Old 10-25-2010, 06:26 PM   #26
cblaz
Senior Member
 
cblaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Marlboro, New Jersey
Posts: 1,007
Default

Bunched panties.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Panties in a bunch.jpg
Views:	138
Size:	18.8 KB
ID:	5874  
__________________
- Christopher Blaszczyk
My shots on RP: http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=284
cblaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 06:32 PM   #27
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Well just so I am sure about this SOO 6034 will be listed under CANADA since they probably have their fingers in CP and CP has their fingers into Soo Line.

Off topic, I believe their pay checks still say Soo Line.

Why can't everyone get the reporting marks right, probably because learning this stuff comes day by day. It may need to get pointed out to people here and there. That is life. It would be like me questioning, why don't roster shooters get that it's luck and not skill to get a SD60 to lead in sunlight. We are all people and we think differently.

I don't know what my take is on some of this.

Anything with Soo paint and SOO repoting marks is Soo Line to me. A WC painted engine with WC reporting marks is Wisconsin Central. A CN painted engine with WC reporting marks I would probably list as CN. A WC painted engine with CN reporting marks I would probably list as CN also. Which way is correct? but I know which way I'm doing it until I see a real reason to change.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 07:15 PM   #28
D.Massey
Member
 
D.Massey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cblaz View Post
Bunched panties.
Christopher, if you could only get a train in that picture. Top Shot of 24 hours and PCA for sure.
D.Massey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 07:38 PM   #29
John Ryan
Senior Member
 
John Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 497
Send a message via AIM to John Ryan
Default

A few words about the Soo Line.

The SOO is a Class-1 U.S. railroad that is controlled by Canadian Pacific. Soo was the brainchild of the Washburn interests of Minnesota and Wisconsin as a way to get midwest four from Minneapolis mills to east coast destinations. Sometime in the first decade after construction of the line from Minneapolis to the Sault Ste. Marie, Canadian Pacific, as primary interchange partner, bought a minority share of the railroad's common stock. CP, through the years, increased this stake until they owned 100% of the common (voting) stock in 1990. CP does not claim to own all the preferred stock, which does not carry voting interests.

Soo Line is still very much alive as a semi-independent corporate interest. CP enjoys a lower wage scale for SOO employees than what it has to deal with in Canada, in addition to other tax and legal advantages. SOO has offices in the ornate Soo Line building in downtown Minneapolis, and Travis is correct that the paychecks still say Soo Line. As do many of the engines. Some people think that SD60M 6062 was the last new locomotive purchased by the Soo Line, but this is not the case. AC4400CW's in the 8500 and 8600 series are owned by Soo Line. "Canadian Pacific" is just the marketing brand applied to new and repainted locomotives of the Soo Line.

The same situation is true for the Dakota Minnesota & Eastern, wherein the Soo Line owns the stock, but the railroad retains a separate legal and operational structure. This, again, is due to wage, tax, and legal benefits. DME will be moving their offices into the Soo Line Building in Minneapolis soon, but unlike the Soo, post-takeover repaints have been in blue and yellow, not something wearing the CP brand.
John Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 07:51 PM   #30
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Max,

You are just flat out wrong. The CNW twins are still under CNW in all computer systems. The same with that SOO engine.

What if you took a photograph of the Pennsylvania Railroad GG1 at a railroad museum? Are the reporting marks going to be the museum's? No, you would use PRR.

It's very simple.

Under your system, what would NW 611 be?
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 08:10 PM   #31
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

No Charles, I am not. You look very foolish in your post and exhibit no knowledge of the subject being discussed.
Why would you label the reporting marks of a museum on a PRR painted engine? Unless the GG1 is stenciled for the museum, the Pennsy reporting marks would rule. There is a difference between reporting marks and owning railroad.
CNW in the computer...what do you mean? The reporting marks? Duh. But I bet you dont see CNW stuff printed on their track warrants...
The Chicago and Northwestern Railroad company does not exist anymore. Therefore the engine (for RP purposes) is owned by Union Pacific.

Also, why are you calling it my system? Ask Kilroy or Starnes about it, its THEIR system.

John, well this goes both ways then. That means every CP AC4400CW etc is mislabeled and the owning railroad should be SOO.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 08:15 PM   #32
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
No Charles, I am not. You look very foolish in your post and exhibit no knowledge of the subject being discussed.
Why would you label the reporting marks of a museum on a PRR painted engine? Unless the GG1 is stenciled for the museum, the Pennsy reporting marks would rule. There is a difference between reporting marks and owning railroad.
CNW in the computer...what do you mean? The reporting marks? Duh. But I bet you dont see CNW stuff printed on their track warrants...
The Chicago and Northwestern Railroad company does not exist anymore. Therefore the engine (for RP purposes) is owned by Union Pacific.

