RailPictures.Net Forums

RailPictures.Net Forums (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/index.php)
-   Railroad Photography Forum (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   In Cab PAQ? (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17214)

Joe the Photog 08-09-2014 01:43 PM

In Cab PAQ?
 
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...25&key=4091123

Any thoughts?

Mberry 08-09-2014 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog (Post 180968)

Somewhat surprising as rp.net seems to love cab shots, but somehow it doesn't do it for me. I know not much choice, but photo is pretty cramped for one thing.

adickson 08-09-2014 02:58 PM

No ear plugs or safety glasses. I wonder if that may be a contributing factor.

Joe the Photog 08-09-2014 03:40 PM

Crap. Could be. I didn't think about that. I shared this with the engineer last night and asked if he minded me posting here and to Flickr. If this is why, this would have been a great spot for a three word comment from the screener to take away all doubt -- "no safety vest"

It's a new rule if that's the case. Admittedly from five years ago --

[photoid=277641]

troy12n 08-09-2014 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adickson (Post 180970)
No ear plugs or safety glasses. I wonder if that may be a contributing factor.

Why would that be a contributing factor?

Is railpictures now the safety police?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog (Post 180971)
If this is why, this would have been a great spot for a three word comment from the screener to take away all doubt -- "no safety vest"

That would take effort... got to commend RP administration for their increased involvement they promised. Guess the updated rejection reasons is enough to pacify the masses for the next year or 2? :confused: :rolleyes:

I was going to throw my 2 cents in here and say I think they should rejected it for PIQ. Try a B&W conversion, it might look better, but I dont see it as-is

CSX1702 08-09-2014 04:45 PM

Is there seriously a rule about having a safety vest inside the cab?

I like it though. Should be in.

troy12n 08-09-2014 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 180973)
Is there seriously a rule about having a safety vest inside the cab?

I like it though. Should be in.

As far as I know, the railroads dont even require them to have the vests on while they are operating the locomotive and in the cab...

bigbassloyd 08-09-2014 06:09 PM

I can't put my finger on it, but the shot just isn't working for me. Technically speaking, there's a fair amount of fine noise in the dark areas and on his left hand. The top two corners are pretty soft as well. That could be a lens related issue.

Loyd L.

Harry Gaydosz 08-09-2014 06:43 PM

Totally absurd if this was rejected due to no ear plugs or eye protection.
Now for dark and blurry on the other hand...

miningcamper1 08-09-2014 06:55 PM

99% of the screen team and 1% of the RP viewers are deeply concerned about the issues raised here.

JRMDC 08-09-2014 11:05 PM

I think the thread is getting carried away; there is no evidence here that work rules are the issue.

One thought that comes to mind is that maybe the screener doesn't care for the in-your-face hand and the large forearm.

troy12n 08-09-2014 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC (Post 180979)
I think the thread is getting carried away; there is no evidence here that work rules are the issue.

One thought that comes to mind is that maybe the screener doesn't care for the in-your-face hand and the large forearm.

Maybe whomever screened it could speak up and speculation wouldnt be necessary. Like I said, I think personally the shot has other issues, but if they did reject it for the reasons speculated, that's ridiculous

Freericks 08-09-2014 11:59 PM

The picture is all engineer and not enough train. I think you needed a winder lens to get more of the cab and to make him smaller. (This is all in regards to framing.)

BobE 08-10-2014 12:55 AM

Your subject is stiff, like he's enduring something worse than his last root canal. If you got him to loosen up, show a little personality, photo would improve hundredsfold.

Mgoldman 08-10-2014 01:25 AM

One screener simply didn't like it. That's the grounds enough for a rejection.

No rules and never mattered whether there is similar and worse in the database.

You can appeal and see if another screener likes it.

Personally, I don't like it either - looks either staged or posed, (even if not).

I'd have accepted it - it meets rules and guidelines in place and was nicely captured, the composition is nice, angle appealing, perfectly exposed and sharp, but again, this is RP - none of that seems to carry enough weight.

/Mitch

Joe the Photog 08-10-2014 01:29 AM

1 Attachment(s)
I'll look through other shots. Not staged or posed; train was rolling down the tracks. I am having lens issues though. Not sure why I chose to carry that one, but it's not in my bag anymore.

Is the attachment any better?

http://forums.railpictures.net/attac...1&d=1407634322

MagnumForce 08-10-2014 01:33 AM

Mitch, I respect the hell out of you but good god your black helicopter stuff gets old.

There are a lot of issues with this photo and it simply doesn't work in my eye. So instead of giving a long laundry list of items to fix and then someone getting pissed off when they fix each one and get another they give it a PAQ right off the bat.

Seems to me they are doing EXACTLY what you have wanted them to do all this time, flat out say we don't want this, don't waste our time.

Or we could make a ginourmous conspiracy theory out of the whole thing, I guess that is way more fun.

And Joe, not digging the second one either.

Joe the Photog 08-10-2014 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagnumForce (Post 180985)
There are a lot of issues with this photo and it simply doesn't work in my eye.

Feel free to list them all. That was kinda the point of this thread.

Mgoldman 08-10-2014 01:35 AM

If it was a lens issue - don't you think they would tell you.

I mean it - don't you go ahead and think they would tell you - they won't. Lol.

PAQ I think is the call here - and perhaps because it simply looks staged. You can
be running down the track at speed and still have an uncomfortable look captured
when a person knows they are being photographed.

Or, it is soft, noisy and looks like it was taken by a cell phone. Yeah, that's it -
that seems to be the call with every photo that is ever rejected eventually.

/Mitch

JRMDC 08-10-2014 01:39 AM

Second one could be a worker handling a valve or other setting just about anywhere. Not obviously RR enough for my tastes.

From a non-RR perspective, no oomph in it, nothing that says "interesting".

MagnumForce 08-10-2014 01:44 AM

Color, Grain, Crop, Noise, Soft, Blurry, Angle, Exposure, Lighting.

I really dig your stuff, Joe and this is in no way representative of your work. The color noise in his shirt and face is really glaring, maybe has something to do with the image being dark and you trying to make something out of it?

Joe the Photog 08-10-2014 01:51 AM

So you're saying Wyatt would cuss at me and call me names if I posted this to his little FB group?

:twisted:

In any event, I'll put this one in my personal collection for the time being.

MagnumForce 08-10-2014 02:02 AM

It's Wyatt, he's one of my best friends but he's still Wyatt. Just have to know him. LOL

I can be pretty damn blunt myself but I try to have some tact with it. I only get PO'd when people ask for opinions and then get pissed off when you give them to them.

B7BBQ 08-10-2014 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks (Post 180981)
The picture is all engineer and not enough train. I think you needed a winder lens to get more of the cab and to make him smaller. (This is all in regards to framing.)

Honestly, that's kind of how I felt as well. I've tried quite a few shots that were more like portraits of various railroad employees doing their job, and they've all been PAQ'd. When including humans, I generally try to think about if the shot would still work if the person wasn't in it.

MagnumForce 08-10-2014 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B7BBQ (Post 180993)
Honestly, that's kind of how I felt as well. I've tried quite a few shots that were more like portraits of various railroad employees doing their job, and they've all been PAQ'd. When including humans, I generally try to think about if the shot would still work if the person wasn't in it.

Well that doesn't work, sometimes the human makes the scene and without them you simply don't have a shot.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:30 AM.

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