[Joe]

The world press awards stands out as one of the few such ceremonies where the photography looks different.

There are some superb technically brilliant photographs in the selection.

There are also some that are technically horrific, but photographically brilliant. Sometimes it's good to see a photograph you know the photographer saw and took in a true fraction of a second (ie not worrying what custom mode the camera was in, or what f stop the lens should be set at, because they once read a DPreview which said it performed sharper in those conditions). A photograph that then didn't spend half it's life being pi@@ed about with in photoshop.

I have many of the World Press yearbooks on the shelf dating back to the early 1990's, which I still look back through. That and the Magnum and Black Star bibles are my revival after spending a day at work listening to people demanding 12million pixel cameras when 8million simply will not do all day, when all they are likely to see from them are machine processed enprints, or snaps for ebay auctions.

Well done Al, glad you posted the link. I shall be on the lookout for the new yearbook