PDA

View Full Version : Bad Angle help


WisconsinCentral
09-30-2006, 06:16 PM
My favorite shot of the day was rejected, for bad angle. So i was sure it was because the train was going away, but looking through some of other bridge shots, there were plenty of trains going away.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject.php?id=293221

Is there anyway I could doctor it up so its accepted?

Thanks.

Alec

SD70MACMAN
09-30-2006, 06:44 PM
Try cropping a little off the top, bottom, and especally the left side, but keep everything in proportion. But the problem though is that its a going-away shot, and that's most likely why youre getting a "bad angle." And unless your real good in Photoshop (or equivilant), that cant be fixed.

Its an awesome shot, I love the water!

WisconsinCentral
09-30-2006, 06:50 PM
Thanks Mike. Ya, im thinking im going to try to do some stuff with it, and try it once more.

Alec

NicTrain35
09-30-2006, 07:46 PM
I'd send in an appeal. Nice shot.

a231pacific
09-30-2006, 08:04 PM
I wonder if "Unlevel Horizon" has been eliminated and they now use "Bad Angle" for unlevel shots? Chris Starnes said they would be revising the rejection scripts. Your problem is the shot is not level (look at the vertical railing stanchions and vertical truss members). I think you were fooled by your position into trying to make the tracks look level. Since it's a perspective type shot, the tracks should actually appear to slope down to the left side of the picture. Level it up and recrop and you should get in. Other than that, it's a good shot.
Michael Allen

Frederick
09-30-2006, 09:30 PM
-Rotated 2 Counterclockwise
-Cropped
-Brightness +25
-Contrast +10
-Hue +4
-Saturation +14
-Unsharp Mask: 65%

dodi4200
09-30-2006, 10:41 PM
I like the edit of Ferderick.Also the paint of the second unit is cool.

Switched out
10-01-2006, 01:27 AM
Alec,

The major problem with your image is it's not level. Once rotated the image looks a lot better, the eye has a hard time coming to terms with angles that just don't look right. The only other tweak you should do is to lighten the shadows slightly and maybe just crop it a little.

Cheers,

Christine.

a231pacific
10-01-2006, 02:24 AM
Alec,

Put Christines version in a window so you can compare it with your own, then make yours look just like hers and you are good to go! Level it and a touch of shadow recovery is all you need. Frederick's version is good too, but I think lightening it as much as he did changed the mood of the shot. I like the darker original and Christine's version keeps that mood.

Michael Allen

Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
10-01-2006, 03:17 AM
There is nothing that exciting about it (i.e. a waterfall, spectacular light, color, etc.), it's just a going away shot of a train on a bridge, thats why it got rejected for "Bad Angle". I say wait until you get one coming towards you. Alec, can you put some examples of the going away bridge shtos you are comparing yours to?

jdirelan87
10-01-2006, 03:48 AM
Here are some of my going away shots:

[photoid=135752]

[photoid=150180]

[photoid=140127]

[photoid=135132]

Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
10-01-2006, 04:19 AM
Here are some of my going away shots:

[photoid=135752]

[photoid=150180]

[photoid=140127]

[photoid=135132]
Boat = good.

Factory = good.

Color = good.

Snow + overlook = good.

My point exactly, each of John's "going-away" shots had something to make them interesting to the viewer. BTW John, I wasn't saying that the shots were just "good" I was just using the term loosely. I love that factory shot therefore I wouldn't say its just "good". Hope I made that clear enough.

a231pacific
10-01-2006, 05:13 AM
Andrew,

In the example we've been discussing, to maintain the reflection in a good location would require the locomotives to be about where they are now in a coming at you shot, which would leave too much dead space on the right. I think this works better as a going away shot. Nice calm water, good reflection, nice early autumn colors, good light, what's not to like about the shot?

Next question, just why is a going away shot "bad?" If your sole interest is the locomotive, I can see why going away would be less desirable, but good composition may favor the going away shot. In this case, I think it does.

Michael Allen

jdirelan87
10-01-2006, 06:56 AM
My point exactly, each of John's "going-away" shots had something to make them interesting to the viewer. BTW John, I wasn't saying that the shots were just "good" I was just using the term loosely. I love that factory shot therefore I wouldn't say its just "good". Hope I made that clear enough.

Sorry, I thought you were just looking for some going away examples!

WisconsinCentral
10-03-2006, 12:18 AM
Thanks for the helps guys (and ladies :-) )

I went back to the bridge the next day, and DID get one going eastbound.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=160040

Alec

Studogg120
10-03-2006, 12:23 AM
Thanks for the helps guys (and ladies :-) )

I went back to the bridge the next day, and DID get one going eastbound.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=160040

Alec

Nice shot!!

ccaranna
10-03-2006, 12:59 AM
Thanks for the helps guys (and ladies :-) )

I went back to the bridge the next day, and DID get one going eastbound.

[photoid=160040]

Alec

Nice shot, Alec.

But is it just me, or is this photo not level as well? The cement bridge abutments appear that they are leaning down and to the right.

