Old 04-07-2017, 01:49 AM   #26
ShortlinesUSA
Senior Member
 
ShortlinesUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 795
Default

Well said. Even when I think I have a "slam dunk" and it gets rejected, I just move on. I don't care to play the appeal game. But I have seen plenty of good photos come on this forum and the photographer takes the constructive criticism and makes improvements and the photo winds up with a lot of views.

The ones that irk me are the rejections which are posted here supposedly seeking help, yet the photographer rejects every ounce of constructive criticism posted, and while "not caring" their photo has been rejected, it is patently clear they are very upset their photo has been rejected.
__________________
Mike Derrick

Shortline and Regional RR forum moderator
ShortlinesUSA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2017, 04:16 AM   #27
Decapod401
Senior Member
 
Decapod401's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Russell - NZ View Post

This one being added to Flickr group "Rejected by RailPictures.net" along with steam shots that just aren't sunny enough for the screener. I encourage others to do likewise as that could be an interesting way of seeing what we can't see here. Not sure how many images are truly rejected images or whether they tried to fix the rejection reason. It also helps me know what I have submitted before.


I skimmed the first page of the photostream, and it's pretty easy to spot why most of the photos were rejected. I'm not sure that making yourself part of that group is going to get yourself followed by the audience that you may want to see your work.

It seems like a collection of the type of "sour grapes" folks akin to the guys that SAR and Mike have referred to - people who think that their photography is adequate, and they couldn't possibly have a need to learn and improve just because some screener doesn't like their flawed image.

Last edited by Decapod401; 04-07-2017 at 12:08 PM.
Decapod401 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2017, 12:50 PM   #28
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,534
Default

Stubborn photographers are the worst. If you think you can't improve upon your photography, your photography will suffer.

Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2017, 05:44 PM   #29
John West
Senior Curmudgeon
 
John West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mill Valley, CA
Posts: 1,074
Cool

While the screeners are not always very good at communicating, I have found that when they reject an image perhaps there is good reason even if it is not reflected in the posted rejection reason. On those occasions when I have fought the system and either appealed or "fixed" the problem and the image gets posted, it usually does not get a lot of hits. There are exceptions, but not very many. Over time my approach has evolved from being unhappy to trying to learn from a rejection. And when I do that it usually results in a better image. Sometimes only slightly better, but usually a bit better. Overall I think the give and take here has greatly improved my photography.
__________________
John West
See my pix here and
here and here
John West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2017, 03:49 AM   #30
John Russell - NZ
Member
 
John Russell - NZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 71
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Decapod401 View Post
I don't perceive a "risk" in submitting images that may push the limits of acceptability on RP, given that the image also has positive merit. The risk is in making these images a high percentage of your submissions, or in repeatedly challenging or resubmitting images with killer rejections.

The key is to recognize that an image may have an issue, and to expect a rejection. If the photo is accepted, fine, and if not, just forget about it. You have plenty of images here. One photo is not going to make or break your portfolio.
Thanks Doug. Words of wisdom indeed. This thread, and others, has helped me recognize the key. I guess one can be almost blind to what others can easily see in photos by their own preferences or standards (or even what has been accepted in the past or elsewhere.) I suspect there is no clear cut standard or point at which a screener may reject for a particular reason just as a viewer response doesn't. Perhaps I've been too analytical of a process that could be more subjective than I would like. And if I was ever a RP screener there might be as many complaints (if not more!) Thanks for your input.
John Russell - NZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2017, 04:46 AM   #31
John Russell - NZ
Member
 
John Russell - NZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 71
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John West View Post
While the screeners are not always very good at communicating, I have found that when they reject an image perhaps there is good reason even if it is not reflected in the posted rejection reason. On those occasions when I have fought the system and either appealed or "fixed" the problem and the image gets posted, it usually does not get a lot of hits. There are exceptions, but not very many. Over time my approach has evolved from being unhappy to trying to learn from a rejection. And when I do that it usually results in a better image. Sometimes only slightly better, but usually a bit better. Overall I think the give and take here has greatly improved my photography.
Yes John, I have learnt a lot but have got some way to go yet. And it's not just about a photo being better but the way RP likes it. That may require a change in approach or in personal preferences. In terms of viewer response you could be right a lot of the time but it's not really provable what difference changes made to photos make. In the case of the photo that started this thread I doubt there would have been any difference. (Quite possibly no difference in acceptance either.) What you say about reasons for rejection not being reflected in the stated reason is often true but makes me wonder why having 2 or more reasons indicated is not common practice. (Maybe it is but I am learning more from past rejections LOL.) Thanks for your input.

Last edited by John Russell - NZ; 04-09-2017 at 07:40 AM.
John Russell - NZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2017, 07:56 AM   #32
John Russell - NZ
Member
 
John Russell - NZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 71
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShortlinesUSA View Post
The ones that irk me are the rejections which are posted here supposedly seeking help, yet the photographer rejects every ounce of constructive criticism posted, and while "not caring" their photo has been rejected, it is patently clear they are very upset their photo has been rejected.
Thanks Mike. Not sure if this comment is directed at me in particular but I'm taking it on-board. Sorry if I've come across somewhat sour and stubborn. I've learnt a lot from being in this community. And I don't think I'd fancy being a screener even if I had what it takes. Thanks guys for your comments.
John Russell - NZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2017, 06:29 PM   #33
ShortlinesUSA
Senior Member
 
ShortlinesUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 795
Default

Not at all, John. Just a general observation of posts I've seen over the years.
__________________
Mike Derrick

Shortline and Regional RR forum moderator
ShortlinesUSA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 05:51 PM   #34
xBNSFer
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Kaden View Post
I'm not looking for advice, just thought you'd all get a kick out this. I've got 1,500+ photos on the site and have been posting since 2005. I've never expected the process to be perfect. But really? I mean really. I guess I'll see if I can get it on by appeal.
Well, hey you can tell it's REALLY cloudy - just look at that jet black shadow next to the lead unit. What more proof do you need?!/sarc
xBNSFer 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 10:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.