Does this look shopped?

[jeffa123]

Well it is a Composite with alternate light sourced saturation. The background is almost out of photoshop sample backgrounds in a surrealistic setting. The foreground looks like it has been taken just after a rain storm and the feature in a similar circumstance.
But any photograph if it is well composited and an editor likes it, is going to get you noticed. Don't forget these compositors get work because they do things out of the ordinary with an otherwise ordinary photograph. They don't have to be great, just different.
When the editor of a Newspaper wants a picture to make his paper stand out are you going to wait for the right photo or someone whom can create the right photo atmospherically for you.
Many magazines pride themselves on their front pages alone, because it says HERE I AM, you don't have to like me, but notice ME. This is all part of the advertising hook.

 

[King4aDay]

I'm pretty willing to believe that's a single (or bracketed) shot and not a composite. Lovely image too.

It's possible that the light on the corn looks odd because of the variable distributions of kernels within the cornheads. I also suspect that when viewed at full size there'd be significant noise where the two people have been selectively brightened.

 

[D.P.]

The lighting on the people doesn't match the rear illumination of the sun. Even if it were HDR the results would be different.

Could be additional flash (off-camera), additional lighting etc.

 

[D.P.]

i've got two pictures where the sun has made it look as though its 2d, with the foreground shopped in - and it wasnt in either case. And the shot of the pantheon, i took one JUST like that about 10 years ago - not a very high standard imo.

I have several shots of the pantheon that look similar.
Tim

 

[Mr Jones]

Well it is a Composite with alternate light sourced saturation. The background is almost out of photoshop sample backgrounds in a surrealistic setting. The foreground looks like it has been taken just after a rain storm and the feature in a similar circumstance.
But any photograph if it is well composited and an editor likes it, is going to get you noticed. Don't forget these compositors get work because they do things out of the ordinary with an otherwise ordinary photograph. They don't have to be great, just different.
When the editor of a Newspaper wants a picture to make his paper stand out are you going to wait for the right photo or someone whom can create the right photo atmospherically for you.
Many magazines pride themselves on their front pages alone, because it says HERE I AM, you don't have to like me, but notice ME. This is all part of the advertising hook.

The thing is, it's for 'photographer of the year' and this just crosses the grey line of photography and into digital art if it is a composite of more than 1 scene in my, and no doubt, many photographers. I'm no purist either.

 

[iSam]

Don't like either of them! Us OcUK'ers could do better than that!

 

[Adrianr]

There's no lighting on the people to suggest they were being backlit by what is a very strong orange light source. Either the photographer has deliberately retouched any hint of rim lighting out or they've been dropped in. Neither a very pleasing aesthetical choice IMO.

 

[jeffa123]

If anything I would say the principal shot was of the field. The two subjects Masked in in a separate layer and the background dropped in for the atmospherics. You have obviously got the lighting that has foreground lighting onto the field and the subjects on it but you have a sunset in the background. The logic of light sourcing is out the window with this one. There again its like the news isnt it. Do you believe everything you read in a newspaper these days.

 

[a1ex2001]

Both the pictures you have linked look very heavily processed to me, it seems to be the trend at the minute which I think is a bit sad. Everyone is to busy chasing razor sharp images with carzy contrast and dynamic range and the actual photos are suffering for it.