PDA

View Full Version : Bad Motive ??


mojo628
09-14-2003, 03:09 AM
OK.

I'm going to the masses for your opinion.

This photo was rejected for bad motive. :x

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject.php?id=917

I thought my motive was to picture this old depot that was turned into a museum for Casey Jones near the site of his famous wreck in 1900. I guess that's bad to show a little history. :(

Please let me hear your opinions. :)

iCe
09-14-2003, 03:14 AM
I suppose it was a bad motive because it's not a rail-related anymore...but then again, I saw a photo of a station-turned-library in the database...so, I don't know...

iCe
09-14-2003, 03:15 AM
oops...lol....I just looked through your photos, and guess what...the library I was talking about was your shot, too. haha

oh yea, it's depot-turned... :D

mojo628
09-14-2003, 03:15 AM
This one??

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=30091

Robert28
09-14-2003, 04:23 AM
Hey MJ,

My questions would be is this an original Depot? Is it still on its original location? I would think that if it was then yes it has validity as a historical point. I have been planning doing some of the old stations here in East TN and none of the ones that I know of are railroad owned or used. Loudon,TN is now office for Loudon County Chamber of Commerce, Niota and Spring City both are City Halls, and Knoxville's Southern sta. is offices and the L&N sta is a resterant. Just my thoughts.

Robert

iCe
09-14-2003, 04:30 AM
This one??

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=30091

Yeah, that one.

Screeners, while you are at it. Would you accept it if I took photos of the former Ottawa Union Station, which is now a conference building.

Ken Carr
09-14-2003, 05:19 AM
My own opinion is neither picture of old stations applied to this site. But as been the norm there always appears to be a countadiction on how they accept photos. Recently there has been a rash of stations submitted and most of them were either closed, or adopted for other uses some were accepted.
Just recently they accepted a photo that was 3 quarters of a business not rail related and in the far background a train. To me the scene was so badly cluttered it wouldn't be accepted. But it was.
I have come to the point where if my photos are accepted great, if they are not and I feel strongly about them I appeal. Otherwise I just leave it a lone for it not worth getting my blood pressure up and go on.

Curtis Wininger
09-14-2003, 05:27 AM
The first question, as always:

Have you tried the appeals process yet?

Nobody in the forum has the ability to get your photo into the database. After that last string of rejection complaints in the forum, I have decided not to give information about a photo's rejection in the forum.

Remember, the forum should be used if you are unsatisfied with the appeals process. That is, if you haven't used it yet for this picture.


Curtis Wininger

Robert28
09-14-2003, 05:34 AM
I have come to the point where if my photos are accepted great, if they are not and I feel strongly about them I appeal. Otherwise I just leave it a lone for it not worth getting my blood pressure up and go on.

Ken,

I tend to opperate that way myself. I do have one on appeal right now. But most of the time I let it lie. After all it is their site and I'm glad to have a good location to show my pictures to a wide audiance and also be able to see other peoples pictures. One of the things I like about the site is that you get a broad range of coverage especially of areas overlooked by the rail mags.

Robert

Ken Carr
09-14-2003, 05:41 AM
Robert


My thoughts exactly, I'm happy I get to show some of my photos. Plus I get some great ideas from looking at others photos.

See my pictures at railpictures:
www.railpictures.net/members/linkmaker.php?id=792

mu23
09-14-2003, 06:27 AM
One of the things that has made railfanning a great hobby over the decades, is the diversity of interests it encompasses. Most railfans love trains in general, but a great many also have special interests such as depots, MOW equipment, towers, inter-urbans, historic RR sites, etc., etc., etc. Often the general railfan population benefits from, and gets to enjoy the work of the fan with a specialty in the form of photographs, articles, and often in book form too. Railroad folklore is a huge subcategory of railfanning with thousands of adherents. People have written entire monographs on Casey Jones and company. Casey Jones and John Henry were two of the most important songs of the Industrial Revolution as they taught us two of the most important rules for working in a mechanized atmosphere: Never Race the Clock and Never Race the Machine. They are also songs about railroading. Now there's hardly a person in the country that doesn't know about Casey Jones, but somehow the subject is of no interest to this site. I find this to be puzzling, and a bit sad. Too narrow.
{BTW if you're interested in train wreck songs, pick up a book called "Scalded to Death by the Steam" it's full of bad motives, but a great read nonetheless. Also look up Joe Hill's 1912 parody of Casey Jones, if you're feeling so inclined, it's a hoot,
"Casey Jones went to Hell a'flying;
"Casey Jones," the Devil said, "Oh fine:
Casey Jones, get busy shoveling sulphur;
That's what you get for scabbing on the S. P. Line."}

http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/casey.html

mojo628
09-14-2003, 04:19 PM
Robert28 - Actually, no, this is not the original depot. The original was destroyed. This depot was moved from Pickens, MS to the former site of the old to become the museum.

