View Full Version : Rejection :[

08-11-2004, 12:25 PM
This photo was rejected because it was too dark - I would just like to get some feedback from everyone & their opinions. Thanks. :)

( Clicking This Image Will Enlarge It To 800 x 600 )
http://img69.exs.cx/img69/6455/BeautifulMarc.th.jpg (http://img69.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img69&image=BeautifulMarc.jpg)

E.M. Bell
08-11-2004, 01:04 PM
it is a tad on the drak side, at least for more or less common power. Also, it appears to be leaning to the right (or is that station on a super elevated curve??). A little cropping, rotation and adjustment to the levels in Photoshop will make this a keeper.

08-11-2004, 01:18 PM
Leaning to the right, too much wasted space on the right side (cropping), and too dark. :)

08-11-2004, 04:18 PM
Where was that taken?

I would agree with the above. The lean and dark probably could be fixed rather easily in Photoshop. In the future possibly the engine should be allowed a bit closer before you shoot.

I enjoy shooting such, that's why I asked where it was shoot and if the location is railfan friendly....



08-11-2004, 04:32 PM
Very Railfan Friendly...

Bowie State University MARC Rail Station.

I appreciate everyone's feedback.

08-11-2004, 04:58 PM
If that's the case, I would recommend a tripod. I shoot manually, and it is great to be able to set the camera just how I want it (what view, wedge or otherwise), set the F stop, etc, and then be able to concentrate 100% on exactly when to shoot.

Is the Bowie station near the wye? I am not really familiar with the area, but I am trying to find another safe railfan-friendly NEC spot. Thanks.



08-12-2004, 07:08 AM
I agree with investing in a tripod, no matter how good, or bad your camera is. Take my word for it, you will notice a vast improvement in your photos :D . Also, for that shot I would have waited slightly longer to snap the shutter, letting the train get just a little closer. Or, if the train wasn't moving, I would have mover closer to the loco to get the shot, that way it fills up more of the dead space. Looks like you have a good eye though, keep it up! :wink:

08-16-2004, 12:24 AM
The use of a tripod is expressly forbidden around NYC, especially in the subways.

Using a tripod to take a picture of a train in New York City is considered especially suspicious.

If I'm not mistaken, you can or soon will be able to apply to the MTA for a permit.


08-16-2004, 04:47 AM
Using a tripod to take a picture of a train in New York City is considered especially suspicious.

Yeah, nevermind Hassim or Ahkmed over there on the park bench "text messaging" someone with his cell phone w/ digital camera built in. :roll:

08-16-2004, 11:53 AM
What I found especially peculiar this week was a story in which a Queens man was arrested as a terror suspect, and the depth of widely-publicized TV and newspaper coverage about the man's alledged intentions.

According to the news, investigators searching the man's apartment found a large number of photos and videos of prominent landmarks and buildings not only of New York City, but of landmarks across the country too.

The next day, the big city newspapers had multi-page feature stories about the latest New York City terror threats and possible targets. The articles featured large, professionally produced photos of the most prominent possible targets.

As if this already wasn't too much info, the newspaper stories went on to identify each landmark by name and discuss its exact location and vulnerabilities. The stories even offered ideas about how these landmarks might be destroyed by terrorists. Doesn't info like this compromise the city's security? It does to me, and quite clearly so, and on a far greater scale than my railfan photos ever could.

So the question begs to be asked: why are railfan photographs considered a 'threat to national security' when widely circulated newspapers publicly identify, locate, and describe prominent targets?

I am aware of 'the times we live in' and I agree that counter-terrorism measures are necessary. I'm not saying determining what these measures should be would be an easier task for me more than anyone else. But our policies at present are incomprehensively inconsistent and contradictory. A guy with a five dollar disposable camera can't take a picture inside Grand Central Terminal, but a newspaper photographer with a press pass can, and then show the photo to millions of people. It would seem that the so-called 'evil-doers' need only read our newspapers to get any info they might need!

Do the city newspaper's articles about possible targets achieve anything besides frighten people? I think the person who might benefit most from the info in the newspapers provide would be a first-time visitor to the city looking to do it harm, not that I really believe that's a plausible scenario. Info about the city's infrastructure has long been public. Just go online, or to any library, and you'll find plenty of info about American architecture and transportation.

More and more I feel that the photo ban is not about controlling the distribution of information. It's about people control, and who knows to what end.

I'm afraid railfans should expect to be pigeon-holed as possible suspects for the time being. Sports fans with cameras need not be so concerned. Being a sports fan is considered a normal American characteristic.

If a permit becomes available I will definitely apply for one. But I don't see how issuing permits to railfans will stop terrorists.

Maybe all cameras should be treated like sidearms, and anyone who purchases one be subjected to the same background checks as gun purchasers.

08-16-2004, 12:06 PM
Using a tripod to take a picture of a train in New York City is considered especially suspicious.

Yes how ridiculous is that? Like someone who wants to be less conspicuous is going to be using a tripod. Who makes these regulations?
Or is it because of limited space and safety so folks won't be trippin over it and falling in front of a train?