Old 10-12-2013, 06:07 PM   #1
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,898
Default "Poor" Lighting

Pfft.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...43&key=9748837
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2013, 06:27 PM   #2
CSX1702
Senior Member
 
CSX1702's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,268
Default

Ouch. I've definitely seen worse.
__________________
Derek

Flickr

Out Of Place Album
CSX1702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2013, 07:06 PM   #3
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Did you get more a broadside angle?
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2013, 07:23 PM   #4
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Shame on you! for trying to upload such dreck.

I'd take a lot off the right side - the entire station is not worth keeping given how it brings in more blank blue sky and plain grass. Go to one side or the other of the utility pole in front of the windows. I hope you have more to the left, I presume you do not.

Make a major change, and the next screener can make a fresh judgment re light.
__________________
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 10-12-2013, 08:20 PM   #5
Oskar
Member
 
Oskar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Montevideo, Uruguay
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Shame on you! for trying to upload such dreck.

I'd take a lot off the right side - the entire station is not worth keeping given how it brings in more blank blue sky and plain grass. Go to one side or the other of the utility pole in front of the windows. I hope you have more to the left, I presume you do not.

Make a major change, and the next screener can make a fresh judgment re light.
I didn't think cropping was a problem at first sight, I think the depot makes a nice pair with the engine, but that might work. Maybe there's no need to keep the entire building, as you say.

Another frame with the train closer to the left?
Oskar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2013, 03:48 PM   #6
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Did you get more a broadside angle?
Not broad side to the point that the front is not as prominent. I should have thought about that in the field, but I was kinda excited that this was the first time I had a chance to shoot it front uncoupled in the ten years it's been online. (Yeah, I know; RP doesn't care.)

I have a variation of the above shot waiting to get screened now without the man in blue walkng the train. I liked the man in the frame, but thought there was a little too much room between him and the train, too.

Thanks for the advice, guys.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2013, 03:52 PM   #7
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

I think the dark end of the station is hurting you more than the dark front of the locomotive, but can't say for sure.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2013, 05:17 PM   #8
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,898
Default

You're probably right pon that, Charles. I do have frames where I cut the depot off, can obviously crop as well, and have another set of shots without the depot from another location that I can try.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2013, 06:03 PM   #9
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
This is the first time I have caught this unit front uncoupled in the ten years it's been on sight.
Nope........
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2013, 11:35 PM   #10
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween View Post
Nope........
OK. In sight then, Mr. Grammar.



Latest reject --

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...46&key=7284448

These are my other two versions. Should I try one of them or give up entirely and go shoot some "properly" lit wedgies?


ADM in Kershaw 10/11/2013 by Joseph C. Hinson Photography, on Flickr



ADM in Kershaw 10/11/2013 by Joseph C. Hinson Photography, on Flickr
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com

Last edited by Joe the Photog; 10-13-2013 at 11:49 PM.
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2013, 03:31 AM   #11
wds
Senior Member
 
wds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 793
Default

I see you went with a later shot:
Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©

The crewmember riding up front helps overcome the lack of light on the nose (not that it really needed overcoming, but well, you know...). Not a fan of the garbage truck, would've preferred to see the first of the two alternates you posted above make it instead...
__________________
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
wds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2013, 03:34 AM   #12
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,898
Default

I really the shots with the depot, but it wasn't going to happen apparently. This is a more typical shot. My favorite of the series is still the first one I submitted, with the guy walking ahead of the train.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2013, 04:48 AM   #13
wds
Senior Member
 
wds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 793
Default

The pole with the hydro meter and the wires hanging down to it from nowhere killed that one for me, couldn't get over the visual distraction it posed. And to lose that you had to lose the walking dude or the balance would be way off. Just my own personal taste, I suppose.
wds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2013, 06:21 AM   #14
jdirelan87
Senior Member
 
jdirelan87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 725
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
OK. In sight then, Mr. Grammar.

Still nope.
jdirelan87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2013, 06:54 AM   #15
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
I really the shots with the depot, but it wasn't going to happen apparently. This is a more typical shot. My favorite of the series is still the first one I submitted, with the guy walking ahead of the train.
By far, the best shot was the original rejected shot. Too bad...

A little INSIGHT - the problem with this SITE at times is that they have no SIGHT. What I don't see in sight on this site is where Joe ever said what he was quoted as saying.

Joe - I'd resubmit your first shot, it's much better. Maybe go into "shadows and highlights" and bring some detail back in the shaded areas. I'd have stopped and looked at the pick had it been accepted but scrolled right past the accepted and much more generic accepted shot.

/Mitch

Edit - Never mind, no need to cite where on site that was that had been sighted. It was out of sight, cited on the original caption.

Last edited by Mgoldman; 10-14-2013 at 07:00 AM.
Mgoldman 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 11:12 PM.


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