Ken Carr - I would have to disagree with you on depot/station pictures. The old buildings regardless of their use are a part of railroad history therefore I feel that those photographs would most certainly belong on this site. Current stations should also be included. I will agree with you on the fact that a photo shouldn't be accepted just because it's a station/depot it should also be a quality photograph.

Curtis - No, I did not appeal this particular picture. The last few appeals I've sent in have gone unanswered but I guess I could try it again. This is the first time I've put a rejected photo up for public debated either here or at jp.net. The main thing that bugged me was the statement "bad motive" with no other explination. I just wanted to get a feel what others thought. I know that only the screeners approve rejected photos.

Mu23 - Casey Jones is of interest to me because the train originated here in Memphis the night of his fateful wreck. I also remember hearing some of the songs you mentioned while growing up although most were loosely based on the facts.

I appreciate the views everyone posted. Depot/station pics are not to everyone's liking. For me it's a part of history I think that should be shown and this site provides a place for that. I would like to think so anyway. Depots were a major source of transportation in most cities in the late 1800's and early 1900's. This is what built the railroads into the major force it was in the US for so many years. I for one am glad that cities that no longer had a use for the depot/stations had sense enough to save the buildings in one form or another to help preserve history so that others would know the origins of railroading. Well, anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. :wink:

M.J.

mu23
09-30-2003, 12:17 AM
I submitted the following photograph which was rejected due to its having a "bad angle"; o.k., I took more than one shot from a couple of angles, so I submitted another one and got the "bad motive" response - huh? I'm trying to be flexible, but I'm baffled by this one. No response on appeal yet. On the lighter side, we have a new local catch phrase 'round here and if you're walking down the street and witness somebody pointing at someone else, laughing, and yelling "Bad Motive!", you're probably not too far from my house. :lol:

"Bad angle"
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject.php?id=3709

"Bad motive"
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject.php?id=3722

iCe
09-30-2003, 12:39 AM
I suppose it's because both photos had a bridge blocking half of the engine. And seeing from your other photos, you can do much better! :D

mojo628
09-30-2003, 01:02 AM
I have to agree with the "Bad Angle" rejection.

"Bad Motive" though.... don't get me started. I've had to start therapy over that statement. :(

ICE is probably right on the blocking the engine with the bridge thing. But is that "Bad Motive"?? No, that's "Engine View Obstructed", "Can't see the wheels", "I don't like your photo" something, anything other than "Bad Motive".

I wonder if you took a photo of just the bridge in good lighting and made that the subject would it get accepted?? Photos of commuter train seats have been accepted why not a train bridge??

Remember what it says on rule #3 for adding photos:
3. The photos must depict railroad-related materialBut hopper cars, flat cars (with M1A1 tanks) and depots are "Bad Motive". :twisted:

Crud.... now y'all have gone and got me all worked up about this. I'm gonna need an extra session this week. :wink:

Chris Starnes
09-30-2003, 01:02 AM
I have been away for a few days and came back to 10+ appeals last night. It is likely your appeal was 'lost in the shuffle' at some point. Your welcome to re-appeal, but ICE has pretty much covered what we could say :wink:

iCe
09-30-2003, 02:01 AM
go me ! go me ! :lol: :D

mu23
09-30-2003, 04:21 AM
The subject is the bridge. The locomotive is secondary. Isn't that why we tick off the little subject checkboxes? I could always submit an empty bridge shot, which I would have done if I had been instructed to do so. I'm still not sure what "bad motive" means either. Whatever the ostensible meaning is, I think it really means, "I don't like your picture nah nah nah!", which is odd to say the least. If it isn't the case, it surely is the impression given. It has something of an "Alice in Wonderland" flavor to it.

oltmannd
09-30-2003, 05:18 PM
The subject is the bridge. The locomotive is secondary. Isn't that why we tick off the little subject checkboxes? I could always submit an empty bridge shot, which I would have done if I had been instructed to do so.

