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)
-   -   Huhh? Among other things... (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17408)

coaststarlight14 03-05-2015 06:45 AM

Huhh? Among other things...
 
It's been a while since i've posted but these latest rejections have me confused.
I appealed all four but they gave me the same rejection and no comments.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...27&key=8614136
I've seen plenty of half nose lit shots in the database, something different wrong with this one. *note it was taken from a crossing*

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...28&key=9016110
Not really going away, but it is an extreme angle. Though i find this one unique and artistic ;)

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...29&key=2232754
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...30&key=7352408
I know these are super cloudy and whatnot but anybody think they'd find their way into the database? I'm quite fond of the first one.

Kevin B. 03-05-2015 11:18 AM

I'm thinking that the first one could "probably" be saved by a little selective shadows/highlights tweek, particularly on the locomotive noses.

I think the second one is not fixable. If the train was moving away, then there's nothing you can do.

I like the last two, but I don't see them making it with that much cloud cover. Sorry.

JRMDC 03-05-2015 12:15 PM

First: at least some screeners have a strong preference against half lit noses. The shots that get in are because at least one screener does not.

Second: not nearly as unique nor artistic as you think, sorry to be harsh. Speaking of harsh, the light is quite harsh and the composition quite plain despite the high position. Put it aside, is my view.

Third and fourth: the only hope is an HDR-style treatment, The fourth one seems too plain to be worth the effort. The third one has composition issues - the row of car noses just doesn't work for me, at all, and I'd rather see the plant on the bottom not cutoff. I'm not seeing either of these on even with HDR.

bigbassloyd 03-05-2015 02:40 PM

Nothing particularly wrong with the first one, but some are not a fan of the lighting.

Sorry, but there's nothing artistic or unique about number 2. It's a harshly lit shot that fully deserved to be rejected.

Three and four will need more intensive processing to make the cut. The ground areas are not bright enough, but the sky will not tolerate an increase of exposure. You'll need to consider doing some selective editing.

Loyd L.

Freericks 03-05-2015 05:15 PM

I was about to write up my thoughts but saw that Janusz hit every single one of them exactly - his post is perfect.

coaststarlight14 03-05-2015 06:35 PM

Thanks guys for your critiques, I will probably try the first one at a different time of day with some selective brightening to see if the half nose lit screener likes it.

As for the second, I probably should have been further to the left of the train to get more of the lit side. Also the train was moving towards me so the rejection they gave was interesting. Though I would hazard because its long hood forward.

I'll try some selective editing and HDR on the third and try including all the cars or crop them all out. I have another version without the Amtrak and I might try that as well or instead

The fourth one is a plain cloudy wedgie so I'll just put it in the personal archive, I included it in the uploads since it had an interesting back story.

JimThias 03-05-2015 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coaststarlight14 (Post 184074)
As for the second, I probably should have been further to the left of the train to get more of the lit side. Also the train was moving towards me so the rejection they gave was interesting. Though I would hazard because its long hood forward.


The problem isn't LHF, it's the fact that no lights are on, giving it the appearance of a trailing unit moving away from you.

Or maybe the lights are on and it's hard to tell because of the harsh lighting. Either way, it doesn't look like they are on.

coaststarlight14 03-05-2015 10:01 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Yeah, just his dims were on. Photo sequence shows that he was moving towards me though ;)

Ah well, cant fix extreme angles and harsh lighting.

SFO777 03-06-2015 07:53 PM

The CN photo is fantastic and should have gotten on, well composed, good use of the utility poles for framing, perfect angleWould like to see this photo make the cut--in any event, it is a very good photo. An example of where the half-lit nose thing is silly, imo.

The rest are good photos, well-composed but it's just a matter of the lighting. They are great photos for the folks who are fans of that area. Cool to catch the RPC Alco at work.

Great catch DAnylo! Stay Safe At Stege (don't get mugged, it's happened before there to railfans--keep moving).

SFO777 03-08-2015 03:02 AM

DAnylo there is more coal in richmond right now. I think the evening coal job on the weekend goes on duty around 5, giving a chance right now for a beautiful shot from the corner looking toward the hills as they pull or shove cuts out of the storage tracks. This will be easier to get with the daylight savings.


Do you know if the Levin Terminal/RPC people are railfan-friendly or at least neutral? Seems like a place you'd expect to find folks not happy/friendly when some guy is taking pictures...

nikos1 03-08-2015 03:10 AM

By the current standards the only one that should have been rejected is #2 and for bad angle or high sun....not going away, cant even press the right buttons now.
There have been so many cloudy common shots accepted recently that it's pretty absurd that yours with a unique subject got rejected.


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.