Poor Aesthetics cab shot rejection

[Heymon]

I find this rejection a bit odd. I have a few similar cab shots that have been accepted, and I see many others that have made it in, but I can't figure out the rejection. I was thinking I might get nicked for exposure perhaps, which I could work on, but the PEQ is confusing to me. Please clue me in.

Andre

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...68&key=9243172

[miningcamper1]

Positives: Good lighting inside.

Negatives: Pieces of other visitors inside.
Blown highlights everywhere outside.

[troy12n]

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Positives: Good lighting inside.

Negatives: Pieces of other visitors inside.
Blown highlights everywhere outside.

Exactly...

Next time take multiple exposures and fix it in post. This is simple.

I'm not a fan of these type shots, but they get on, and a lot of time get views

[EMTRailfan]

You may not have a leg to stand on with this one. Maybe not even both of them...

[Noct Foamer]

Next time, steady the camera against something and take one shot exposed for interior, one for outside. Flash would have allowed you to balance in the inside light with the outside, but that would require at least two off-camera flash and a good bit of time to set it all up.


Kent in SD

[troy12n]

Originally Posted by Noct Foamer

Next time, steady the camera against something and take one shot exposed for interior, one for outside. Flash would have allowed you to balance in the inside light with the outside, but that would require at least two off-camera flash and a good bit of time to set it all up.

Yeah, when you are running from the train crew, sometimes you don't have time to do all that prep work, lol!

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Positives: Good lighting inside.

He had the flash just a tad too bright, IMO.

Originally Posted by Noct Foamer

Next time, steady the camera against something and take one shot exposed for interior, one for outside. Flash would have allowed you to balance in the inside light with the outside, but that would require at least two off-camera flash and a good bit of time to set it all up.

One flash would have been sufficient.

[RobJor]

I can't do these and not sure what makes good one but this seems a little awkward. I realize constraints of getting in the cab so maybe would have been better to have only right side. There are so many pieces cut off, crazy angles which I realize can be OK but ....., flash glare, parts of people as mentioned.

Maybe someone more flash savvy can chime in but I see 1/60th ISO 500, F.5.6, so it would seem to me better to have overall exposure balanced for outdoor and the flash would have picked up the interior enough.

Bob

[Noct Foamer]

Originally Posted by JimThias

He had the flash just a tad too bright, IMO.



One flash would have been sufficient.

Maybe. When I do these I generally have two. One is on the floor pointed up at the ceiling, and another is off to my side at half or quarter power, for fill. In such confined space it's tough to avoid hotspots and window glare. A quick down & dirty way is to point flash up at ceiling and have a white square attached to the flash to direct some light forward (most Nikon flash have this built in.) A fancier deal is a Lumiquest 80/20 which goes over the flash head and directs 80% up for bounce while reflecting 20% forward for fill. I carry one of these in my bag. The only issue is the ceilings of many locos are painted a yucky color, which can cause a tint in the final shot. Usually can clean this up in PS or Portrait Pro. In the old days I used to tape a big white square of poster board to the ceiling rather than mess with CC filters.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...C&A=details&Q=


Kent in SD

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by Noct Foamer

In such confined space it's tough to avoid hotspots and window glare.

I know. I shoot interiors for a living.

[Heymon]

For what it's worth, I agree with most of what you all have said. But I think overexposed stuff can be worked on and should get that reason as a rejection, but the PEQ means there is nothing salvageable here. I am not posting it for artistic reasons per se, but more of a documentary type shot, and I don't think that it is so bad it can't be recovered especially compared to other cab shots. If it is the cut off people parts, well okay.

I agree about the flash. This was one of those locomotive displays with a long line behind me, so I sort of had to fire away without the ability to review or do much else. This was a bounce flash with a diffuser, which I have used before with no issues. A few other shots had flash glare on the display screens that I found distracting, and this one had the least of that. Probably my bigger mistake was using the flash at all, since I just got a new camera that can apparently shoot in the dark. Totally not used to its abilities. Thought the light coming in from the windows needed to be offset, but flash ended up being too strong. At least I know how to adjust next time I break into a cab...

Andre

[Noct Foamer]

Originally Posted by Heymon

This was a bounce flash with a diffuser, which I have used before with no issues. ...Probably my bigger mistake was using the flash at all, since I just got a new camera that can apparently shoot in the dark. Totally not used to its abilities.

It takes awhile to learn a camera, and even longer to learn the flash. You then learn to anticipate what it will do. What the camera exposure meter was doing here was trying to properly expose the interior. It didn't realize you were trying to match it to the outside. A quick way to do these shots is to take a reading of the outside light, then dial that in to the camera using manual. Test this first, but what should happen is the flash will illuminate the interior enough to match that exposure, which is what you want. The alternative is it take a test shot, chimp, knock flash down by half, retest. You can lower flash exposure by either using flash compensation on the camera or by cutting the power on the flash manually.

--->shutter controls ambient
aperture controls flash


Kent in SD

[EMTRailfan]

Originally Posted by EMTRailfan

You may not have a leg to stand on with this one. Maybe not even both of them...

So the person's legs and the other person's elbow in the photo doesn't have anything to do with the PEQ rejection vs. an exposure rejection?

[Heymon]

In taking another look at this shot, I can now agree with the PEQ. The cut off body parts surely have something to do with it, but I just looked right past them. The outside is too blown out to ignore as well. I have the raw file but have not installed the update to read the new camera. I would have done so and resubmitted if that is all it was, but the body parts are hard to hide. I will move on. Thanks for the input.

Andre

PS FWIW I did throttle the flash itself down but obviously not nearly enough. I really wish I had taken just one non-flash shot but I was just hurrying through.

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by Noct Foamer

--->shutter controls ambient
aperture controls flash


Kent in SD

Nice rule to remember, thanks for it.