Old 08-28-2008, 03:56 AM   #1
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default Subject too far away?

Please help me out here!

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=567773&key=0

The train is much closer than in any number of photos I've seen in the collection here, and the signal bridge is part of the subject here. Why is the train too far away?

Jon
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 04:07 AM   #2
Paulinbna
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 14
Default

Since there is all ready a thread about this thought I would ask the same question.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=567786&key=0
Paulinbna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 04:20 AM   #3
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
Please help me out here!

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=567773&key=0

The train is much closer than in any number of photos I've seen in the collection here, and the signal bridge is part of the subject here. Why is the train too far away?

Jon
it doesn't fit with the photo idea, and it's also way off level. I don't like the way in which the ties are included, though I'd have to chimp a bit to see if they should be there.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulinbna
Since there is all ready a thread about this thought I would ask the same question.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=567786&key=0
I see what you're going for, but it's a pretty boring station and those trucks don't really add anything, either.
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 04:23 AM   #4
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

Chimp a bit?
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 04:32 AM   #5
JBCagle7073
Alpha Phi Psi
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kannapolis, NC
Posts: 264
Send a message via AIM to JBCagle7073
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
Chimp a bit?
Monkey around with it


Both just don't seem interesting because of how they are framed. The ties dominate in one and the station dominates in the second. They both just aren't aesthetically pleasing. They could have chosen several reasons but stuck with the too far away.

It's not the distance away that kills the shot. There are much closer and much further away images in the database, but you have to look at what else is in the space. Usually there is some kind of scenery or interesting angle or comparison and contrast with the train and the surroundings going on in those shots.
__________________
Duty is the most sublime word in our language. Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less.- Robert E. Lee
JBCagle7073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 01:02 PM   #6
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
Please help me out here!

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=567773&key=0

The train is much closer than in any number of photos I've seen in the collection here, and the signal bridge is part of the subject here. Why is the train too far away?

Jon
Why didn't you capture the train going under the signal as your description implies? I agree with the screener, too far away for an appealing composition. Is that the only frame you shot? If you got the train actually going under the signal, submit that one instead.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 01:31 PM   #7
ottergoose
American Gunzel
 
ottergoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 1,626
Send a message via AIM to ottergoose Send a message via Yahoo to ottergoose
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
Why didn't you capture the train going under the signal as your description implies? I agree with the screener, too far away for an appealing composition. Is that the only frame you shot? If you got the train actually going under the signal, submit that one instead.
I agree 100%.
__________________
Nick Benson | Pictures | Website | Flickr | Profile | JetPhotos | Twitter
ottergoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 01:40 PM   #8
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
Why didn't you capture the train going under the signal as your description implies? I agree with the screener, too far away for an appealing composition. Is that the only frame you shot? If you got the train actually going under the signal, submit that one instead.
I actually submitted a shot with the train going under the signal earlier, and they rejected it because the signal tower cast a "distracting shadow" on the train.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=566342&key=0

Jon
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 02:36 PM   #9
WKUrailfan
Senior Member
 
WKUrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
Chimp a bit?
Chimping is looking at your LCD to see what your photo looks like in the field.
WKUrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 02:40 PM   #10
WKUrailfan
Senior Member
 
WKUrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
I actually submitted a shot with the train going under the signal earlier, and they rejected it because the signal tower cast a "distracting shadow" on the train.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=566342&key=0

Jon
Jon, what does the next frame in the sequence look like? You struck out with that shadow. Give the train a few more feet into the frame and you've got your shot. The ties are also an interesting compositional element, providing some crude leading lines into the shot. My eye rolls around from the ties, up the signal bridge and down to the train nicely.
WKUrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 02:41 PM   #11
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
I actually submitted a shot with the train going under the signal earlier, and they rejected it because the signal tower cast a "distracting shadow" on the train.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=566342&key=0

Jon
Interesting. Well it looks like you'll need the sun to be at a lower angle to avoid that. Or...wait for the engine to be closer to you so the shadow is on top of the train and farther back. If the train was actually under the signal, or just a bit closer to you, you wouldn't get that shadow on the nose. Did you fire off one more frame?


