Old 05-04-2011, 06:25 PM   #1
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default Figuring Out What Is Wrong

This shot was rejected for high sun - and also rejected on appeal.

I think the high sun reason may have been a mistake - but the second screener did not let on what the real reason may have been.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...3&key=53154484

Regarding high sun --

Shot is 3/4 lit with full lighting on nose and side facing the camera.

Sun is directly behind my back (witness that shadows from other objects, in front of me, are hidden by the angle).

The railhead (visible between the two units, to the left) does not cast a shadow on the rail.

Trucks (well truck) is 95% lit, with barely a trace of shadow at its very top.

Handrail shadow is visible on the long hood - telltale sign of high sun is when this shadow is not visible.


Now - what might the real reason be then?

The sun is lightly filtered by very high clouds (not the heavy clouds in the shot - the sun was visible behind me). But if this is the issue, how did the very cloudy and zero sun shot of an NS GE going through the same procedure get in two days ago?

The locomotive in back and the truck in front are both cut in half? This is an issue, if that is what is wanted, and I don't have a frame that would address that. My focus had been the locomotive. In hindsight, I should have taken one with the truck too, but there was a pickup blocking part of it, inches out of frame (not that the last issue is a reason for the picture to be accepted - just letting you know what the conditions were).

Would a tighter crop then be better, because it dilutes the question, where is the rest of the truck?

Anyway - any suggestions would be appreciated. This is pretty full frame, so there's not a good chance of "add back," but I can crop more.

Unlike the abandoned control stand I asked about yesterday - I still believe in this shot and want to figure out what change I need to make to resubmit it.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 07:11 PM   #2
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,661
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
This shot was rejected for high sun - and also rejected on appeal.

Trucks (well truck) is 95% lit, with barely a trace of shadow at its very top.

Now - what might the real reason be then?
Are you new here, lol. ; )

I think "high sun" can be an auto response to "dark trucks". Though there is some detail available, it's mostly pretty dark under the painted bodies of each engine and even the rear of the cab to the left. While you don't have a shadow, you also have no light.

Fear not! A visit to Mr Shadows and Highlights filter should save the day.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 07:20 PM   #3
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
Are you new here, lol. ; )


Yup to the advice. Whether or not you can change something else about the shot to avoid the "you were rejected on appeal, loser, we now take away your appeal rights" banishment is an issue.
__________________
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 05-04-2011, 07:28 PM   #4
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

It was actually pretty bright out (and the dark shadow under the carbody where there is no truck shows that, and the handrail shadow on the hood is pretty obvious).

I must have processed it wrong if it's looking like it lacks light. I try to avoid candyland - will take another look tonight.

What about cropping? Did either of you think I should go in closer, or it's fine as is?

Last edited by Freericks; 05-04-2011 at 07:32 PM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 07:32 PM   #5
magicman_841
Senior Member
 
magicman_841's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 1,024
Default

I don't get the high sun reject either. To me it looks more cloudy that anything. Perhaps you can try playing with the curves to make it brighter.
__________________
Mathieu Tremblay
Choo photos
magicman_841 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 07:49 PM   #6
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
This shot was rejected for high sun - and also rejected on appeal.

I think the high sun reason may have been a mistake - but the second screener did not let on what the real reason may have been.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...3&key=53154484

Regarding high sun --

Shot is 3/4 lit with full lighting on nose and side facing the camera.

Sun is directly behind my back (witness that shadows from other objects, in front of me, are hidden by the angle).

The railhead (visible between the two units, to the left) does not cast a shadow on the rail.

Trucks (well truck) is 95% lit, with barely a trace of shadow at its very top.

Handrail shadow is visible on the long hood - telltale sign of high sun is when this shadow is not visible.


Now - what might the real reason be then?

The sun is lightly filtered by very high clouds (not the heavy clouds in the shot - the sun was visible behind me). But if this is the issue, how did the very cloudy and zero sun shot of an NS GE going through the same procedure get in two days ago?

The locomotive in back and the truck in front are both cut in half? This is an issue, if that is what is wanted, and I don't have a frame that would address that. My focus had been the locomotive. In hindsight, I should have taken one with the truck too, but there was a pickup blocking part of it, inches out of frame (not that the last issue is a reason for the picture to be accepted - just letting you know what the conditions were).

Would a tighter crop then be better, because it dilutes the question, where is the rest of the truck?

Anyway - any suggestions would be appreciated. This is pretty full frame, so there's not a good chance of "add back," but I can crop more.

Unlike the abandoned control stand I asked about yesterday - I still believe in this shot and want to figure out what change I need to make to resubmit it.
Clone out or crop the orange cone in the foreground? ...or both?

Has absolutely nothing to do with the rejection reason - but it is a bit distracting...to me.

The story is "A Baldwin getting traction motor/truck/wheel work. All you need is the locomotive up on jacks plus a bit of the lead truck that's been removed to tell that story, I think.

But, then who I am I to try and second guess the screeners????
oltmannd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 03:21 AM   #7
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Lightened it... cropped it... got rejected for unlevel... took it back into the software and every horizontal and vertical I could be sure of was 100% true.

