RailPictures.Net Forums

RailPictures.Net Forums (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photo Processing Forum (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   Poor Image Quality Is this possible to fix?? (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=5687)

AmericanAirFan 08-16-2007 12:22 AM

Poor Image Quality Is this possible to fix??
 
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=861990218

This photo was rejected due to poor image quality is there anyway to fix this? the original is similar to this, the only difference is that the photo is larger and it hasn't been sharpened at all. This is my first train spotting photo that seems to be worth a try here but we'll see what you guys think... Also the original is 2592x1944 if that's of any interest to the topic. Any help would be appreciated.

-Justin

JRMDC 08-16-2007 12:32 AM

Honestly, I have no idea about the poor image quality. I would have expected it to be rejected for Bad Motive or something like that; I don't recall ever having seen a nighttime flash shot accepted here. Perhaps a screener clicking/mouse error? I would not expect this shot to be accepted here, sorry to say.

BTW, I had always assumed the UP shield/wings on the nose was also reflective; apparently not the case.

AmericanAirFan 08-16-2007 01:31 AM

I was actually quite shocked at the results here is all the snaps I took of the train as it passed by, there was no flash on it what so ever.

EDIT:It wont let me post the 6 photos of the sequence I wanted to show... but the sun was low it was about 7 PM and the sun was on the exact oposite side I was from in all of them and I was standing about 15ft from the tracks so you get an idea...

I never really expected the shot to get accepted but I thought if all it was was poor image quality that had me baffled because I had appealed it and gotten the same rejection reason... Anyways thanks for letting me know. Also I am aware they're all back lit, I was a picnic and didn't feel like crossing two sets of tracks illegally... But I at least had the intentions of catching a train or two when I went :-D

-Justin

Cyclonetrain 08-16-2007 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmericanAirFan
I never really expected the shot to get accepted

Well, then why upload?

The Photo Queue isn't as bad as it used to be, but it still doesn't need to be clogged with "I have no expectations for this photo" or "This photo isn't great but I want to see what they say." It should be filled with "This photo best represents my skills in an outstanding way" or "This is of good quality and has some historical/newsworthy significance to it."

The screeners already have their work cut out for them, why should they accept something you don't think is good?

ssw9662 08-16-2007 01:39 AM

It's a decent shot, I just don't see it being RP material. The sky does look a little grainy, but that's all I see as far as image quality is concerned.

AmericanAirFan 08-16-2007 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclonetrain
Well, then why upload?

The Photo Queue isn't as bad as it used to be, but it still doesn't need to be clogged with "I have no expectations for this photo" or "This photo isn't great but I want to see what they say." It should be filled with "This photo best represents my skills in an outstanding way" or "This is of good quality and has some historical/newsworthy significance to it."

The screeners already have their work cut out for them, why should they accept something you don't think is good?

My apologies but I did actually upload the photo with some glimmer of hope as I got alot of great comments on the photo and I do think it is a good photo, but I know as an aviation photographer from the criteria that needs to be met this one maybe doesn't meet it, but still it's worth a try, sorry for wasting the screeners time, but when I checked the queue I was astounded to see only 13 photos in the queue when jetphotos.net has at one point had 5,500+ photos in queue... So surely 13 isn't too bad but I really did upload the photo with a positive attitude rather than a "Lets see if I can get one past them" kind of attitude...

-Justin

Carl Becker 08-16-2007 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssw9662
It's a decent shot, I just don't see it being RP material.

That pretty much covers my opinion of it as well. Although it seems as though the flash would be the thing to use for nighttime train shots, IMO, you never should.

JRMDC 08-16-2007 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmericanAirFan
I was actually quite shocked at the results here is all the snaps I took of the train as it passed by, there was no flash on it what so ever.

It is my ever-so-humble :) opinion that there is just no way there was no flash. Are you sure your camera didn't do an autoflash without you realizing it? This would make sense if it is a digicam; if it is a DSLR, I think one would notice the built-in flash popping up.

JRMDC 08-16-2007 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmericanAirFan
as I got alot of great comments on the photo and I do think it is a good photo

I must say, I am quite surprised to read this. Sorry to be so harsh - and two others have said here the shot is "decent" so take my opinion for what it is - but what exactly did they say is "great" about it? The same shot in daytime light - well, a portion of an engine, backlit, nothing interesting background, nothing interesting sky. Nothing of compositional interest, yet with part of the engine lost, not a roster shot either. So not a good photograph, boring. So what is added by near darkness? No particular mood, no interesting silhouette. The flash reflection, more gimmicky than anything. I don't see anything here that says "good photograph," regardless of subject matter.

You may not realize this, but actually I am trying to be helpful here. Both in terms of what I perceive to be RP expectations, and what I (one person!) perceive to be good photography. Please try to take the harshness in stride; I don't see a good reason to convey the same info but reduce its clarity by smoothing over some edges.

Carl Becker 08-16-2007 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC
It is my ever-so-humble :) opinion that there is just no way there was no flash.

