Winners of the Anything Butterfly Contest

[Freaky]

How did we judge the contest?

The judges were Freaky and ShaolinTiger, with Kim as a tie breaker judge.

Firstly, each contestant was assigned a contestant number. This data was captured and maintained by Persatuan SLE Malaysia (PSLEM). Upon the closing date, they printed a copy of all the contestants with their corresponding contestant numbers and details. This was sealed in an envelope.

Each photograph was emailed to lupus@shutterasia.com (although some people could not read and sent them to PSLEM... who replied those people and hopefully they resent to the proper email)

Our process was:

Go through all the pictures and disqualified any that had no EXIF, was not at least 5 megapixels or was not shot within May 1-7th. (there were only a few)
Choose the best photo for each contestant (for those with multiple entries). The others were put in a 'out' folder.
Removed any photo which was not up to par, either did not follow the theme, or was too technically off.
Set up a preliminary top 8 (for the main prizes), then narrowed down the remainder for the consolation prizes.
Review all the out photo's in case we missed any good ones during the 1st run through
Made adjustments to the lists (cos we did miss some)
Review the all the winners, making final judgments. Any photo's that needed a third decision or to make a tie breaker decision was done by Kim.
Once list was finalised, we opened the sealed envelope and matched the contestant numbers with the photo's


The criteria in which we judged the contest:
• Interpretation of the theme
• Technically correct
• Composition
• Artistic Value

Here are the winners of the Anything Butterfly Contest...

It was a hard fight between the prize winners, so we decided to look at the flaws to the pics rather than what made it good to set them aside from the top 3. Once there were no longer any flaws, the decision got really hard...

The first three pics were all technically good. Each well composed and good artistically in it's own right. There were very little separating them. But someone had to be on top...

1st Prize: Hemin Xylan B. Mahzan
This was chosen because of the clarity of the subject and nice clean and blear background. The colours were also very nice, with the blue sky, red flowers and good contrast and definition on the blue butterfly.

20456

2nd Prize: Low Wuu Shin
This was 2nd because the background was not as clean and the subject was not as defined. However, we liked the composition and the use of the plant as a leading line, to draw the viewers to the butterfly. The colours was also vibrant and we liked the highlights on the plant from the sun.

20457

3rd Prize: Goh Lai Chong
This was chosen because, it was technically superb... On all aspects, the photo is a winner. However, it lost out to the other two because it lack the vibrancy of the first two pictures. Apart from that, there was nothing to complain about this picture.

20458

[Freaky]

They are all nice photo's, but was either not as good as the winning 3 on 1 or more points. I will write a brief notes on each on why it was chosen and why it didn't make the top 3.

Here are the Merit Winners in no particular order:

Wong Yie Fung:
Technically it was good. Good interpretation of the theme, but the painting on the model could have been nicer.

20459

Wong Sze Fei:
Nice vibrant colours. DOF too shallow.

20460

Yuen Kok Leng:
Clean clear and nice interpretation. Good use of the lines. A little too plain though, but very artistic.

20461

Tan Chee Seng:
Nice interpretation of the theme but too much negative space on top that serves no purpose.

20462

Sanjitpaal Singh:
Nice photo. We liked this very much, but lost out because we felt the composition was slightly off as the butterfly was too low. But good use of light and shadows.

20463

[Freaky]

The consolation prizes were pictures which caught our eye. Each had their good and bad points.

In no particular order:

Foong Hock Leong:
20586

Ng Wei Siang:
20587

Debbie Aw:
20590

Foong Chun Piew:
20588

Lee Kim Hon:
20589

[Freaky]

Eiran Tan Jiun Yen
20591

Sim Xing Ru
20592

Kok Lek Juan
20593

Esther Teoh Yunn Pei
20594

Nazmir Najubuddin
20595

[Freaky]

Wee Jee Fang
20596

Tan Lup Chee
20597

Tee Yi Ning
20598

Ho Pei See
20599

Ho Pei Leng
20600

[nel]

Congratulation to all the winners. Very nice and creative work ... :)

[SooHK]

cantik cantik, colorful...

[joyce]

Congratulations to all winners!!

And to Lordmint...hint hint...paham paham la...kekekeke :P

[funkiller]

Indeed these are superb works.

Can't wait to see the others.

Congrats to all winners !

[hawkl]

i found out the winner editted the picture with photoshop effect... Is that right?

[nfariz8]

Congrats Lordmint! well deserving photo for the win! :D

[karheng]

So does that mean congrats Lordmint?! Congrats Wuushin too!

[kenneth]

...but the painting on the model could have been nicer.

20459...
i guess i can never be a professional face painter :(:Phttp://www.shutterasia.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Raymond]

i found out the winner editted the picture with photoshop effect... Is that right?

