No advice needed, just need to bitch

[Mberry]

It sure seems hard to get a detail shot onto rp, usually when I do I get PEQed right off the bat. Had some hope on this one because on the first try I got underexposed and also because I got a builders plate shot on recently. Resubmitted today and NOW a PEQ. Very frustrating.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...02&key=2491446

PhotoID: 465934 Photograph © Michael Berry

[Mgoldman]

Hopefully, it's the rejection reason given that is frustrating...

Seems to me, Bad Angle might be more appropriate.

Why not compose 90 degrees parallel to the camera as your first example?

/Mitch

[Mberry]

Originally Posted by Mgoldman

Hopefully, it's the rejection reason given that is frustrating...

Seems to me, Bad Angle might be more appropriate.

Why not compose 90 degrees parallel to the camera as your first example?

/Mitch

It's the killer rejection on the second try that is frustrating.

I do have a shot parallel to the camera which I considered submitting instead but it doesn't look as good as the submitted angle.

[Mgoldman]

Originally Posted by Mberry

It's the killer rejection on the second try that is frustrating.

I do have a shot parallel to the camera which I considered submitting instead but it doesn't look as good as the submitted angle.

I don't so much mind back to back rejections that are unique. I can see where one issue is instantly most apparent and checked without further review.

While I'd probably let your image in on appeal, I may have initially rejected for poor angle. Your example at 90 degrees parallel is not as appealing. The angle is "better" and more RP appropriate, but missing what makes the rejected shot so interesting: better light, easier to read and better detail all around, especially in the blacks. Looks like you cleaned it up a bit - no black on the top right, for instance.

/Mitch

[Mberry]

Originally Posted by Mgoldman

I don't so much mind back to back rejections that are unique. I can see where one issue is instantly most apparent and checked without further review.

While I'd probably let your image in on appeal, I may have initially rejected for poor angle. Your example at 90 degrees parallel is not as appealing. The angle is "better" and more RP appropriate, but missing what makes the rejected shot so interesting: better light, easier to read and better detail all around, especially in the blacks. Looks like you cleaned it up a bit - no black on the top right, for instance.

/Mitch

Cleaned it up in photoshop or some other program you mean? Nope, wouldn't know how to do that..... I do my processing in Iphoto and my skills are not that advanced.

[Mgoldman]

Originally Posted by Mberry

Cleaned it up in photoshop or some other program you mean? Nope, wouldn't know how to do that.....

No, I meant, literally, lol - note the top left rivet. In your rejected shot, the rivet is covered in paint or tar whereas the un-submitted shot shows a shiny clean rivet. The covered rivet adds a little character /detail, in line with the rest of the detail in the rejected but "going away" view of the submitted shot.

/Mitch

[Mberry]

Originally Posted by Mgoldman

No, I meant, literally, lol - note the top left rivet. In your rejected shot, the rivet is covered in paint or tar whereas the un-submitted shot shows a shiny clean rivet. The covered rivet adds a little character /detail, in line with the rest of the detail in the rejected but "going away" view of the submitted shot.

/Mitch

lol - no, I didn't physically clean it either.... I do see a big difference, not sure what the deal is!

[Mgoldman]

----------------------------------------------

[Mberry]

Originally Posted by Mgoldman

No big deal at all - just adds a little more character. Again, overall, the rejected though possibly poor angle shot seems to have much more detail and /or better light. For one thing, it's fully legible with details better exposed.

/Mitch

Yes, that's why I took the chance of submitting that one, even though it's not an ideal angle for a stationary object such as a builders plate.