Also, why are you calling it my system? Ask Kilroy or Starnes about it, its THEIR system.

John, well this goes both ways then. That means every CP AC4400CW etc is mislabeled and the owning railroad should be SOO.

Honestly Max,

I'm not going to argue with you. Maybe the confusion you're having is because old reporting marks are being used again by some railroads - I would agree that a PRR engine in NS paint is Norfolk Southern - but a CNW engine in CNW paint with no patch is a Chicago & Northwestern Engine.

In the future, try not to add personal attacks. It's beneath you and really degrades the list.

Charles

Last edited by Freericks; 10-25-2010 at 08:20 PM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 08:20 PM   #33
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

I am not confused, you are. CNW does note exist anymore, they are gone, they own nothing.
The engine is owned by Union Pacific (for RP) The reporting marks DO NOT change with ownership. They are entirely different. They still have CNW reporting marks, duh, I said that. They are OWNED by the Union Pacific Railroad. They belong to the UP, not the CNW. Two seperate data columns in the Add Photos area.
Need some reading glasses?
My god.

These guys agree with me:
Image © Bob Lewis
PhotoID: 280577
Photograph © Bob Lewis

Image © Nicholas Hansen
PhotoID: 231579
Photograph © Nicholas Hansen

Image © The Unknown Photographer
PhotoID: 103095
Photograph © The Unknown Photographer
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG

Last edited by coborn35; 10-25-2010 at 08:33 PM.
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 08:29 PM   #34
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

I can't find one image in the data base of the CNW duo labeled as UP owning them. The reporting marks and owning railroad on all photos I saw in the database are CNW.

update: I see you found a few. 3.

Last edited by travsirocz; 10-25-2010 at 08:56 PM.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 09:01 PM   #35
MDH
Senior Member
 
MDH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
...what do you mean? The reporting marks? Duh. But I bet you dont see CNW stuff printed on their track warrants...

That means every CP AC4400CW etc is mislabeled and the owning railroad should be SOO.
Uhhh... wading into this late (and wondering why I am!) and I know it's not always this simple but I always go with how the railroads themselves identify equipment in operation. I.e. NS and CSXT stuff is always NS or CSXT (not PRR or NYC which is sublettered but not the actual reporting marks) but in the case of CN and CP they still use reporting marks for subsidiaries and the equipment is meanigfully owned by said subsidiaries even if it all wears a "CN" on the side (i.e. like how NYC System used to be - P&LE was part of NYC System but not NYC proper.)

I can't tell you how many times I've heard authorities given out to "IC XXXX", "GTW XXXX", "DME XXXX" or "SOO XXXX" leading so they certainly use the correct reporting marks on track warrants and such. As pointed out, if they didn't they'd have multiple same numbers in a few cases.

My 2 cents,
Michael
__________________
Michael Harding
P&WV fan in HO

Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!

Click Here to view my Toledo Railfan Photo Location map!
MDH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 09:18 PM   #36
ssw9662
Senior Member
 
ssw9662's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 839
Default

Quote:
Why would you label the reporting marks of a museum on a PRR painted engine? Unless the GG1 is stenciled for the museum, the Pennsy reporting marks would rule. There is a difference between reporting marks and owning railroad.
Not exactly. The reporting mark listed in the "blue card" is the correct one that should be used. In your example, since PRR is owned by Norfolk Southern, the GG1 can not have PRR reporting marks unless NS owns it. It's one thing if the engine is on static display, but if it is in active interchange service it cannot use that reporting mark. It doesn't matter what reporting mark is or is not on the engine, what does matter is what the blue card says. The same goes for the Juniata Terminal E8s - these are not PRR units!

I understand your logic Max, but for RP purposes it would be impractical, confusing, and unnecessary. For instance, what would we do about the "Railroad" field for lease units? Do we put in the owner of the track, the current owner of the engine (regardless of paint scheme), or the railroad displayed on the engine? It would be far too confusing for most people to grasp.
__________________
Austin
Canon EOS 7D
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon 50mm f/1.8
My Railpictures.net Photos
flickr

Last edited by ssw9662; 10-25-2010 at 09:21 PM.
ssw9662 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 09:36 PM   #37
Soo 6060
EMD > GE
 
Soo 6060's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 285
Default Soo/CP reporting marks

For the record, in the united states, it is still the Soo Line Railroad Co.

Anyway, It is a Soo SD60, not a CP SD60, it has the reporting marks as Soo, so it is a Soo Line locomotive. Same thing with, unpatched Warbonetts or something similar,they would be the ATSF XXX, not the BNSF XXX. As for the CN repaints, this is a unique situation. I would call it Canadian Nation Railway, with EJE, IC, GTW, etc as the reporting marks.

