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)
-   -   Need help getting this accepted (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=16642)

CSX1702 09-11-2013 05:10 PM

[photoid=450858]

Here's how it looks on RP if anybody's interested.

Sean Mathews 09-11-2013 05:13 PM

Thank goodness. I think toning the sky down helped a lot in getting it accepted. Nice photo to get number 25 with.

Thank you everyone for your help. You all really went a long way helping me.

CSX1702 09-11-2013 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Mathews (Post 170062)
Thank goodness. I think toning the sky down helped a lot in getting it accepted. Nice photo to get number 25 with.

Thank you everyone for your help. You all really went a long way helping me.

It's a really nice pic. Would've been nice if it would've game through in better sun though.

Sean Mathews 09-11-2013 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 170063)
It's a really nice pic. Would've been nice if it would've game through in better sun though.

I know.... But, like I said, it was by chance I even saw it. I think that if the sun had been up any more It probably would have been unusable, and the mist in the background would have burned off making it just another high sun angle photo. It was very humid. My camera and astronomy equipment was soaked at around 10pm the prior night.

CSX1702 09-11-2013 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Mathews (Post 170064)
I know.... But, like I said, it was by chance I even saw it. I think that if the sun had been up any more It probably would have been unusable, and the mist in the background would have burned off making it just another high sun angle photo. It was very humid. My camera and astronomy equipment was soaked at around 10pm the prior night.

You did great for what you had though.

Sean Mathews 09-11-2013 05:58 PM

Thanks! I really appreciate it. RP has been a constant and steep learning curve.

troy12n 09-11-2013 06:11 PM

Sky looks a LOT better in the accepted version. Glad it got on. Looks like it could have been taken any time from the early 70's through the mid-late 90's.

Sean Mathews 09-11-2013 06:19 PM

Thanks! Sadly, I just realized after looking at the site I could have saved myself a lot of time and just taken a photo of a door. I'd probably have a PC under my belt too. :roll:

Joe the Photog 09-11-2013 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 170060)
[photoid=450858]

Here's how it looks on RP if anybody's interested.

It should have been rejected for Bad Info.

JimThias 09-11-2013 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Mathews (Post 170056)
It was shot in raw. Again, these are technical challenges from the angle of the sun. And every time I reprocess to the screeners comments, It degrades.

Can you explain this? Are you actually reprocessing the formerly processed image, or are you starting over from the original file each time (like you probably should to avoid that degradation)?

JimThias 09-11-2013 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 170041)
PS - I rotated it .01 CCW and that looked crooked.
In other words, looks good to me as is.
The verticals on the centered Chessie cab look PERFECT.

Maybe Jim can chime in on which blades of grass were not
perpendicular to the ground?

.8 CCW and it started to look better. :-P

JRMDC 09-12-2013 12:21 AM

Agree on the CCW, I noticed it right away. Mitch can't always be right. :)

Glad it's on. Go into the editing feature and change "B&O 6340" to "BO 6240" as RP chokes on the ampersand and the shot will never appear in a search.

It isn't conventional to identify the 2nd locomotive instead of the leader, but I have no argument that says one should do it differently.

Mgoldman 09-12-2013 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC (Post 170083)
Agree on the CCW, I noticed it right away. Mitch can't always be right. :)

Glad it's on. Go into the editing feature and change "B&O 6340" to "BO 6240" as RP chokes on the ampersand and the shot will never appear in a search.

It isn't conventional to identify the 2nd locomotive instead of the leader, but I have no argument that says one should do it differently.

Why is RP even accepting "&" in the data field? Refuse once, and you never have to worry about it again. I've fixed a bunch for others already...

As for .8 degrees (not even a full percent of a single degree) - was it turned? I can't tell. The "structure" is still leaning and Loyd was the one that said tipping left or right /CCW or CW was not the issue.