Tried tilting it a little, to make the rake of the lift less severe, and it did look better, but there wasn't a single true vertical or horizontal in the shot.

I'm frankly done... giving up... it's a roster shot (with the truck missing) and they don't want it. It's their site.

See you guys later.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 04:16 AM   #8
DWHonan
Senior Member
 
DWHonan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA
Posts: 590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
I'm frankly done... giving up... it's a roster shot (with the truck missing) and they don't want it. It's their site.
I like the shot; it's a neat bit of maintenance that we don't normally get to see. If you do continue working on the image for your personal uses, be sure to clone out the dust spots in the clouds above the exhaust stack and cab roof.
__________________
Dave Honan
Issaquah, WA
View my portfolio at RailPictures.net
View my portfolio at Flickr Not quite so new anymore!
DWHonan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 04:31 AM   #9
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Yikes... thanks David... can't believe I didn't see tht.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 04:36 AM   #10
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Not level at all. Look at the cab on the other switcher on the left. Also look at the verticals on the tank or whatever it is on the right margin. Do some perspective control and rotate CCW. Note that the unit is having a truck worked on, so it is lifted on one end, so it should not have verticals go straight up. It needs a good bit of rotation, sorry but I lost track of just how much I applied overall.

Did a bit of shadows, a bit of sharpening, came up with this.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 7559b.jpg (169.6 KB, 86 views)
__________________
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 05-05-2011, 04:54 AM   #11
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

ALL RIGHT - you guys pulled me back in... dust spots fixed... J's leveling chosen (I had leveled off the trailer rib and the rail on the SW1 in the bg, and they were level, but I agree, J's version looks better, and the B&O unit's cab behind was not level.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 05:30 AM   #12
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Yikes... thanks David... can't believe I didn't see tht.
Time to wipe your glasses.

I got the same rejection on this one too.

Welcome to Beautiful Amboy
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 01:05 PM   #13
DWHonan
Senior Member
 
DWHonan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA
Posts: 590
Default

Nice to see this got on, Charles.
Image © Charles J Freericks
PhotoID: 362453
Photograph © Charles J Freericks

I see you found another frame taken after a railroad employee had been kind enough to move the cone in front of the engine's air tank out of the shot.
__________________
Dave Honan
Issaquah, WA
View my portfolio at RailPictures.net
View my portfolio at Flickr Not quite so new anymore!

Last edited by DWHonan; 05-05-2011 at 01:07 PM.
DWHonan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 01:33 PM   #14
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holloran Grade View Post
Time to wipe your glasses.

I got the same rejection on this one too.

Welcome to Beautiful Amboy
The 40D is self cleaning - but I have to remember to turn it on and off during the day on long days like that one.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 06:43 PM   #15
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default

So....

TWO orange cones are too many, but ONE is OK.

....I'll have to remember that.
oltmannd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 06:54 PM   #16
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Actually, there are four less cones - they were getting moved around during the shoot. That being said, I had so many open versions of this frame, I applied all of my fixes to the wrong one. I'll upload the right one tonight (no cone is actually blocking anything).

The cones were in and out of the shots quite a bit - all replaced in the exact spot they belonged in after the pictures.

Just saw a spot of sensor dust on my other shot from that area. Will have to upload that one again too.

Last edited by Freericks; 05-05-2011 at 07:01 PM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 07:06 PM   #17
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Actually, there are four less cones - they were getting moved around during the shoot. That being said, I had so many open versions of this frame, I applied all of my fixes to the wrong one. I'll upload the right one tonight (no cone is actually blocking anything).
I don't follow, what fixes? You mean you have a different version that you prefer to the one you uploaded?

I like the cone, it adds depth and does not look out of place.

Four FEWER cones, as my wife would surely remind me had she seen me write that sentence.

J
__________________
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 05-05-2011, 07:33 PM   #18
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

J, I do like all the fixes... it was just late last night that I was working on it, and I leveled the version in which I had cloned out the cone. I did not intend to do that. That was just created to see what it looked like. The cone wasn't blocking anything and wasn't an issue.

Could it have been "less four cones?"
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 08:08 PM   #19
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Talking My edit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Could it have been "less four cones?"
No, the question should be "could it have had more cones?"

Name:  Charles 1.jpg
Views: 144
Size:  598.8 KB
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 08:13 PM   #20
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Why am I suddenly seeing Dan Akroyd and Jane Curtain - "We are from France."
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 09:26 PM   #21
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Why am I suddenly seeing Dan Akroyd and Jane Curtain - "We are from France."
Bridgeport and Remulac, the twin cities.
oltmannd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 10:12 PM   #22
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holloran Grade View Post
No, the question should be "could it have had more cones?"

Attachment 6514
You get photoshop FAIL award for that. I know you can do better. You didnt bring your "A" game today.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 03:25 AM   #23
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

That's weird, David... looks as it was to me!




Fixed.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 03:55 AM   #24
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Here, I fixed it for you all. It's way past my bedtime, lol

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 7559.1304393650 copy.jpg (295.4 KB, 229 views)
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 04:33 AM   #25
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Exclamation

Em DUBS are phat!

They could also be sic.

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 05-06-2011 at 04:35 AM.
Holloran Grade 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 04:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.