In a time when the public is increasingly skeptical about the veracity of what they see online, the Natural Landscape Photography Awards is a breath of fresh air. Thanks to a stringent set of requirements, you can rest assured that, in the case of this exceptional landscape photography, what you see is what you get.

Entrants are not allowed to add, remove, or distort significant elements from their images. They also can’t combine images taken at different focal lengths or during different times of day. In order to verify the accuracy of the images, judges require that each photographer also submit their RAW files.

Even though the competition is only in its third year, it still received 11,176 entries from professional and amateur landscape photographers in 54 different countries. And the winners clearly demonstrate that heavy editing is not necessary to produce breathtaking images. Canadian landscape and nature photographer Blake Randall was named Photographer of the Year for his exceptional portfolio of work. From snowy rolling hills to detailed photos of the icy environment, Randall’s photos rose to the top of the field.

“Since its inception, the NLPA awards have set the gold standard for landscape photography—preserving the authentic experience of capturing our planet’s unaltered natural beauty in contrast to the growing popularity of AI and computer-generated imagery,” Randall shared. “The images presented in the competition reflect the kind of photography I aspire to achieve, making this award extra special and something I will be proud of for the rest of my life.”

Proving that you don’t need to be a professional photographer to win an award, Gabriel Stankiewicz‘s image of snow-hugged trees in Norway was named Photograph of the Year. Stankiewicz is a doctoral researcher in computational mechanics by day, and he came across the scene while snowshoeing in Norway.

While winter appears to dominate the top awards, there’s also plenty of greenery to be seen across the contest’s 10 categories. From stunning star trails to lush moss-covered forests, the winners showed off a wide range of landscapes. The winners shared in a prize pool that included $13,000 in cash prizes, as well as FLM tripods. Scroll down to see more winners and get inspired to know that AI has nothing on these talented photographers.

The 2023 Natural Landscape Photography Awards announced their winners.

“Untitled” by Tiago Mateus. Project of the Year, Winner.

“A storm in crayon” by Björn Nehrhoff von Holderberg. Grand Scenic, Winner.

“Lake Frome / Munda, South Australia” by Peter Eastway. Aerial, Winner.

“Gogh With The Flow” by Matt Redfern. Abstract and Details, Runner Up.

“Untitled” by Blake Randall. Photographer of the Year, Winner.

The contest has strict rules about photo manipulation and retouching in order to ensure the integrity of the contest.

“Arctic Tenacity” by Gabriel Stankiewicz. Photograph of the Year, Winner.

“Untitled” by Benjamin Maze. Photographer of the Year, Runner Up.

“Untitled” by Xavier Lequarre. Grand Scenic, Runner Up.

“Eyeing the stars” by Prajit Ravindran. Night, Runner Up.

“Disturbed” by Peter Coskun. Black and White, Runner Up.

All finalists were required to submit their RAW files so that the judging panel could guarantee the authenticity of the entries.

“Ice calligraphy” by Pål Hermansen. Aerial,Runner Up.

“Little Leaves” by Mieke Boynton. Common Places,Runner Up.

“Empty” by Jay Tayag. Environmental,Runner Up.

“Tempest – Crawford Notch NH” by Harry Lichtman. Black and White, Winner.

“Early Morning at Piemans Falls” by James Hider. Water, Winner.

Over 11,000 images from photographers in 54 countries were entered into the competition.

“Winter Story” by Takahashi Hiroto. Intimate Landscape, Winner.

“Lightpainting” by Barbara Seiberl-Stark. Water,Runner Up.

“Solstice Marker & Star Trails” by David Hunter. Night, Winner.

“Ephemeral distortion” by Alexandre Deschaumes. Mountains, Winner.

“Winter Light – Mt Geryon – Du Cane Range” by Grant Dixon. Mountains,Runner Up.

“Untitled” by Eric Bennett. Abstract and Details, Winner.

“A little piece of autumn” by César Llaneza. Intimate Landscape, Runner Up.

“Once Upon a Time” by Matt Redfern. Common Places, Winner.

“Fuse” by Martin Bürner. Environmental, Winner.

Natural Landscape Photography Awards: Website | Facebook | Instagram

My Modern Met granted permission to feature photos by the Natural Landscape Photography Awards.

Related Articles:

Stunning Winners of the UK Landscape Photographer of the Year Contest

Stunning Panorama of Melting Polar Ice Wins Nature Photography Contest

Awe-Inspiring Winners of the 2021 Natural Landscape Photography Awards

20+ Incredible Panoramic Photos From the 2023 EPSON International Pano Awards

The Sony World Photography Awards, a recognized platform for emerging talents, has come under scrutiny for its age limit policies within its Student award category. There’s a growing concern about the fairness of age limits that exclude mature students, with questions raised about imposing an upper age limit of 30 years for participants in the student category.

The Sony World Photography Awards Student competition, themed “Home,” encourages participants to explore and express their interpretations through a photographic series. Education institutions across the world are encouraging and supporting their students to submit their entries in order to be in the running for early-career recognition of talent, which would certainly stand students in good stead for their ongoing career trajectories. When reading the terms and conditions of the student category, rule number one states: “The Competition is open to all students of photography from World Photography Organization’s selected Universities. All Entrants must be aged between 18 and 30 years of age at the time of Competition’s deadline.” The latter contradicts the former, as not all students pursuing photography qualifications are 30 years old or younger.

