“Candid” winning photo of CEWE Photo Award 2023 was staged
Oct 26, 2023
Dunja Đuđić
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.
Share:
It was only yesterday that we covered the winning images of the CEWE Photo Awards 2023. However, the “candid” overall winning photo has raised eyebrows today. The winner of the “world’s largest photo competition” was now found to be staged.
Indonesian photographer Dikye Ariani won the first prize in the contest for her photo of a woman playing cards. Other than the flattering title, she also won the grand prize worth over $25,000. The competition, themed “Our world is beautiful,” showcased Ariani’s portrayal of a traditional Indonesian café, “Warung Kopi.”
The description accompanying the photo painted a vivid picture: “The proprietress, the sole woman in the scene, welcomes the men from the village after a hard day’s work in the rice fields.” CEWE Board Member Thomas Mehls said that the image conveyed “an authentic glimpse into everyday life in Indonesia” and captured “the beauty of the moment.” But as it turned out, the glimpse into the everyday life was not authentic at all.
The plot twist
PetaPixel found out that Adriani’s photo was, in fact, not a spontaneous documentary shot. She took it during a conceptual photo shoot, marking the launch of the Fujifilm X-T5 camera in Bogor, Indonesia. The information came from Budi, the owner of the studio where the shoot took place.
View this post on Instagram
Budi expressed his surprise about this image winning the contest. Speaking with PetaPixel, he said that “The Waroeng Kopi concept” was a concept that he’d created during a promotional event for the Fujifilm X-T5 camera launch. “I act as a mentor and conceptor who organizes the venue setup, lighting, and costumes as well as preparing the talent,” he added. “One of my workshop participants was Dikye who apparently won the CEWE photo contest.”
The plot thickens as other photographers who attended the same workshop began sharing strikingly similar photos from the event.
Were the rules broken?
The CEWE Photo Awards, in its guidelines, states:
In our photo competitions, a variable number of self-taken photos can be submitted that are photographic or lens-based and represent the motif and the essential image content in an unaltered and realistic manner. This means no photos generated by artificial intelligence, for example. In addition, the participant must own the unrestricted copyrights and rights of use and the motifs must not contradict the legal provisions of the country of origin, legal provisions of the European Union or the personal rights of persons depicted.
Judging from this, it remains uncertain whether Ariani violated any rules. In fact, she probably didn’t. However, the way this photo was described certainly is misleading. It’s definitely not “an authentic glimpse into everyday life.”
Similar controversies
This incident mirrors a similar controversy from 2019 when Malaysian photographer Edwin Ong Wee Kee won the esteemed Hamdan International Photography Award (HIPA). His photo earned him the grand prize of $120,000, but it was also later revealed to be staged. It also reminded me of the time when the BBC staged some scenes in their 2011 series Human Planet. And perhaps you remember the stuffed anteater that won the 2017 Wildlife Photographer of the Year Competition.
We have reached out to the CEWE Photo Awards and Dikye Ariani. None of them have replied at the time of publication, but we will update the article if we hear back.
[Update November 15, 2023: CEWE has suspended Dyke Ariani over a staged photo. You can read the full statement here.]
[via PetaPixel]
Dunja Đuđić
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.
Join the Discussion
DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.
205 responses to ““Candid” winning photo of CEWE Photo Award 2023 was staged”
Even if no rules were broken: Ask yourself if the jury would have still awarded that staged image a first price and 25k$ with the justification it conveyed “an authentic glimpse into everyday life in Indonesia”.That totally suffices.
Does not surprise me one bit.
Was that against the rules?
Clay William it’s not candid if it’s staged
Angel Evar Curioso I didn’t see candid in the rules.
Clay William oh i see. Then it must be okay, what’s the title of the image though? “Candid”?
Angel Evar Curioso I’m not saying it’s a good thing to do, but it doesn’t seem to break the specific rules of the contest according to the article.
Angel Evar Curioso from the article right after quoting the rules “Judging from this, it remains uncertain whether Ariani violated any rules. In fact, she probably didn’t”
Clay William no
Bill Brooks of course it is
Sébastien Valiela Read the rules. They prohibit AI-generated images but there are no constraints on staged images.