Quote:
Originally Posted by WKUrailfan
Chimping is looking at your LCD to see what your photo looks like in the field.
This is true.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 03:50 PM   #12
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
Did you fire off one more frame?
Unfortunately, the next shot I took was of the train going away because it was passing a coal drag waiting in the hole. I know that won't get accepted because of the lighting. What I'm finding, based on some of my rejections here, is that I need to start shooting multiple exposures of some of these setups (3.5 frames/second or whatever my camera will give), and hope that one of them is right. That's if I want them posted here anyway.

Jon
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 04:47 PM   #13
stevenmwelch
Senior Member
 
stevenmwelch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minot, ND
Posts: 720
Send a message via AIM to stevenmwelch Send a message via Yahoo to stevenmwelch
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
Unfortunately, the next shot I took was of the train going away because it was passing a coal drag waiting in the hole. I know that won't get accepted because of the lighting. What I'm finding, based on some of my rejections here, is that I need to start shooting multiple exposures of some of these setups (3.5 frames/second or whatever my camera will give), and hope that one of them is right. That's if I want them posted here anyway.

Jon
You don't have to machine gun, just shoot at the proper time. I bet there are some on here that shoot like snipers (NOT ME!!).

Just need to learn the proper time to shoot, etc.
__________________
Steven M. Welch
Minot, ND
I gots my floaties and I'm ready to go railroadin' in Minot.
My Photos on RP
My RP Rejects and then Some
stevenmwelch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 06:53 PM   #14
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman

The train is much closer than in any number of photos I've seen in the collection here, and the signal bridge is part of the subject here.
Jon
Except we're not talking about those pictures, we're talking about yours. The train is too far away to really be a part of the shot. It may have worked better if the train was actually further away, *maybe.* If anything, my eyes are drawn to the pile of ties on the ground.

I agree with the reject.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 06:57 PM   #15
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
What I'm finding, based on some of my rejections here, is that I need to start shooting multiple exposures of some of these setups (3.5 frames/second or whatever my camera will give), and hope that one of them is right.
No, no, no!!! Get the train where you want it and shoot! Don't just hope one just happens to be right. You'll find more times than not, hope is all you'll hve. You can still fire off more than one shot, but put some thought into where you want all the elements of your shot and fire the shutter when you think you'll get it.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 07:21 PM   #16
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulinbna
Since there is all ready a thread about this thought I would ask the same question.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=567786&key=0
Paul;

Very simply, go back when a train is there -- albeit closer to us -- but the shadows are not.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 08:19 PM   #17
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
No, no, no!!! Get the train where you want it and shoot! Don't just hope one just happens to be right. You'll find more times than not, hope is all you'll hve. You can still fire off more than one shot, but put some thought into where you want all the elements of your shot and fire the shutter when you think you'll get it.


Joe
This IS where I wanted the train!
http://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...id=566342&key=0 (note - already deleted. when I get home I'll attach a copy of the pic)
But as I said above, it got rejected for the shadow. If I'd had just one more burst shot, I'd have gotten the train with the nose just past the shadow. But like I said, I was also thinking in terms of turning to get the meet with the freight in the hole . . .

Jon

Last edited by jnohallman; 08-28-2008 at 08:22 PM.
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 08:21 PM   #18
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

BTW, I've come to terms with the rejection for the train being too far away, relative to the rest of the composition. That leads to another question . . . would it be a suitable photo with no train at all? That is, just the tracks, ties and signal?

Jon
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 08:45 PM   #19
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Senior Member
 
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marlboro, NJ
Posts: 1,956
Send a message via AIM to Andrew Blaszczyk (2) Send a message via Yahoo to Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
That leads to another question . . . would it be a suitable photo with no train at all? That is, just the tracks, ties and signal?

Jon
The easy answer is...no. It would just look like you didn't see a train so you snapped a shot of the scene and submitted. Not exactly what RP is about especially since trains DO run there. Now there is a yes answer to the question because RP does accept artistic shots of just railroad infrastructure but there must be that little something that makes it interesting and not like someone just happened to aim the camera that way and "click".

