Here is sometime I was sent about World Press. Wonder what you think. I was not too wild about the winners. I feel like if you want to make documents that are more "moody" or vague, then you need a photo essay, not a single. But i could be wrong. I also feel there are years when there is not a single iconic image and they shouldn't give a single prize. Actually, I don't even like the prize for a single images - unless it is an icon like Eddie Adams or Nick Ut, I don't see the reason to give it an award. What do yot think? ps - I think since Gilles Peress photographers have had more of a "clear Authorship" and perhaps the World Press is just behind the times? - Robert Stevens
This year's World Press Photo Awards are somewhat of a departure from previous competitions, as there were less pure news pictures chosen, typically coming from one of the wire services, but more well composed, moody, and photographically sophisticated stories and images that showed a clear authorship by a single photographer. It seems that slowly the walls between what is still known as photojournalism, documentary photography, art photography and commercial photography are crumbling and I think that this is a good thing. Many of the prize winners this year are very young photographers, young both in age and also in their approach. I feel very proud to be part of this new generation of people who are not so much thinking in categories any longer.
- Christoph Bangert re. World Press May 2008