Yeah, it's sure an odd one. IMHO, you can't get an appearance like that without a flash. The shot also is underexposed, which seems to happen often when a flash is used. Coincidence?

567C 08-16-2007 08:53 AM

Uhm.
 
I am surprised to see no response to try and HELP you understand what is wrong, and possible solutions. That is the stated purpose of these forums. However, much to my chagrin, I have learned the hard way that forums degenerate to a select few participants, who treat outsiders poorly.

If you like, send me a .tiff high quality file. I'd like to fiddle around with it and see if I can get an acceptable image for you. I had a high contrast shot, taken in the cab of an F-9, of a friend of mine shooting 8mm. The view outside the cab window was pure white. But I accidently got an image revealing structures in that white out! I use Silverfast AI, FocalBlade, and PhotoShop Elements 3.0, a stripped down version of PhotoShop, and have been somewhat sucessful in processing negs. 35mm slides are proving to be a challange with noise streaking!

-- 567C

Joe the Photog 08-16-2007 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmericanAirFan
but the sun was low it was about 7 PM and the sun was on the exact oposite side I was from in all of them and I was standing about 15ft from the tracks so you get an idea...

Well, there you go. Low sun on the other side of the tracks and you're 15 ft. away from the train, way too close. That's part of the reason this shot turned out this way. I'm guessing you shot on auto exposure, which is why it's so dark. It does look like there is a flash in use. I never use my built in flash for ANY photography and I never use my external flash for railroad photography. It's just plain too weak to be of any use.

It woul help us to know what kind of camera you used and to see the EXIF data. And who told you this was a good shot? Family and friends or fellow photogs? It's sub par at best and if you went through the 160,000+/- shots on RP, I bet you would not find one remotely similiar to this one.


Joe

JRMDC 08-16-2007 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 567C
I am surprised to see no response to try and HELP you understand what is wrong, and possible solutions. That is the stated purpose of these forums. However, much to my chagrin, I have learned the hard way that forums degenerate to a select few participants, who treat outsiders poorly.

Please read my posts again. Sometimes help consists of saying an image is not good enough and not fixable/improvable, instead of explaining how to fix it. Certainly in this case, the problem is not post-processing. You may disagree with that assessment, but don't accuse me, for one, of treating this person poorly. I took some time to write out some detailed comments. I didn't treat this outsider (and, welcome to them!) poorly, I found the picture in question to have little merit. There is a huge difference between the two.

Quote:

If you like, send me a .tiff high quality file. I'd like to fiddle around with it and see if I can get an acceptable image for you.
Please explain what it is about this shot that you think will make it acceptable after further post processing. What do you see in this shot?

JRMDC 08-16-2007 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
It's sub par at best and if you went through the 160,000+/- shots on RP, I bet you would not find one remotely similiar to this one.

Now Joe, be careful! We all know that in the early days stuff got in that wouldn't get in today. :) Perhaps have the person go through all the shots since #150,000. That will also take less time! :D

AmericanAirFan 08-16-2007 01:29 PM

:lol: Well I never meant for such a miniscule topic to get blown out of proportion, but no really I didn't use flash... I use a Kodak P850 5.1MP camera the flash did pop up however I pushed it back down before pressing the shutter button, thank you for the feedback I think I got the point before the last 7 posts :oops: Thanks anyways... if anyone would like to see the other shots that were taken I would be glad to share them also 567C I'll try to send you the original and later to satisfy everyone's thirst I'll show you guys the exif data... :razz:

-Justin

P.S. 567C thanks for your kindness in words

scottychaos 08-16-2007 05:30 PM

not that it really matters..but the flash absolutely did go off..
you may think you pushed down the flash, but it popped back up again! ;)

I have absolutely no doubt..lets see if I can prove it..
hmm..need a plugin for irfanview.
ok then, here is a screenshot of the exif data:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u...chaos/exif.gif

im not sure what "flash = 9" is saying exactly..heading to google.

this example:
http://www.digital-photo-software-gu...exif-tags.html
shows "flash - not fired"..so thats pretty obvious that would be the exif value if the flash was not fired.

ah! here is something:
http://www.exif.org/specifications.html
http://www.exif.org/Exif2-2.PDF

its a bit confusing, but it looks like "9" equals "flash fired, compulsory flash mode"

further googling clinches it:
http://tinyurl.com/39kxrr

9 = flash fired, compulsory flash mode.

the flash fired..no doubt about it.
the exif data says so.

I like the shot! :)
I think the flash effect is pretty cool..
you would not have had those reflections at all if he flash hadnt gone off.
you could get that kind of reflection from very low direct sunlight, but in that case, the whole side of the loco would have been better lit.