I agree with MU23. It's a neat bridge picture. The train on it is gravy.

-Don

iCe
09-30-2003, 09:13 PM
Well, I guess if the bridge was meant to be the subject, then it's a different story.

Forget what I said earlier, but basically, "bad motive" means "bad subject" I think. Because some of my station shots, cabooses, and passenger cars got rejected with "bad motive", so my conclusion is that those are not as good subjects as engines and complete trains.

just my $0.02

mu23
09-30-2003, 10:36 PM
Gravy it is, by cracky! :lol:

oltmannd
10-01-2003, 12:41 PM
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=34124


If I was a screener, this is one I would have been tempted to reject. The exposure and lighting are perfect, but the composition leaves me cold. The train is the subject. Including the man waving in the shot gives the whole shot an unbalanced look. The man, truck and house are distracting rather than complimentary. Other quibbles, the rear truck of the lead locomotive is obscured by a shadow and a clump of weeds. There is too much foreground - a lower camera angle would have kept the gravel road in the foreground and made more of the train visible under the tree branches.

I suspect we all value different things in a photograph. Personally, composition and subject matter are more important to me than technical matters.

Other opinions?

-Don

mojo628
10-01-2003, 03:29 PM
A critique of the editor's photos. Now that's a ballsy move. :shock:

Chris Starnes
10-01-2003, 03:49 PM
A critique of the editor's photos. Now that's a ballsy move.

Not really....

I am not perfect and do not claim to be. Mr. Oltmann may not really care for this photo, and he is entitled to his opinion. Looking back on his lastest page of uploads, I see a couple of his shots that just do not really 'jump' out at me either. Thats what 'publishing' your photography is about. Not everyone is going to roll out of their chair in amazement at every photo you take. Reading the comments that Don has made will give me ideas in the future about how better to have composed a shot like this. Shortly after I shot it and looked at it on the camera, I said to myself "I wish I had went for a lower angle".

Now, opinions aside, I do not think this photo is worthy of rejection, otherwise I would not have uploaded it. I never upload anything that I would reject from someone else.

Ken Carr
10-01-2003, 05:09 PM
I know I was sort of involved in the begining of this thread since I didn't understand the number of rejections at one time that I was receving. Nor did I feel that the screeners were being fair. To some extent I believe that is still true, I base that on some of the photos accepted in comparion of my own photos like how can a picture of a hi-rail be rejected since it not rail related (the reason) and the next set of accepted photos are four hi rail of poor quality are accepted. Better yet a picture of a small engine shop is accepted with so so much clutter in the forground you can barely make out the train in the background, it is not rail related to my thought process and is true a bad motive. Regardless of these comments this is the best site on line to share our photos it's not perfect but it beats the rest. I like to see a basic list of definitions of bad motives etc and we go from there. Even now I'm still learning hoping to improve my photos. That what this is about capturing ideas, learning more about my hobby trains/railfaning.
So may I suggest we close out this thread, Chris knows what we want and is working towards some of those goals. Curtis has been a very helpful screener going out of his way to answer our questions. Let's leave it at that....

oltmannd
10-01-2003, 05:19 PM
As they used to say, "Different strokes for different folks."

Everybody has a different idea of what makes a "perfect" picture. There are some who ONLY like perfectly lit, roster shots. A train picture is usually too "head-on" for their tastes and they ONLY like locomotives.

There are some who ONLY like 3/4 wedge shots - every other shot has flawed geometry (I suppose).

There are some prefer a train posed in great scenery vs. those who just want to see the train.

There are some who like the "Jim Boyd" train-in-context kind of shot vs. those who think it's all too cluttered.

There are some who like photos that include RR workers vs. "just the equipment, please" types.

There are some for whom the subject alone brings back fond memories even if is cloudy and underexposed.

Then there are some who draw the line at Trolleys or commuter rail, or passenger, or North America or the US or or East vs. West or some combination of the above.

What I was trying to do was to start a converstation about these things by voicing my opinion, not impung the judgement of the screeners. This is, after all, their web site and they get to make the rules and apply their own judgement (like they could apply someone else's judgment?).