Bill Brooks you know what mean « candid shoot » in photography it exactly mean « not staged »
Angel Evar Curioso The word “candid” comes from the article. It was not a description from the photographer
Bill Brooks oh I see. Thank you.
Sébastien Valiela I agree. But “candid” was a description used in the magazine article; it was not used as a description of her own work by the photographer. The competition was not one for “candid” photography and did not not prohibit staged shots.
Bill Brooks so why they are thinking about disqualification ?
Sébastien Valiela the article doesn’t say anything about disqualification – and the CEWE website is still showing her as the winner. My own concern would be less about whether it was “candid” but rather about the extent to which the organiser of the workshop it was taken at designed the set and posed the actors. If so, how much of the photograph was truly the photographer’s creative contribution?
Bill Brooks shooting and editing, I’d say. I don’t think the photographer had any control of the scene, same as the other photographers who shot the same scene.
Clay William yes, candid means it happened organically and you captured it in the moment.
Tina Murray show me where that is in the rules. The rules are quoted in the article.
Bill Brooks the description from the photographer was a blatant lie. That the main problem.
Clay William I went back and looked at the rules and you are correct, It does not state it must be candid.
Michael Hussey totally agree with you there. That’s why I think they did a bad job with this article. Because they are focusing on the wrong aspect.
I knew i was being a hater for a reason. Hehe
The judges didn’t notice this photo being artificially lit?
Ferry Passchier Are they even photographers or just judge the competition ? Just ask 🙂 no hate
Ferry Passchier “judges” probably old relics judging.
George Wal sometimes, Judges are also people from sponsorship companies, so they may not be professional photographers.
William Aung well the magic word. Sponsor which means Money
how many actual images are staged?? even if they happen on wedding day
Joshua Michael this was a workshop with lighting and basically paid actors.
Joshua Michael all wedding photos are staged! 😅
I believe Robert Doisneaus’ photograph entitled ‘The kiss’ was alleged to be staged.
James Cullen So was “Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima” and many others
For sure, not alleged 😉
No, really ?! 😂 All these fake contests and pictures…
Many famous photographs passed off as spontaneous were staged.
https://www.oddee.com/item_99568.aspx
Everyone is smoking at the same time! Like it’s obvious 🤣
When you remove virtue from society, how do you expect people to play by the rules?
I suppose it is candid as the studio owner created the scene.
Garbage image.
At least it’s not AI
So what? It’s an awesome photo. At least it’s not AI. The moment you say “hold it a little higher” or “don’t look at the camera” or “oh my god don’t move this would be such a cool candid shot” it becomes staged.
Daniel Lopez-Paullada there are many “levels” of staging. Removing a can of coke from the table before taking a photo is one thing. Setting actors who wouldn’t be there, performing an action they wouldn’t do, with several flashes and modifiers to have a light it didn’t exist there, and change the decoration of the place… (to put some examples) is something else. Perhaps you think it’s the same than “don’t look at the camera” but, it’s definitely different to me. I’m not saying anything against the photo in the context of the contest, though.
To is the same, ai or staged 😉
Daniel Lopez-Paullada thank you
And I was sure it was AI.
Glenn Laufer me too!
Glenn Laufer Though AI is getting incredibly good, there are too many hands in this photo and all are anatomically right (something AI still struggles to date). So I doubt it is AI (for now in 2023). Im sure AI will get all fingers right sooner than later.
Poems are beautiful lies
They were performing off stage
Facts: the category in which this photo was entered is called “people”. Probably no violation of the rules.
“Smoke and mirrors”
Not unlike Burger King’s ads or redtube. Lol
As was Steve McCurry’s famous Afghan girl- still an amazing photo
Locky Cooper and “Lunch atop a Skyscraper” was an optical illusion. I see no issue here
Tony Marotta it was also staged
Locky Cooper at least she was a real person out in a real environment, and we weren’t lied to.
Locky Cooper “Afghan Girl” was a studio style portrait. Those are always “staged”.