Scot

AmericanAirFan 08-16-2007 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottychaos
not that it really matters..but the flash absolutely did go off..
you may think you pushed down the flash, but it popped back up again! ;)

I have absolutely no doubt..lets see if I can prove it..
hmm..need a plugin for irfanview.
ok then, here is a screenshot of the exif data:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u...chaos/exif.gif

im not sure what "flash = 9" is saying exactly..heading to google.

this example:
http://www.digital-photo-software-gu...exif-tags.html
shows "flash - not fired"..so thats pretty obvious that would be the exif value if the flash was not fired.

ah! here is something:
http://www.exif.org/specifications.html
http://www.exif.org/Exif2-2.PDF

its a bit confusing, but it looks like "9" equals "flash fired, compulsory flash mode"

further googling clinches it:
http://tinyurl.com/39kxrr

9 = flash fired, compulsory flash mode.

the flash fired..no doubt about it.
the exif data says so.

I like the shot! :)
I think the flash effect is pretty cool..
you would not have had those reflections at all if he flash hadnt gone off.
you could get that kind of reflection from very low direct sunlight, but in that case, the whole side of the loco would have been better lit.

Scot

Yeah it seems so but usually what happens is the flash pups up after the half click to focus on the object then Ill just hold it down so it doesn't fire so I must've not held it down like I thought but I had no idea that flash that sort of effect from so far away :shock: I know I originally said 15 I measured it up on google earth I was roughly 35ft away, I'm just bewildered that flash would actually have an effect from that point but oh well who cares. Thanks for the info guys. Hopefully when I get my Canon 400D within the next year I'll be getting better photos.

-Justin

Mike B. 08-17-2007 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmericanAirFan
... I was roughly 35ft away, I'm just bewildered that flash would actually have an effect from that point...
-Justin

You do know that engine have reflective stripping on them, right? You can light up these reflective stripes from miles away with a car so I'm sure a camera flash from 35ft will be more than enough light.
I am also curious who says this was a great shot as I can't even find one good thing to say about. I'm probably not a good person be commenting on this though since I've been too harsh/mean here for some peoples taste in the past.

Ween 08-17-2007 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 567C
I am surprised to see no response to try and HELP you understand what is wrong, and possible solutions. That is the stated purpose of these forums. However, much to my chagrin, I have learned the hard way that forums degenerate to a select few participants, who treat outsiders poorly.

-- 567C

I don't know how I missed this post, but dude, you're way off base on your view of the forum participants and the help that's offered. There are countless examples of people asking and receiving help with their photos, many of which later end up in the RP database. If you fail to see that, you're not looking, my friend...

Here're just a few from the past couple of days:
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=5693
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=5688
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=5603

That's all I feel like looking for at the moment, but the point is made...

Also, as far as advice:
Quote:

Originally Posted by 567C
If you like, send me a .tiff high quality file. I'd like to fiddle around with it and see if I can get an acceptable image for you. I had a high contrast shot, taken in the cab of an F-9, of a friend of mine shooting 8mm. The view outside the cab window was pure white. But I accidently got an image revealing structures in that white out! I use Silverfast AI, FocalBlade, and PhotoShop Elements 3.0, a stripped down version of PhotoShop, and have been somewhat sucessful in processing negs. 35mm slides are proving to be a challange with noise streaking!

Not to knock the photographer who started this thread, but he didn't even know if his flash went off or not, a pretty basic thing to notice when taking a photo. Do you think your response above is anywhere close to where he currently sits in his knowledge of photography or post-processing? I'm guessing most of it went straight over his head. In other words, you may have offered some advice, but did it really HELP in this situation?

AmericanAirFan 08-17-2007 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ween
I don't know how I missed this post, but dude, you're way off base on your view of the forum participants and the help that's offered. There are countless examples of people asking and receiving help with their photos, many of which later end up in the RP database. If you fail to see that, you're not looking, my friend...

Here're just a few from the past couple of days:
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=5693
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=5688
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=5603

That's all I feel like looking for at the moment, but the point is made...

Also, as far as advice:


Not to knock the photographer who started this thread, but he didn't even know if his flash went off or not, a pretty basic thing to notice when taking a photo. Do you think your response above is anywhere close to where he currently sits in his knowledge of photography or post-processing? I'm guessing most of it went straight over his head. In other words, you may have offered some advice, but did it really HELP in this situation?

Actually none of the above terminology is over my head and actually it's very hard to see the flash go off in daytime lighting... so that's why if it did I barely noticed... Currently I have 91 photos on jetphotos.net and I regularly go to the photography forums over there, rather I'm saving up for a better camera cause I know mine is crap... even though back then it was all I could afford, but I am very much into photography...

Also to people who know nothing about photography they have nothing to critique so they can find very unique photos that look "great" or amazing but not necessarily acceptable in the eyes of a screener... Basically I have alot of unpublished photos all my friends and some photographer fellows of mine online love my photos but I know most of them just won't be accepted... this particular photo I wasn't sure so I had to try it... I myself thought the effect was rather interesting.

-Justin

Ween 08-17-2007 04:50 PM

Quote:

Currently I have 91 photos on jetphotos.net
Good deal. Hopefully the jump to rail photography goes smoothly. I've dabbled in aviation photography very, very briefly, but I found that it's much harder than taking shots of trains (especially when planes are on approach). I have 9 photos on JP, but most of them are on just because my job gives me access to some angles that most folks don't have the opportunity to get...


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:56 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.