PDA

View Full Version : Road nos


tomh
01-07-2004, 12:06 PM
I was reading an earlier thread and noticed the obvious irritation some folks have when the various data blocks aren't all filled in nice and proper. So irritated was one guy that he suggested rejection of photos that didn't have all the requisite information. In particular, some guys were bent on adding the missing reporting marks to the road number of other people's photos-yikes, talk about having a lot of idle time on your hands! Better get lineside instead!

That's when I discovered that I haven't been doing this. Yep, I just put the road number in the box. Didn't follow the example verbatim. Bad boy, for sure. But how bad?

Why are the reporting marks (called "railroad identification" by most on this young site), so important in the database? Well, one guy says he wants to search for a given locomotive, say NS 6711. To me that's a bit of redundancy, because you can simply elect NS in the railroad pulldown and put the number in the keyword line and you get what you want. So, before I spend an afternoon adding information to my photos that I feel really isn't that important, ya'll jump right in and tell me why I'm wrong.

Perhaps next week we can take up another subject. Like the overuse of telephoto lenses as evidenced by a lot of the work posted to this site. Leave the @#%%% telephoto thing at home for a change, guys, you just might learn that angular locomotives and telephoto forshortening (compression) don't necessarily make a pleasing picture.

tomh

Lord Vader
01-07-2004, 11:29 PM
I've been known to plug in reporting marks, proper spelling, punctuation, capitalization, etc. while screening photos. If somebody really does a half-assed job plugging in captions, I'll reject it. For example:

CSX Transportation
Alco PA2 (obviously wrong)
dumpvil, new yorrk (sigh)
236 (Q, S, X236?)
123 (CSXT? NS? UP?)
goinn bi mai maws howse (ugggh)

While I realize education backgrounds are different and I can count on one hand the number of photos I've rejected on the grounds of poor grammar (likely due to, how shall we say, "online intoxication"), I do feel it is important to spell words correctly and use proper grammar. It helps make your work and the site in general, appear more professional.

tomh
01-08-2004, 12:05 AM
Thanks K8DTI,
I was really trying to find out (in a long-winded sort of way) the true importance of uploading reporting marks with the road number. I haven't been doing this (my bad), but I really don't see the significance. It may be a courtesy to include them, but that's all it appears to be. You can usually select the RR with the pulldown and put the road number in the keyword line and get to the unit you want. So...is it really important?

dsktc
01-08-2004, 12:16 AM
"Perhaps next week we can take up another subject. Like the overuse of telephoto lenses as evidenced by a lot of the work posted to this site. Leave the @#%%% telephoto thing at home for a change, guys, you just might learn that angular locomotives and telephoto forshortening (compression) don't necessarily make a pleasing picture."

Hi, Tom. I don't believe the problem with the overuse of
telephoto lenses is as serious as you suggest. I have seen
one example of significant foreshortening of locomotives
caused by the use of a long telephoto lens:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=24214

but I was birding at the time, not railfanning. :)

Dave

tomh
01-08-2004, 12:46 AM
Dave,
Wow! If there was any more forshortening in that picture the hind end would get there before the head end!

Anyway, your explanation explains the shot nicely.

tomh

tomh
01-08-2004, 12:10 PM
"Explanation explains the shot?" Please pardon poor posting procedure in reply's really repetitive redundancy (above).

oltmannd
01-08-2004, 05:08 PM
[quote="K8DTI"]
Alco PA2 (obviously wrong)
[quote]

Why is PA2 wrong? According to the Diesel Spotter's Guide, there were 81 PA2s and PA3s built for US roads.

-Don

Guilford350
01-08-2004, 07:04 PM
Well, CSX never owned PA-2 units.

E.M. Bell
01-08-2004, 09:08 PM
I belive Mr Landrum was using the PA as an example of wrong information...yes, there where 82 PA's built, but CSX never owned one. I see a lot of folks that will just "fill in the blanks" when they submit a image, not taking the time to research what the correct info might be, and most of these will be rejected for wrong info. There are tons of web sites out there that one can use to research what they dont know for sure.

Thanks to Tom's ranting about tele shots, i decided to put the big lens away and slap on the wide angle to shoot a few...its nice to have that little 400mm on the camera for a change :twisted:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=45402

Ken Carr
01-09-2004, 04:33 AM
Just to add my 2 cents

1) Reporting marks and other information is important for me for research and I sure learn more sometimes of what I am seeing when the comments are filled out and the photographeer includes information like film, F-stop and type of lense.
2) Telephoto lenses guilty as charge half my photos are taken with a Sigma 80-300mm lense.

oltmannd
01-09-2004, 11:39 AM
Well, CSX never owned PA-2 units.

Roger, that!

-Don

tomh
01-10-2004, 04:07 PM
K8DTI,
In regards to typos and bad spelling. I just uploaded a few, and was reminded in the process that I make an embarrasing amount of fat-finger typos myself. If there was a review page where the uploader could see the data one last time before clicking "UPLOAD", I for one would be able correct most of my own mistakes. We have a preview page for forum messages, but nothing for image upload page. Am I the only one to feel this way?

tomh
01-10-2004, 04:08 PM
K8DTI,
In regards to typos and bad spelling. I just uploaded a few shots, and was reminded in the process that I make an embarrasing amount of fat-finger typos myself. If there was a review page where the uploader could see the data one last time before clicking "UPLOAD", I for one would be able correct most of my own mistakes. We have a preview page for forum messages, but nothing for image upload page. Am I the only one to feel this way?

Robert28
01-12-2004, 04:11 AM
Another reason for getting the info correct espcially road nos. and train ID's is that they become search links on your pictures. When I load a new pic I'll pull it up and the click on them to see other pics of that loco or that train. Also sometimes you find someone else shot the same train when you did such as these of NS 163 8) . First was shot by T Moses at MP 159.9
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=33227
And then at MP 162.8 by me
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=20393

As for tele lenses. Yep I use them, gonna keep using them. 70-210mm.

tomh
01-12-2004, 01:28 PM
Well anyway, I went ahead and added the reporting marks to my photos. I did this because while it was true that you can use the pulldown for railroad, then input the road number, it seems that you get a more accurate and complete search if you have both the reporting mark and road number available. That's how it works best, so I have identified my photos accordingly.