Clay William indeed it was
Everything is fake now.
Adrian Betti staged is not fake.
Who the hell is “CEWE?”
We knew this. First time looking at it. Next story.
Nooooooooo I’m so surpriiiiiiiised 🙄
No shit sherlock
Since it was very obvious I just thought that the rules allowed it.
Kalle Rimling nothing in the rules against it. Just a dishonest description
it ai staging
Tra Tran not AI. A photo workshop. There were a bunch of photographers all shooting this same scene, that was set up and lit by the organizer, for profit. And everyone in the photo were paid models.
Im shocked.
Alex Timmermans Nice shot. It is nothing to do with stage or not stage. Both need skill. I guess in the context of the competition, there may be some rules that explicitly state the requirements of how a photo should be created to be qualified to enter a competition. Now that makes me wonder how are the organizer going to differentiate an AI generated or generative AI content.
Of course it was, If it’s not staged it would likely be heavily manipulated in post. There is less integrity in contests these day.
George Lee so was Ansel Adams not a photographer of integrity?
Clay William he had some photography skills to lean on to being with , and whilst there was clearly some dark room manipulation, it was nothing like the scale of fakery we see every day these days and people trying to pass it off as original artwork.
It’s just one of two camps, and I find nothing to admire in overworked and staged images
George Lee how do you know he didn’t stage images? And why is dark room manipulation ok but Photoshop isn’t? How do you know the photographer who won the competition doesn’t have skills? Hers is the best image to come out of that photoshoot.
Clay William it’s difficult to stage a mountain or valley scene, darkroom manipulation is by comparison very limited , if you have skills you don’t need much PP.
its a point of view and a valid one. I don’t expect others to agree, there is and always will be pluralism in the arts.
George Lee do you not know, Adams photographed people also.
George Lee you need to learn some photo history and have some respect for the process.
Clay William he did , but he also was able to show that his work could stand on its merits.
Todays dilemma is both camera firmware and PP mean that you can make a banal image look better or even very good, a good image can be made to look great. I just find less to admire in that as a process. It’s not just tweaking , a bit of pushing or pulling with the developer in a dark room, it’s manipulation. Not every one buys into that.
George Lee so none of the photographers I posted are good? They were all more than pushing and pulling in dark room. In fact Adams never just pushed or pulled in dark room. He did a whole lot more than that. Again take a photo history class.
Clay William I don’t need your advice on history, neither of us where there in the dark room with the single example argument to make a generalisation of a point. You don’t like or agree with my view point doesn’t matter to me.
I don’t like staged or excessively manipulated images. Any folk can produce those with enough equipment and deep pockets and a bit of software to lean on
George Lee I’m very familiar with a dark room. I firmly believe everyone needs to spend some time in the dark room “manipulating” images in order to call themselves a photographer.
Clay William and?
Clay William and so there you have it, we are reduced to believes and opinions , not facts .
George Lee pot meet kettle
Clay William indeed
These contests are pretty much bs. lol.
Alex Timmermans what? You didn’t randomly find an ostrich riding in a side car? I’m shocked to the core.🤣
I got to be honest, a lot of you so-called photographers need to take a photo history class. Photo manipulation, photo composites, and staged group photography is not something new to the digital age. All the digital age has done is give us more tools but it hasn’t changed anything.
Clay William So true. In fact, back in the day every portrait would have to be staged because of the incredibly long shutter speeds
Clay William I always laugh when someone says they are a “true photographer” cause they don’t edit their photos like in the film days hahaha 🤣
Jonathon Loucks yeah photographer that just took his rolls of 35 mm film to Walgreens to be developed. 🤣🤣🤣 They probably never heard of medium format
Clay William What difference does that make
David Vaughn because people have a warped perception of photo history and photo manipulation.
Clay William before you go making crazy comments… maybe know the discussion you are in… it’s only mentioned because it was in a category of NOT staged… meaning it broke the rules.
Jeff Dietz show me where it says the category is “not staged” before you go off making crazy comments.🤡
Clay William staged does not mean manipulated. It means that the scene was setup and actions posed. Many photos taken as being “historical” have been staged.