When trying to go for the artistic approach between trains or while waiting for ONE d%#@ train ask yourself these questions:

Whats my goal in taking a shot of the ties, tracks and signal?
Is there a special meaning behind them? Tie replacement?
Whats my subject and how do I make it stand out against everything else?
Why should anyone care about these ties, tracks, etc.?
What is the best lighting to make this artistic and not just a sunlit shot?
What depth of field would be appropriate?
Is there anything odd, unique or special about these objects that I really want the viewer to focus on?

Just because you think its interesting, it may just look like railroad junk to someone else. You need to make them stop and really look at it and have some sort of feedback whether good or bad, the photo has done its 'job'.
__________________
-Andrew Blaszczyk a.k.a. AB(2)
Proud fan of the Sabres, Islanders, Rockies, and Lions.

"My camera is an artistic medium, not a tool of terrorism."

www.ab2photography.com Coming soon!
My photos on RailPictures:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=960
Andrew Blaszczyk (2) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2008, 11:35 AM   #20
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Anyone care to comment on this one?

The train is barely discernable and IMHO is not a very well exposed shot, has focus issues (imho)

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=248530

I have some real issues when I see shots like this, but I get shots rejected which are a few hundred feet away from the train
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2008, 12:41 PM   #21
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

I have to admit I wondered a little bit about that one as well . . .

Jon
__________________
"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." - Mark Twain

Click here to see my photos on RP.net!

Do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, click here. Don't even think about it. I'm warning you!
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2008, 05:05 PM   #22
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n
Anyone care to comment on this one?

The train is barely discernable and IMHO is not a very well exposed shot, has focus issues (imho)

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=248530

I have some real issues when I see shots like this, but I get shots rejected which are a few hundred feet away from the train
Do you think the rejected shot is better than the accepted shot?
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2008, 05:13 PM   #23
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
Do you think the rejected shot is better than the accepted shot?
I did not read his post as comparing the accepted shot to the rejected one, but rather to his own (unseen) rejections. He basically started a new thread without actually doing so.

I don't much care for the accepted shot; I would have rejected it under a "bland" light category of some sort. The colors are also pretty dull - too early in the spring to get lots of green - except the water is a nice hue. I'm fine with vista shots and there are certainly many of them on RP. Here, that dominant mountain on the far side is just too uniform and winter brown for my tastes. Looks like a nice vista to shoot at another time of year.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2008, 08:28 PM   #24
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I
I don't much care for the accepted shot; I would have rejected it under a "bland" light category of some sort. The colors are also pretty dull - too early in the spring to get lots of green - except the water is a nice hue. I'm fine with vista shots and there are certainly many of them on RP. Here, that dominant mountain on the far side is just too uniform and winter brown for my tastes. Looks like a nice vista to shoot at another time of year.
The picture doesn't wow me for many of the same reasons. To me the lighting isn't great - I almost think the shot would be better without any sky in it, to reduce the overall sense of haziness. Someone commented on the photo that to take it an any other time of year would mean it couldn't be a train photo because the foliage would obscure the tracks, which is probably true. Still, a crisper shot should be possible. The other thing that strikes me is that the brush in the foreground is the element of the picture most in focus - I'm not sure whether I like that in this photo or not. I guess the question is whether the "grandness" of the location outweighs the other elements of the photo, and I gather in this case it did for the screeners.

Jon
__________________
"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." - Mark Twain

Click here to see my photos on RP.net!

Do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, click here. Don't even think about it. I'm warning you!
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2008, 08:40 PM   #25
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I did not read his post as comparing the accepted shot to the rejected one, but rather to his own (unseen) rejections. He basically started a new thread without actually doing so.

I don't much care for the accepted shot; I would have rejected it under a "bland" light category of some sort. The colors are also pretty dull - too early in the spring to get lots of green - except the water is a nice hue. I'm fine with vista shots and there are certainly many of them on RP. Here, that dominant mountain on the far side is just too uniform and winter brown for my tastes. Looks like a nice vista to shoot at another time of year.
The accepted shot certainly isn't an amazing shot for the reasons you listed, but it's still miles better than the rejected one. The accepted photo actually shows a scene and has something to look at. The rejected photo is just empty track with a signal and a train that for no reason is in the background.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:13 AM.


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