-Don

Trainman51
10-01-2003, 05:25 PM
I am like ken when it comes to comparing to what has been uploaded (Hi-Rail) and anyways why can't anything railrealated like that bridge be accepted because i know som modelers not photographers but modelers and i have told them abouth the site and some use the photos to help model a certin pice of the railroad.

Lord Vader
10-02-2003, 12:31 AM
Personally I think the picture is great, but what makes it so is not the train, but rather the man waving on the right. It adds character.

That is the sort of thing I am partial to. It's not so much about equipment for me, as it is location and the human element. I have not been able to upload as much of my preferred type of photos due to they often being committed to other venues. But I plan on eventually getting them on here.

iCe
10-02-2003, 01:29 AM
I know I was sort of involved in the begining of this thread since I didn't understand the number of rejections at one time that I was receving. Nor did I feel that the screeners were being fair. To some extent I believe that is still true, I base that on some of the photos accepted in comparion of my own photos like how can a picture of a hi-rail be rejected since it not rail related (the reason) and the next set of accepted photos are four hi rail of poor quality are accepted. Better yet a picture of a small engine shop is accepted with so so much clutter in the forground you can barely make out the train in the background, it is not rail related to my thought process and is true a bad motive. Regardless of these comments this is the best site on line to share our photos it's not perfect but it beats the rest. I like to see a basic list of definitions of bad motives etc and we go from there. Even now I'm still learning hoping to improve my photos. That what this is about capturing ideas, learning more about my hobby trains/railfaning.
So may I suggest we close out this thread, Chris knows what we want and is working towards some of those goals. Curtis has been a very helpful screener going out of his way to answer our questions. Let's leave it at that....

could you post some examples? that would help

iCe
10-02-2003, 01:37 AM
As they used to say, "Different strokes for different folks."

Everybody has a different idea of what makes a "perfect" picture. There are some who ONLY like perfectly lit, roster shots. A train picture is usually too "head-on" for their tastes and they ONLY like locomotives.

There are some who ONLY like 3/4 wedge shots - every other shot has flawed geometry (I suppose).

There are some prefer a train posed in great scenery vs. those who just want to see the train.

There are some who like the "Jim Boyd" train-in-context kind of shot vs. those who think it's all too cluttered.

There are some who like photos that include RR workers vs. "just the equipment, please" types.

There are some for whom the subject alone brings back fond memories even if is cloudy and underexposed.

Then there are some who draw the line at Trolleys or commuter rail, or passenger, or North America or the US or or East vs. West or some combination of the above.

What I was trying to do was to start a converstation about these things by voicing my opinion, not impung the judgement of the screeners. This is, after all, their web site and they get to make the rules and apply their own judgement (like they could apply someone else's judgment?).

-Don

I agree 100%

While I too, have preferences for these things, I also respect other people's likes and dislikes. Sometimes, I also experiment to see what it is about it that these people like.

For example, I used to only like European passenger trains. Simply because I lived in Europe for a long time and I rode them countless times. I found them sleek and modern, and just awesome to look at.

When I moved to Canada, I was shocked by these trains... They are so big and bulky, without aerodynamics, and are DIESEL POWERED!!!

Slowly, but surely, I got used to the Canadian passenger trains, and now I find them just as, if not more, attractive than European trains.

But I didn't like the freight trains. I really didn't like them. I didn't like their mismatched cargo, their "rough" engines, or any other part of them. But one day, I just went to shoot some freight photos, to see why people liked them so much. Guess what, now I like them just as much as passenger trains.

The point is, you don't have to like everything the other photographers like. But respect their preferences and maybe give it a try. Who knows, you might just like it! :D

busyEMT
10-24-2003, 07:42 AM
I am surprised that guy is waving with all 5 fingers! I mean, his house is 40 feet away from a crossing - when is the last time he got a good night sleep?

At any rate, I must have had every reason for rejection so far. Not that I like rejection, but at least we get explanations.

S.C. Vermillion
10-24-2003, 06:06 PM
Being that Chris Starnes owns the site he has every right to reject a photo. I myself have had a few photo's rejected but do I get mad no. Why, because its not everyday that that someone like Chris opens his site to other people to display their railroad photography. Befor railpictures.net what was there, not much at all. I myself would just like to thank Chris for offering a web-site like this.


Shawn

Curtis Wininger
10-24-2003, 06:26 PM
Chris Starnes *and* Chris Kilroy