I got same feeling also....
found the some part of the flower not natural.
this is 1st time I reply, not yet figure out how to upload picture else I can show the part that give this feeling.

yup. and not forget to say congratulation to all winner.

is nice picture.

[karheng]

I got same feeling also....
found the some part of the flower not natural.
this is 1st time I reply, not yet figure out how to upload picture else I can show the part that give this feeling.

yup. and not forget to say congratulation to all winner.

is nice picture.

Which part of the flower is not natural? It is a well deserved pic.

Technically perfect, rule of thirds, keeping it simple, and contrasting colours.Very easy on the eye. For me, the size of the butterfly was at it's most perfect. Not too overbearing and not too small.

5. Only minor editing such as correct white balance, exposure and colours is allowed. However borders, tags, copyright logos or any other symbols or text may not be added to the photograph. Digital super imposition, composite photographs, trick photographs, or and any form of digital imaging or image manipulations will not be accepted.

This is the terms and condition. So editing, ie boosting colours and processing accurate WB with Photoshop is definitely allowed. :)

[transit2]

Good and nice set! Congrats to all winners.

[juliekong]

congrats to all deserving winners


Go through all the pictures and disqualified any that had no EXIF, was not at least 5 megapixels or was not shot within May 1-7th. (there were only a

i find some of the photo's date particulary interesting. wow , shot at 7th 0000, 12 am??. these guys must be real clickers right on the time eh ?


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3181/2485776881_674fcaa77a.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2191/2485775663_49ea0e056b.jpg
that's one hell of a shot at 8.30pm. 1/160 secs. plenty of lights. very good timing for butterfly shoting

[noruazumi]

these guys must be real clickers right on the time eh ?
errr.. that is possible. 1/60 percent that it is possible.

that's one hell of a shot at 8.30pm. 1/160 secs. plenty of lights. very good timing for butterfly shoting
and again, this is possible. with the use of proper lighting (such as strobes), it is possible.

[kiankheong]

and again, this is possible. with the use of proper lighting (such as strobes), it is possible.

But I have not known of any butterflies that are active at such time of hour, and that is not a moth.

Well, correct me if I'm wrong. ;)

[noruazumi]

But I have not known of any butterflies that are active at such time of hour, and that is not a moth.

Well, correct me if I'm wrong. ;)
i don't shoot butterfly, so i wouldn't know. ;)
but i don't see the butterfly looks active on the photo tho.

[Raymond]

Which part of the flower is not natural? It is a well deserved pic.

Technically perfect, rule of thirds, keeping it simple, and contrasting colours.Very easy on the eye. For me, the size of the butterfly was at it's most perfect. Not too overbearing and not too small.

5. Only minor editing such as correct white balance, exposure and colours is allowed. However borders, tags, copyright logos or any other symbols or text may not be added to the photograph. Digital super imposition, composite photographs, trick photographs, or and any form of digital imaging or image manipulations will not be accepted.

This is the terms and condition. So editing, ie boosting colours and processing accurate WB with Photoshop is definitely allowed. :)


Yup, you are right....
Just because I found some border of the flowers with black line, especially the flower on most left side. So these give me feeling like it was cut and paste from somewhere else, not real. May be I use of the word "not natural" is not correct.... he... he...
Anyway Hemin Xylan B. Mahzan in reading hope you don’t mind of my comment. And please correct me if am wrong.... :D

[hawkl]

I totally agree with Raymond. The picture has been cut and pasted at a blue background. That is major editting , not minor...

[Freaky]

congrats to all deserving winners
i find some of the photo's date particulary interesting. wow , shot at 7th 0000, 12 am??. these guys must be real clickers right on the time eh ?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3181/2485776881_674fcaa77a.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2191/2485775663_49ea0e056b.jpg
that's one hell of a shot at 8.30pm. 1/160 secs. plenty of lights. very good timing for butterfly shoting

But I have not known of any butterflies that are active at such time of hour, and that is not a moth.

Well, correct me if I'm wrong. ;)

Yuen Kok Leng pic was shot at 2.10pm in the afternoon. He processed the pic at 23.43pm the same day at night. According to the exif on the original that I have, opened in Photoshop CS3. Go check it out.

Goh Lai Chong pic was shot at 8.25pm and processed at 8.58pm using Nikon NX software. Which means he must have shot this pic at home, where he does have his own butterfly's as he is documenting the life cycles of butterflys. Otherwise there could be no other way he can shoot and get home so fast to process. Also according to the exif opened on Photoshop CS3.
.

Yup, you are right....
Just because I found some border of the flowers with black line, especially the flower on most left side. So these give me feeling like it was cut and paste from somewhere else, not real. May be I use of the word "not natural" is not correct.... he... he...
Anyway Hemin Xylan B. Mahzan in reading hope you don’t mind of my comment. And please correct me if am wrong.... :D

I totally agree with Raymond. The picture has been cut and pasted at a blue background. That is major editting , not minor...