Robert Molan I understand, but many people in the comments that have gone off on manipulation and saying that real photographers don’t stage photos. There was nothing in the rules against staging photos
Clay William that depends on the nature of the competition. All photos have some degree of manipulation (coming to this as a photographer)which I’m fine with. It’s the matter of saying one thing ie it’s real life when it’s not. I don’t know the terms of the competition so I can’t comment on the validity of the photo with respect to the rules.
Robert Molan I believe the article quoted the rules
Clay William definitely not candid
Jonathon Loucks I don’t even go into discussion anymore with these so called purists. On the other hand I do love reportage photography among other things and there is a difference between editing and staging 😉
Jonathon Loucks or when they bring out the only name they know. “Ansel Adams didn’t have Photoshop, he never edited his photos.” Uhg.
Otter Zamora omg that’s my favorite one hahahahaha
Clay William A lot of ‘us so-called photographers’ actually DO recognize the difference between editing images – which we ALL do to one degree or another – and creating a scene which never existed at the time we took the image. As a landscape photographer, this concerns me far more than it might a commercial, architectural or portrait photographer. There IS a difference between a visual representation of what I saw with my own eyes, and a composite image containing elements which never existed. Clearly, you don’t seem unduly concerned about this difference, which is why I worry greatly about the future of photo-realism.
Robert Molan rules don’t say it has to be candid
Clay William And with AI who even needs a camera! All one needs is their “/ imagination “ to create masterpieces. Saves money and time.
Mike Beaugeard there was nothing in the rules about it not being staged. This isn’t a documentary photo contest, where staging would be a major issue. Nor is it landscape. So yes, I do understand the difference. Art doesn’t have to be photorealistic.
Otter Zamora he would’ve been the king of Photoshop.
Joe Moss 😭
Jonathon Loucks and then they fail to understand a JPEG is edited by camera software before rendered
Clay William Yes, that’s the argument being used by a lot of landscape photographers lately when they’ve been caught out presenting AI-generated images as their own ‘real’ work – “It’s not meant to be real, it’s Art!” Well, that’s not honest photography, matey – in my world it’s called ‘lying through your teeth!’
Sebastian Nowakowski lol yes hahaha 🤣 all so great
Otter Zamora but they use RAW 😂😂
Clay William it was entered in the ‘candid’ category?
That tends to imply “not staged”.
But the rules definitely don’t state it can’t be.
Jacques LeTendre could you find some citation that there was a candid category because I couldn’t find that. I did find this though.
The CEWE Photo Awards, in its guidelines, states:
In our photo competitions, a variable number of self-taken photos can be submitted that are photographic or lens-based and represent the motif and the essential image content in an unaltered and realistic manner. This means no photos generated by artificial intelligence, for example. In addition, the participant must own the unrestricted copyrights and rights of use and the motifs must not contradict the legal provisions of the country of origin, legal provisions of the European Union or the personal rights of persons depicted.
Judging from this, it remains uncertain whether Ariani violated any rules. In fact, she probably didn’t. However, the way this photo was described certainly is misleading. It’s definitely not “an authentic glimpse into everyday life.”
Sebastian Nowakowski bingo!!!!
Clay William you should probably sit this conversation out…
Clay William I feel like you skipped the last part of my comment.
Jacques LeTendre and you must have skipped my last comment. There is no candid category so it not being candid isn’t a problem.
Jeff Dietz get a life.
Mike Beaugeard AI is completely different scenario and that should be labeled as AI because they did not actually do anything other than tell a computer what to do. That’s not what I’m talking about buddy stay on topic. But I don’t try to pass off my photographs as straight out of camera because straight out of camera is stupid. I tell people exactly what I did if they asked how I made my photographs. It doesn’t change the quality of the artwork for it to be “edited” or a tree branch moved out of the way.
Clay William – yeah. And ‘candid’ seems implied with the description you quoted. Probably because that seems pretty synonymous with ‘candid’.
I mean, we could continue to argue semantics, though. If that’s really what you want to do.
But yeah, not in the rules. And people should probably take issue with whoever set it up that way.