The crux of the issue is that not all students are recent high school graduates or young adults starting their academic journeys. It is common for creatives of all types to change careers and pursue their passions after trying to fit into working in a more traditional career. The argument for removing age limits gains strength when considering the motivations behind taking up photography later in life. Unlike younger people, mature students often come with some extra life experience, each bringing a distinctive narrative to their photographic endeavors. For some, photography might be a second career or a means of self-expression after years spent in a different field. Others might use it as a therapeutic outlet, a creative escape that adds depth to their personal and professional lives, or something to keep them occupied upon retirement.

The term “student” encompasses a diverse range of individuals, including those pursuing higher education later in life. Imposing an upper age limit overlooks the broader reality of a typical higher education classroom. Mature students, often juggling work, family, and education, might discover their passion for photography later in life, but their contributions to the student population should not be dismissed. This policy inadvertently penalizes those who bring life experiences and unique perspectives to the art form.

A student competition should extend beyond age brackets and celebrate diverse experiences, perspectives, and creative journeys. By imposing an age limit, the competition inadvertently perpetuates a narrow definition of what it means to be a student photographer. Photography is not confined to a specific age group, and the restrictive policies risk sidelining the rich contributions that mature students can bring to the table.

As someone who enrolled in formal photographic study in my late twenties when I was already working in the field of photography, I can remember aging out of student photography competitions. The exclusionary nature of these competitions not only affects individuals who, like me, ventured into photography later in life, but also undermines the diversity of perspectives that could contribute to the richness of the artistic discourse within the student community. The only option that mature students have within the confines of the Sony World Photography Awards would be the Open category, amongst a myriad of professionals and enthusiasts, which accepts single image entries only. This category also offers a different prize at $5,000 cash rather than $20,000 of Sony imaging equipment for the student and their institution. The existence of a separate Youth category for those under 18 implies an acknowledgment of the unique needs and perspectives of younger photographers. Placing an age ceiling on the student category seems contradictory, as it fails to recognize the equally diverse experiences of those over 30 pursuing photography as students.

To even the playing field, student photography competitions should consider adopting more flexible age policies. Eliminating the upper age limit would acknowledge the varied life trajectories of students. As the deadline for the Sony World Photography Awards approaches, it is an opportune moment for organizers to re-evaluate their age restrictions and pave the way for a more equitable experience for all student photographers.

A few days ago, we brought you news about the latest edition of the world-famous World Press Photo Contest, already on its 69th anniversary, one that aims to recognize and celebrate the best photojournalism and documentary photography. At the moment of publication, though, we lacked information on what precise measures and rules would be set to safeguard the awards —and the profession’s credibility— from the justly maligned and frankly misnamed “AI art.”

After all, genuine and honest photojournalism is already being used to spread misinformation; can you imagine the blow the profession would suffer if this happened at the World Press Photo Awards?

Luckily, the measures already put in place against manipulation were enough to set most minds at ease; as stated in rule 18, participants entering the final stages of the contest will be required to submit the files as recorded by the camera.

This made us wonder, though; we know these plagiarizing engines couldn’t make up raw files out of thin air, so what extra rules did they have left to announce? What legalese did they need? Let’s go over them.

Through the Lens

Clearly, the word of the day is “lens-based,” as stated repeatedly in the specific rules on the use of AI tools. Sorry, pinholers; it seems you’re barred from taking part in this contest.

Singles, Stories, and Long-Term Projects.

As stated in rule 19, all photographs in these categories must be made by a lens-based camera. Synthetic or artificially generated images will be disqualified immediately.

Enlarging tools such as Adobe Superresolution or Topaz Photo AI are not allowed and will breach the contest rules on sight.

AI-powered enhancement tools like Denoise have a place in the contest, however; as long as these don’t alter the image significantly, they’re permitted up to a certain extent, yet to be determined by the organization and the jury.

Remember, too, that if you make it past the initial stages of the contest, you will be required to submit the original RAW files for a detailed forensic check.

Knowing all of this, it seems to me that it’s better to be safe than sorry and not use these tools at all.

The Open Format

Here’s something I did not expect; in this category, some AI-powered shenanigans are allowed, as long as the core of the work relies on lens-based photography.

We encourage entries that feature innovative techniques, non-traditional modes of presentation, and new approaches to storytelling. In this context, artificially generated images and generative fill will be permitted as long as lens-based photography remains the core and original source of the project.

I may be old and set in my ways, but I don’t see how this would improve any project based on visual journalism; if you can think of any way it could happen, I’d welcome any comments or suggestions.

Remember, though, that the rules for this category aren’t exactly set in stone; the entrants will be asked to specify to what extent the AI has been used — and only the organization can determine if the work meets their criteria.

Zooming out, a Summary

We’ve been pretty clear on this already, but here’s a reminder. AI visuals shouldn’t have a place in photography awards — or any art awards, for this matter. For several extra reasons —credibility, honesty, safety, etcetera— it should have even less of a place in a contest designed and created to award photojournalists.

We’re in an era where photojournalism is at its most important; it has the power to change minds and push new laws into action, to make us believe and behave differently.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that such a prestigious contest as The World Press Photo Awards is hellbent on lens-based photography; after all, there’s no other kind of photography.

Except for the pinholers, of course. You, I salute.