusing on some small aspect of the image to enter it, for example, in the environmental category when the image is clearly a nature photo. This was especially frustrating for me, because images that I rejected in one category might have done very well were they in the right category.

·      When making photographs and deciding which to submit for a contest, publication, portfolio, etc., think about how the best photographs in any genre take the viewer somewhere new emotionally, physically, psychologically, etc.  The key to much great art is showing the viewer something they have not seen (or have not thought of looking at “that way.”)

·      Another way of thinking of this is to not simply show the viewer what a person, place or thing looked like. Show them what it feels like to be that person, to be in that place or to be part of that event, etc.

·      Just showing up in a visually stimulating place does not guarantee a great photo. Getting to certain remote parts of the third world is something of an accomplishment, but that is not enough.  The art in the best images from the third world were the ones that gave the viewer the experience of what those places felt like rather than just looked like! 

·      Fine art is not the dumping ground where you put imagery that fits no other obvious category. Fine-art imagery is usually about authorship, aesthetics and emotion.  While the best ones have those components, they also are technically and aesthetically well executed.

 ·      In organizing work for any kind of project submission, such as this kind of contest, keep in mind that too many images that look too similar will dilute your entry. Images that look too different from others in the set will also disrupt the continuity that is at the core of a good project. It is definitely a balancing act. 

I hate to make generalizations, but I noted that the professional submissions generally showed higher technical skills and image execution.  On the other hand, the non-professionals were often as adventurous if not more so than the professionals, in bending the rules and imaging conventions to make interesting projects. This suggests that doing photography for a living can constrain one’s thinking and creativity.

The lesson in all of this is that if your work was rejected and something that you think of as similar to yours was accepted (or even won an award,) try to understand why. In the case of projects, for example, was the winner’s entry more tightly edited, visually cohesive or stylistically unified than your submission? Griping is one possible reaction, but clearly analyzing what your worked lacked in comparison to the winners is key step in getting better as a photographer. 

The prizes you might win in this competition (or any other) are nice. The real prize is getting better as a photographer. That prize is there for ANY photographer willing to look at the winners (and their own work) analytically, even critically.  An award is a momentary thing, but creative growth lasts forever.