Regarding Hemin's pic... usually it's innocent until proven guilty. Unless you guys got proof, I'd rather you not speculate.

Anyway, black line means nothing. The whole flower on that section has black on it, which indicates to me that the flower has original black marking. If anyone wanted to "photoshop an entry" 'borders' would the first thing to get rid of, then you would 'feather' the pic so it blend better with the background. I can see no visible proof that the pic has been 'feathered' and other parts of the flower just blends too well into the background.

I believe it's a DOF characteristic that has made that particular flower stand out compared to the rest, giving a feel that it is 'pasted' on.

Again, if you have any evidence, please show me. If not, I rather people not make baseless accusations.

Hemin's photo was shot 4/5 10.52 am and processed 5/5 3.49pm

[lordmint]

Yup, you are right....
Just because I found some border of the flowers with black line, especially the flower on most left side. So these give me feeling like it was cut and paste from somewhere else, not real. May be I use of the word "not natural" is not correct.... he... he...
Anyway Hemin Xylan B. Mahzan in reading hope you don’t mind of my comment. And please correct me if am wrong.... :D

The picture was shot as it is with blue sky background at KL Butterfly. I didn't even cropped the picture. It was shot as is using a 70-200 f4L on a 350D camera. An off-camera flash was used at an angle, possibly resulting a rim effect on the flowers. Only minor PP was done, ie. levelling, saturation, sharpening. To be honest, I don't know how to play around with layers or heavy editing on Photoshop at all. I have the original RAW file if the organizer would like to see it.

A 100% crop of the flower in the picture.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2050/2488324332_d13575bc58_o.jpg

If you'd like to take the same shot, lets go to KL Butterfly park next time, and i'll show you where you can get the same shot. Maybe that will justify my shot.

[gr2k]

the winner's photo looks ok to me...

you do get weird-looking edges sometimes when u Sharpen an image in photoshop..

it's fine

[nivek]

Congratulations to all the winners and well deserved. As to the current contention :

10. Judges’ decisions are final and no correspondence will be entertained.

[adr]

Congratulations, to all...

this remind me some radio station that day about KB..:D:D

[Caveman]

Goh Lai Chong pic was shot at 8.25pm and processed at 8.58pm using Nikon NX software. Which means he must have shot this pic at home, where he does have his own butterfly's as he is documenting the life cycles of butterflys. Otherwise there could be no other way he can shoot and get home so fast to process. Also according to the exif opened on Photoshop CS.
.



Haha... no need to explain lah Freaky. They don't know who am I and why I can shoot at that speed and at about 9pm.

I bred that butterfly. It eclosed on that day when I came back from work. Immediately I snapped it and sent in the entry.

If I want to cheat, I have plenty of shot which are better than this.

Check out my site then please don't question me about BUTTERFLY.

Life history ==> http://www.pbase.com/lcgoh/butterfly_life_history&page=all

Butterfly of Malaysia ==> http://www.pbase.com/lcgoh/butterflies

[kiankheong]

Haha... no need to explain lah Freaky. They don't know who am I and why I can shoot at that speed and at about 9pm.

I bred that butterfly. It eclosed on that day when I came back from work. Immediately I snapped it and sent in the entry.

If I want to cheat, I have plenty of shot which are better than this.

Check out my site then please don't question me about BUTTERFLY.

Life history ==> http://www.pbase.com/lcgoh/butterfly_life_history&page=all

Butterfly of Malaysia ==> http://www.pbase.com/lcgoh/butterflies

My apologies. Cause I didn't expect that name to be actually the real name of Caveman.

Had I known it was you, I wouldn't cast my doubt on a Lepidoptera expert.

Thanks for enlightening me. :)

[wuushin]

Haha... no need to explain lah Freaky. They don't know who am I and why I can shoot at that speed and at about 9pm.

I bred that butterfly. It eclosed on that day when I came back from work. Immediately I snapped it and sent in the entry.

If I want to cheat, I have plenty of shot which are better than this.

Check out my site then please don't question me about BUTTERFLY.

Life history ==> http://www.pbase.com/lcgoh/butterfly_life_history&page=all

Butterfly of Malaysia ==> http://www.pbase.com/lcgoh/butterflies


Great set of photos you have on the butterfly. I think I got the lucky shot after view your galleries.

[ShaolinTiger]

Full coverage of the event from me here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shaolintiger/sets/72157605057804631/

[Caveman]

My apologies. Cause I didn't expect that name to be actually the real name of Caveman.

Had I known it was you, I wouldn't cast my doubt on a Lepidoptera expert.

Thanks for enlightening me. :)

No need to apology. Please don't call me expert, I am no way need.

Great set of photos you have on the butterfly. I think I got the lucky shot after view your galleries.

You photo deserved it. Please keep it up and show us more great images. ;)