Otter Zamora they always bring up Ansel Adams bahaha
Jonathon Loucks right?! Uhg.
Clay William wasn’t it in the title?
Robert Molan that’s not the rules
Clay William I imagine calling something candid in the title would imply that either way it’s obviously staged. Couldn’t really give a toss though.
Robert Molan um, “candid” doesn’t appear in the title or description of the photograph. That’s in the headline for the article. The photographer never used that word.
Clay William 😭
Did the entry requirements specify candid?
Lucy Agius no, but the photographer lied in the description.
Michael Hussey ok I didn’t know that. I think ‘making a photo’ is ok but sounds like it was misleading. Started conversation though I suppose.
No violation of “spontaneous documentary shot”…sounds like the other photogs are sore losers.
you don’t say …
Pretty sure all 3 people dragging at the same exact moment made it clear to be staged
Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see.
It was obviously staged, I didn’t know it wasn’t supposed to be when I saw this photo being passed around.
I knew it was staged from the first moment I saw it 😀
All photographs are staged.
Like the great man said ‘All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players’
“Can?Did”
It’s still a great shot 👌
Yes. True photography by a talented photographer.
Jim Fuglestad shooting a set-up somebody else actually staged and lit? Yup, talented all right. Her only decision was on where to stand while holding her camera.
Harvey Steeves Well, so this could be new information I hadn’t read… she didn’t stage it and setup the listing? Nothing to do with the production?
So e ery studio session isn’t a real ohktograph? I’m confused. Is only street photography real?
Jim Fuglestad set up while in someone else’s studio for a class. There were others who got similar images from the same event.
Harvey Steeves I agree with you, but if you look at all of those none of them are as good as this one. So there is some talent that can be attributed to the photographer here. But a good portion of the photograph would belong in my opinion to the studio owner
Clay William they were in a different position. To assess talent, you would have to look at her portfolio and see which images she generated herself. Anyone can take one nice photo. It can be just the luck of the draw. Talent is shown through consistency.
Harvey Steeves so what’s the point of photo competitions then? According to you it wouldn’t be able to assess talent.
Clay William photo competitions are/were never to assess talent. They are about finding images. Nowadays, it’s often for the sponsor to get the use of numerous images to use for little payment.
Harvey Steeves that I wholeheartedly agree with
um… of course it was… I could have told you that…
Kind of obvious
Alex Timmermans yes
No!
F Edwards Carcamo thank you. Very kind of you…….
Alex Timmermans I’m being facetious and having fun with your feigned humility / humble brag / need for acknowledgment. You made it easy.
Guess what? They also used photoshop to color correct it.
And a fu&king camera to take it instead of painting it. So wrong!!
Mustafa Sheikh best comment
Mustafa Sheikh clueless comment
F Edwards Carcamo wasn’t looking for acknowledgment. Was referring to the discussion of staged photo which won the competition. If that wasn’t allowed than the guidelines weren’t clear enough. Although the picture was made during a class ge probably took that photo at the very best moment. But again, thank you for your kindness.
So???? It wasn’t AI 🤷🏽♂️🤷🏽♂️🤷🏽♂️
These days, contest rules will have to be at least 10 pages long stating explicitly what is and what isn’t allowed. No implied meanings. So what is not expressly forbidden is allowed. Like that HIPA contest winner, both of them lied in their descriptions of their photo. There is nothing on the rules that says the description must be factual. Frankly, the photo category was not “photojournalism”. What really ires me is that I have been lied to both times and successfully taken for a fool. Shame on me.
Kok Yoon Lee if the category is “candid” the only tule needed is that the photo must actually be candid by definition.
Herschel Martin but the category wasn’t “candid,” it was “people.”
Like nearly everything you see on internet these days
Tye van Niekerk
at this point nothing new every award winning photo is staged
This is just the problem with competitions…people greedily want to win and will bend the rules. She did a photo course where it was set up in a studio and others took pretty much the same image.Either she didnt understand the spirit of the competition or she thought ‘I’ll give it a go!’.