Personally, I like the rejected shot better, especially Christine's edit of it. I also agree with Michael's comment about the nice reflection, so I can't see how there's nothing interesting in it, either. I don't think it's boring at all. The accepted photo is good, but it's another close up wedge. I guess you could call it a "wedge on a bridge".

a231pacific
10-03-2006, 01:52 AM
Just insert Chuck's post here! ;-)

The rejected going away shot, after Christine's corrections, is more interesting than the accepted "normal" shot. I'd rework it and try it again. Maybe Chris Starnes will be screening at that point. He tends to incorporte interesting scenic elements into his own photos and has often encouraged people to resubmit rejected shots (after some tweeking, of course!).

Michael Allen

WisconsinCentral
10-03-2006, 12:02 PM
The conversation about the bridge, about it being unlevel, is hard to say. This bridge has a lot of things you can look at and see if its level or not. If you look around on some points, you can see a stantion that looks level. Then you go somewhere else and it doesnt.

Im going to level my first shot, and give it another try.

Alec

Switched out
10-03-2006, 01:35 PM
[photoid=160040]
Nice shot, good exposure and composition but it's also got a lean of 2.6 degrees.

When looking for a vertical or horizontal line start looking from the center of the image and work your way out towards the edges till you find one that you can use to judge if the photo needs leveling. My reasoning is to take into account the pin cushioning and barrel distortion charistics of the lens used. These are generally more apparent at the edges and corners of the frame.

If we use photoshops ruler to measure a vertical beam on the bridge it returns an angle of 2.6 degrees now if we measure the vertical beam next to the edge of the frame on the right hand side it returns an angle of 1.6 degrees. Now we have to take into account that the bridge is also higher then where the photo was taken from so that will also effect the angles.

And you thought taking photos was a no brain-er :lol:

This brings me to one of my burning questions I usually ask my self when I have to level one of my photos "Why don't camera manufacturers put a spirit level in the viewfinder?" they put the damn things on tripods.

Cheers all,

Christine.

a231pacific
10-03-2006, 02:08 PM
Alec,

Christine makes some good points. The center area is the one that is free from camera induced distortion, so that's where you want to look. Vertical members on bridges are vertical for engineering reasons, so use them. Also, the metal pilings at the base of the concrete piers will have vertical seams. Handrail stanchions can be bent and aren't structurally important, so they can fool you, but engineering members are going to have vertical components.

If you aren't familier with it, hidden in one of the buttons in photo shop is a nifty ruler, that you can drag down what should be a vertical edge and then when you click on rotate image-arbitrary, it will tell you what the angle is. Otherwise it's just trial and error until you can get things looking right.

Michael Allen

WisconsinCentral
10-04-2006, 12:03 PM
Thanks for the help all! I dont use Photoshop, as I much prefer Paint Shop Pro. Next time I go back to the bridge, i will surely line things up a bit better!

Alec

RS27
10-05-2006, 02:50 AM
Michael - how do I get that angle ruler? If I were in Autocad I could rotate it by the angles easily but for whatever reason I've never found it in Photoshop and have had to rotate it a little at a time till it is veritcal... Thanks!

busyEMT
10-06-2006, 01:24 AM
Michael - how do I get that angle ruler? If I were in Autocad I could rotate it by the angles easily but for whatever reason I've never found it in Photoshop and have had to rotate it a little at a time till it is veritcal... Thanks!
Set the rulers to be visible and use the arrow tool (not marquee or paintbrush, etc.). Click on the ruler and hold down the left mouse button to pull a line into the work area.

a231pacific
10-06-2006, 04:25 AM
In Photo Shop 7, in the tool menu that lives on the left side of the desk top, there is an eye dropper. Right click on it and you get three choices, Eye dropper, Color sampler and Measure tool. Left click on measure tool and the icon changes to a ruler. Now, find a line that you want to make vertical, the edge of a building, or whatever and hold down the left button and drag along the edge. Then on the top menu bar, click on Image, rotate canvas and arbitrary. When you click on arbitrary, the degrees of rotation needed will show in the box, click OK and your line is now vertical!

It's a neat trick and very fast.

Michael

Northern Limits
10-06-2006, 04:55 AM
Alec,

Christine makes some good points. The center area is the one that is free from camera induced distortion, so that's where you want to look. Vertical members on bridges are vertical for engineering reasons, so use them. Also, the metal pilings at the base of the concrete piers will have vertical seams. Handrail stanchions can be bent and aren't structurally important, so they can fool you, but engineering members are going to have vertical components.

If you aren't familier with it, hidden in one of the buttons in photo shop is a nifty ruler, that you can drag down what should be a vertical edge and then when you click on rotate image-arbitrary, it will tell you what the angle is. Otherwise it's just trial and error until you can get things looking right.

Michael Allen


I have Photoshop Elements and use the "view grid" feature. Same principle - I just turn until something horizontal or vertical lines up.
This one required a large move to level. http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=157653. I used the yellow strip along the front walkway.