Old 01-30-2008, 12:14 AM   #1
Bryan Oliver
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 41
Default Foreground Clutter?

I got this one rejected for "Obstructing Objects (Foreground Clutter)" -
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...9&key=50483402
Comments please?
Bryan Oliver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 12:24 AM   #2
Northern Limits
Senior Member
 
Northern Limits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 611
Default

Although it is not obstructing the lead locomotive, the power pole and wires are very intrusive.
If you look from the rule of thirds perspective - they sit pretty close to the lines, especially in the upper r/h area. I can almost hear the power pole say, "look at me, look at me."
__________________
Cheers, Jim.


Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
Northern Limits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 12:41 AM   #3
UNDPilot
Member
 
UNDPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: VA/MI
Posts: 63
Default

My first reaction was that it should have gotten a distracting shadows reject, I've gotten that once before.
__________________
RailPictures.net photos http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=18763

RRPictureArchives.net photos http://wblanton.rrpicturearchives.net

Personal Rail Photo Website http://wesrail.myjalbum.net/Main
UNDPilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 12:46 AM   #4
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

One hesitates to compare with a image in the database but, since it is my own!

Image © Janusz Mrozek
PhotoID: 171158
Photograph © Janusz Mrozek


I favor my own shot - ha ha! - but that may be primarily because I like Conrail and it is one of my best CR shots. There is a color difference, but about the only interesting difference between the two shots, to me, is that I use the lines all the way across the top as a frame within a frame, along with the pole. Whereas in the rejected picture, while doing much the same thing, does not have the lines extended all the way across the top and so the frame within frame effect is diminished.

But I can't really say why one is rejected and another not. It may just be the usual variations in screening from time to time, just a judgment call.

Also note that warpage on CSX poles is quite common.
__________________
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 01-30-2008, 01:05 AM   #5
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

I think this might be one for appeal, myself. That being said, I do want to warn you that it had a strinkingly green tint on my monitor.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 01:28 AM   #6
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks
I do want to warn you that it had a strinkingly green tint on my monitor.
Yup, I didn't stress that enough. On the other hand, it wasn't rejected (this time) for color.
__________________
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 01-30-2008, 02:33 AM   #7
randy
Senior Member
 
randy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 144
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks
I think this might be one for appeal, myself. That being said, I do want to warn you that it had a strinkingly green tint on my monitor.
I never thought I'd say this, but I think the VERY green grass and shadow in the foreground is more of a distraction than the poles/wires. The poles/wires make a minimumally acceptable frame.

I think both objections pale compared to an otherwise beautiful photo.
__________________
Randy
randy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 02:42 AM   #8
Joe the Photog
A dude with a camera
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,921
Default

Hey, Bryan;

I love those slugs and mates in YN3, even if my favorite are the old GP30 road bodies. Would these two by cance be in local service near you? And can you get back to shoot them? Because just for me, that pole is a shot killer. It's placed in an unfortunate part of the picture as it relates to the composition but also just where it is in relation to the train.

I agree also there is a green tint to the shot as well as the possibility of a distracting shadow reject next time around.


oe
__________________
Joseph C. Hinson Photography
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 01:19 PM   #9
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UNDPilot
My first reaction was that it should have gotten a distracting shadows reject, I've gotten that once before.
Wes,

I see what you're saying about the shadow, but I don't think that this shadow is quite enough to quality for that. Typically, the photos I see rejected for this have large shadows on a portion of the train that takes up a large part of the photo.

A couple of accepted photos of mine and my dad's, with shadows:

Image © Louis Becker
PhotoID: 219847
Photograph © Louis Becker

Image © Carl Becker
PhotoID: 214800
Photograph © Carl Becker


~Carl Becker
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 06:56 PM   #10
Bryan Oliver
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 41
Default

Thanks for all the comments. I actually got this one in on appeal - http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=221187
. I see what your saying now about a green tint. I'll try and correct that and reupload it. Thanks again.
Bryan Oliver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2008, 12:42 AM   #11
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Becker
Wes,

I see what you're saying about the shadow, but I don't think that this shadow is quite enough to quality for that. Typically, the photos I see rejected for this have large shadows on a portion of the train that takes up a large part of the photo.


Since were talking about shadows, and what gets rejected & accepted,
as you said; "Typically, the photos I see rejected for this have large shadows on a portion of the train that takes up a large part of the photo."
.....


accepted:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=221144

rejected;
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=178484224
sd9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2008, 12:44 AM   #12
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,850
Default


.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2008, 01:02 AM   #13
gbrozny
Senior Member
 
gbrozny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 169
Send a message via ICQ to gbrozny
Default

I have a couple large shadows in a few photos, all caused by limited space:

Image © Geoff Brozny
PhotoID: 208835
Photograph © Geoff Brozny

Image © Geoff Brozny
PhotoID: 207404
Photograph © Geoff Brozny

Image © Geoff Brozny
PhotoID: 213608
Photograph © Geoff Brozny

Image © Geoff Brozny
PhotoID: 210169
Photograph © Geoff Brozny


I generally always try my best to stay as shadow free as I can, not possible all the time..
gbrozny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2008, 01:06 AM   #14
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

I had this one rejected for shadows... It is a large shadow, but it starts on the body of the train, way behind the front end.

http://freericks.rrpicturearchives.n...aspx?id=824638

I think that both foreground clutter and distracting shadows are the types of rejections that if you ask 10 people's opinion on a particular rejected picture's merits you will get six or seven different views on.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2008, 08:53 PM   #15
chris crook
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Zanesville Ohio
Posts: 246
Default

Sometimes shadows can be used to a photographer's advantage, to make an interesting picture (big fan of those type shots, myself) and sometimes they just look crappy.

I think you are wrong though; if you ask 10 people you would probably get 10 different answers
__________________
contrarian

Flickr: Armco_block
chris crook 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 06:01 PM.


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