Slam away

RobJor · 06-22-2018, 08:47 PM

Ok, just for discussion, doubt there is anything to "fix".?

Bob

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...55&key=5901337

ATSF666 · 06-23-2018, 02:44 AM

Looks soft, too tight and meh.

JimThias · 06-23-2018, 03:39 PM

Cell phone grab shot.

Joseph Cermak · 06-23-2018, 05:53 PM

It's a neat idea, but the one light right above the loco cab (behind it) kind of ruins it for me, makes the lighting there very odd.

RobJor · 06-23-2018, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Cermak

It's a neat idea, but the one light right above the loco cab (behind it) kind of ruins it for me, makes the lighting there very odd.

Yes, saw that, would have taken a while to eliminate properly. I took a little light glare out. Don't think it would have unrejected it tho. I can see the quality problem but I think the too tight is not warranted. It is something i can redo but...... can't change the composition much. i thought the over and under background with the bridge was kinda neat.

Bob

Joseph Cermak · 06-23-2018, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobJor

Yes, saw that, would have taken a while to eliminate properly. I took a little light glare out. Don't think it would have unrejected it tho. I can see the quality problem but I think the too tight is not warranted. It is something i can redo but...... can't change the composition much. i thought the over and under background with the bridge was kinda neat.

Bob

Can you stand further back at all and go more broadside? Maybe that would help with the tightness issue. I like the idea but if it were me I'd try again, hopefully improve the softness issues as well.

miningcamper1 · 06-23-2018, 09:18 PM

I'd like to see some of whatever was behind the engine. Also a sharper Sears Tower (or whatever they're calling it now). Why not re-shoot this?

RobJor · 06-23-2018, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

I'd like to see some of whatever was behind the engine. Also a sharper Sears Tower (or whatever they're calling it now). Why not re-shoot this?

Thanks, I can reshoot maybe in blue hour, gain some light.
Ok, behind the engine was another P-42 since this was when they tacked on the Iowa Pacific cars but then you are getting into the bridge abutments. the concept was to frame the lead unit between the lights and have the background out of focus. Doubt I could keep in focus if I tried with 1.4. I have a few with the full train and the buildings all in focus from 21 st, so looking for something else.

Bob

RobJor · 06-23-2018, 10:32 PM

I know there is a thing of not making direct comparisons because they are never really direct(and this is not) and also thinking of our dear departed member but I am not being critical, just noting that this image just showed up

PhotoID: 662128
Photograph © Matt Donnelly

Bob

miningcamper1 · 06-24-2018, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobJor

I know there is a thing of not making direct comparisons because they are never really direct(and this is not) and also thinking of our dear departed member but I am not being critical, just noting that this image just showed up

PhotoID: 662128
Photograph © Matt Donnelly

Bob

Departed???

As for the pic, I'm thinking perhaps I might like sharp city lights with the train blurred.

RobJor · 06-24-2018, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Departed???

As for the pic, I'm thinking perhaps I might like sharp city lights with the train blurred.

From the forum.

And -

PhotoID: 662217
Photograph © Matt Donnelly

Bob

JRMDC · 06-24-2018, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobJor

I know there is a thing of not making direct comparisons because they are never really direct(and this is not) and also thinking of our dear departed member but I am not being critical, just noting that this image just showed up

PhotoID: 662128
Photograph © Matt Donnelly

Bob

This. Train sharp, background well blurry. An effect worth going for in the Willis Tower shot if you can't get it all sharp.

bigbassloyd · 06-25-2018, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC

This. Train sharp.

Train not sharp. Train just more sharp than Bobs.

As for the reject Bob, I woulda nailed it for several other issues, and I don't forsee a fix for any of it. Sorry.

Loyd L.

RobJor · 06-25-2018, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

Train not sharp. Train just more sharp than Bobs.

As for the reject Bob, I woulda nailed it for several other issues, and I don't forsee a fix for any of it. Sorry.

Loyd L.

I agree and I looked at some others I took of of building and bridge only and see I missed a little, at 1.4 and a train moving at 90 degrees at night leaves very little margin of error. The ???? seemed to like it tho so I'll take that. I still believe the concept is good but the rejection at face value says not. Anyway if I go back for a repeat and get good focus and a little better lighting will it now get accepted, ie is it worth that effort or just do it for the sake of doing it. About 3 weeks or so I will see. Bob

JRMDC · 06-25-2018, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

Train not sharp. Train just more sharp than Bobs.

Sharp enough for my viewing pleasure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobJor

I still believe the concept is good but the rejection at face value says not. Anyway if I go back for a repeat and get good focus and a little better lighting will it now get accepted, ie is it worth that effort or just do it for the sake of doing it. About 3 weeks or so I will see. Bob

While personally I don't care for the concept, the important thing is do you like the concept enough to go back and redo? Shoot for yourself, always. Later, find a publication/distribution venue.

J