Monty Rakusen but how exactly did she bend or break the rules. Where in the rules does it state something like this can’t be done. I’m not defending the choice to do this. I think her description of the photograph was extremely misleading and wrong. I’m just stating that we got to be clear in our rules.
Clay William I said bend. I’ve not read the rules so I don’t know if she broke them or not. She must have known what she was doing was not in the spirit of the competition.
Monty Rakusen how was it not in the spirit of the competition? If you’re referring to her description I’ll agree with that but the photo?
Monty Rakusen The CEWE Photo Awards, in its guidelines, states:
In our photo competitions, a variable number of self-taken photos can be submitted that are photographic or lens-based and represent the motif and the essential image content in an unaltered and realistic manner. This means no photos generated by artificial intelligence, for example. In addition, the participant must own the unrestricted copyrights and rights of use and the motifs must not contradict the legal provisions of the country of origin, legal provisions of the European Union or the personal rights of persons depicted.
Monty Rakusen if it’s because it’s fictitious, would that bar me from entering the kind of photography I sometimes do from a competition. I take pictures of theatrical events like musicals and plays. They’re completely fictional so does that rule them out from being a picture of people? It wasn’t a photojournalism competition it was “our world is beautiful”. Fiction is a part of our world and fiction is beautiful.
Clay William it was lit and set up for her, they were actors and a number of others took the same picture. I’m not going to argue the fine points with you.
Monty Rakusen I don’t do the lighting when I do theatrical photography. Everyone there’s an actor. Sometimes there’s other people with a camera (it’s just that usually I’m the only one hired to do it).
Monty Rakusen I guess we better rule out all fashion photography as ineligible for any competition because it’s fiction it has actors and it has lighting that’s done maybe by other people.
Photography, like most forms of Art, is totally subjective – as are the opinions of any competition judges! However, fake is fake, and I deeply regret that this is something we are going to see much more of with every passing day.
The definition of “photography” is not only blurred but has been obliterated. Todays generation of “photographer” will have no need for a camera. Use of AI, and digital compositing skills is all one will need. Possibly a new genre of photographer should be added: Virtual or Meta Photographer. What say you?
Just follow some Kelby courses and you will realize that professionals stage photos to the point that candid and travel photography is dead.
If the rules allow, I have no problem with it being staged…except that the photographer didn’t do the staging.
Jerry Graybosch agree, and I would add to that that their description shouldn’t be misleading like this photographer’s was.
F Edwards Carcamo no need to be an a-hole.
of course, it’s a staged. there’s nothing wrong with that. Ansel Adam stays in the darkroom for weeks retouching his negatives. When you’re photographing families on your studio, aren’t those staged as well?
Vincent Muñoz exactly!
Clay William I have a friend whose mother was a film retoucher. it’s amazing to know.
Vincent Muñoz studio family portraits aren’t categorized as “candid” by definition. That’s a bogus comparison at best.
Herschel Martin but it’s staged right? You’re directing them to pose?
Vincent Muñoz yes, as in, not candid whatsoever.
Herschel Martin and neither was this category in the competition.
Herschel Martin yah but the complain in the post is staged.
Unless you are doing man on the street style street photography aren’t they all staged. I’ve seen your work keep staging them, looks amazing.
Most great photos are staged. Even most of those “street” ones. That’s why the best tip from renown photogs is to study paintings, so you can orchestrate your compositions better. Even photojournalists stage their photos, you just need to watch old tutorials to figure this out (before YouTube Academy).
John Crisostomo exactly. One big example that I learned in photography school was the famous picture “the vulture ans the little girl”. The photographer placed himself to make it look like the vulture was just behind the kid, there are other examples like war photojournalists came to a scene of an explosion and restaged a scene to make it look “better”
Nothing new.
Congrats to the winner 😄
Staged, Charlie! No image is sacred!
Somebody snitched!
Who’s surprised? I’m not.
Well, duh. Reminded me of the old dogs playing poker paintings on black velvet.
Like the “available light” when they use speed lights and strobes because they’re available.
She presented as a real traditional kopi shop but it was in a studio with actors, so….
I knew it ….
I knew.