/Mitch

PS - I think the engines popped a bit better in my edit - Sean, did you try (do you have PS) adjusting the clipping as noted? Engines seem just a bit dark and less then crisp in the accepted version, though the sky seems more accurate.

nikos1 09-12-2013 05:17 AM

Real Chessie :D
[photoid=366657]
[photoid=332476]
[photoid=332757]

Mgoldman 09-12-2013 05:36 AM

REAL CHESSIE :D :D

[photoid=174492]
[photoid=352843]
[photoid=408218]

/Mitch

troy12n 09-12-2013 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 170086)
REAL CHESSIE :D :D

[photoid=174492]
[photoid=352843]
[photoid=408218]

/Mitch

Not quite, even though it's kind of painted that way.

REAL CHESSIE:

[photoid=432930]

Sean Mathews 09-12-2013 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 170084)
Why is RP even accepting "&" in the data field? Refuse once, and you never have to worry about it again. I've fixed a bunch for others already...

As for .8 degrees (not even a full percent of a single degree) - was it turned? I can't tell. The "structure" is still leaning and Loyd was the one that said tipping left or right /CCW or CW was not the issue.

/Mitch

PS - I think the engines popped a bit better in my edit - Sean, did you try (do you have PS) adjusting the clipping as noted? Engines seem just a bit dark and less then crisp in the accepted version, though the sky seems more accurate.

I wish that I could have got the engines in with more pop. However I kept getting hit with overprocessed with them. I may try to re-edit the accepted photo master and resubmit down the line. I am done for now though. I have a file with about twenty photos in it of that one photo. Still, I am pleased with the fianl outcome, or at least the fact it finally made it.

I'm sure there is plenty to nitpick. I might have been an expert photojournalist at one point, but I am not an expert train photogrpaher. At 32, married and a job that requires me to be away from home 12 hours a day, I just don;t have the time to set up and plan out some of the spectacular shots I have seen on here. One day maybe. For now I just have to rely on being at the right place at the right time like this shot. Or a trip to a heritage railway like Strasburg or Western MD on my birthday.

Again, thanks for those who took the time to help a stranger in his quest to get a photo accepted.

bigbassloyd 09-12-2013 11:36 AM

I hope that was a tounge in cheek post about the Hog in a leisure suit Mitch.. :D

Sean, I wouldn't sweat it. The photo makes you happy, and that's job number one.

Loyd L.

Sean Mathews 09-12-2013 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd (Post 170089)
I hope that was a tounge in cheek post about the Hog in a leisure suit Mitch.. :D

Sean, I wouldn't sweat it. The photo makes you happy, and that's job number one.

Loyd L.

Hog in a leisure suit??? :lol:

JRMDC 09-12-2013 01:59 PM

C'mon people, this is real Chessie!

[photoid=200031]
[photoid=197274]
[photoid=197276]

this is fake Chessie:

[photoid=230713]

Mgoldman 09-12-2013 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC (Post 170092)
C'mon people, this is real Chessie...

Pfffffttt..... OK, I was just playing, but if you want to see the REAL Chessie, look no further!

"...The C&O heavily promoted the 500 as the locomotive of the future, and advertised them pulling the soon to be placed in service "Chessie" passenger train. The Chessie was to have four dome cars and one of the lounges had a large warm water aquarium with tropical fish...."

Text from "Steamlocomotive.com" - more here:http://www.steamlocomotive.com/turbine/
(Don't look - they didn't fare too well!)

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...T5Pkrb5024mepc

http://www.pwrs.ca/product_images/110360_1.jpg

http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r...ER/PTA/CO1.jpg

http://www.brasstrains.com/images/pr...9/DSC01392.jpg

/Mitch

CSX1702 09-12-2013 09:01 PM

Not even close guys. The real Chessie:

http://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Cats/Chessie.jpg

Sean Mathews 09-13-2013 12:51 PM

I think this argument has now been won.... by about the width of a cat's whisker.

JRMDC 09-14-2013 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Mathews (Post 170136)
I think this argument has now been won.... by about the width of a cat's whisker.

Yes, I did, thank you very much! :) It only counts if one only go the shot by one's self, back in the day. :) :)

Now watch Ron pop in with a picture of the cat he took himself. :(

Holloran Grade 09-15-2013 03:55 AM

Just to be an asshole (sorry Joe) I used the conjunctive of " asshole.".
 
Just to be an asshole (sorry Joe).

The image is accepted, why is this thread still active?


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:51 PM.

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