Edit: The reason for the X on CSXT, is so CSX isn't confused as a leasing company. If you notice all leased cars and engines end with X...CITX, CEFX, GATX, etc.
Soo 6060 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 09:57 PM   #38
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssw9662 View Post
Not exactly. The reporting mark listed in the "blue card" is the correct one that should be used. In your example, since PRR is owned by Norfolk Southern, the GG1 can not have PRR reporting marks unless NS owns it. It's one thing if the engine is on static display, but if it is in active interchange service it cannot use that reporting mark. It doesn't matter what reporting mark is or is not on the engine, what does matter is what the blue card says. The same goes for the Juniata Terminal E8s - these are not PRR units!

I understand your logic Max, but for RP purposes it would be impractical, confusing, and unnecessary. For instance, what would we do about the "Railroad" field for lease units? Do we put in the owner of the track, the current owner of the engine (regardless of paint scheme), or the railroad displayed on the engine? It would be far too confusing for most people to grasp.
I agree, I guess I am just playing RP's advocate, because that is how their wording goes.
However you are incorrect about the interchange. We own Missabe, SOO, GN etc units and their reporting marks have not changed. When the DMIR #193 was interchanged with the CN and WSOR, it was not interchanged as the LSRX (our reporting marks) #193, it was still the DMIR #193. Bluecard still says DMIR. The Hustle Muscle is in the BNSF and CP computers as the GN #400.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG

Last edited by coborn35; 10-25-2010 at 10:00 PM.
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 10:32 PM   #39
Frederick
Senior Member
 
Frederick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Hastings, Minnesota
Posts: 594
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
No Charles, I am not. You look very foolish in your post and exhibit no knowledge of the subject being discussed.
Why would you label the reporting marks of a museum on a PRR painted engine? Unless the GG1 is stenciled for the museum, the Pennsy reporting marks would rule. There is a difference between reporting marks and owning railroad.
CNW in the computer...what do you mean? The reporting marks? Duh. But I bet you dont see CNW stuff printed on their track warrants...
The Chicago and Northwestern Railroad company does not exist anymore. Therefore the engine (for RP purposes) is owned by Union Pacific.

Also, why are you calling it my system? Ask Kilroy or Starnes about it, its THEIR system.

John, well this goes both ways then. That means every CP AC4400CW etc is mislabeled and the owning railroad should be SOO.
They are used system wide and owned by SOO line, but carry CP reporting marks. That is the way they are officially identified and entered into the railroad's equipment registry.
A related note on the side: a lot of locomotives are not actually owned by the railroad, but financed through an independent lessor - yet they still have the lessee's reporting marks and paint.
__________________
Railpics Photos

Flickr Account
Frederick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 10:57 PM   #40
WisconsinCentral
Senior Member
 
WisconsinCentral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Brighton Minnesota
Posts: 361
Default

Thank god for Austin!

I never said CP doesn't own or does own anything. I never said that the train I shot with the 6034 was SOO Train #940. Like I so clearly stated earlier, It's about what one searches for in the database. Clear as that. I shoot a WC engine, its going under Wisconsin Central with the accurate railroad train symbol if applicable. Why? Oh, I don't know, because it makes sense.

Would you call a new Dodge Ram a Chrysler Ram? Because that's who owns Dodge.

Max, you seem to want to make people look foolish, which I just don't understand. And in doing so you ran in circles, because now you're trying to tell everyone that the CP AC44's should be under SOO Line. Doesn't that totally undermine your point even more? And furthermore you never answered my posed question to you about the WC SDL's,SD45's, and SOO MP15AC's. You seem to know everything, so entertain me.

Alec
__________________
The future is uncertain, so take the shots now.
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=8714
WisconsinCentral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 10:59 PM   #41
WisconsinCentral
Senior Member
 
WisconsinCentral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Brighton Minnesota
Posts: 361
Default

"A related note on the side: a lot of locomotives are not actually owned by the railroad, but financed through an independent lessor - yet they still have the lessee's reporting marks and paint."

Which was exactly my point in the above post.

Alec
__________________
The future is uncertain, so take the shots now.
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=8714
WisconsinCentral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 11:10 PM   #42
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WisconsinCentral View Post
Thank god for Austin!

I never said CP doesn't own or does own anything. I never said that the train I shot with the 6034 was SOO Train #940. Like I so clearly stated earlier, It's about what one searches for in the database. Clear as that. I shoot a WC engine, its going under Wisconsin Central with the accurate railroad train symbol if applicable. Why? Oh, I don't know, because it makes sense.

Would you call a new Dodge Ram a Chrysler Ram? Because that's who owns Dodge.

Max, you seem to want to make people look foolish, which I just don't understand. And in doing so you ran in circles, because now you're trying to tell everyone that the CP AC44's should be under SOO Line. Doesn't that totally undermine your point even more? And furthermore you never answered my posed question to you about the WC SDL's,SD45's, and SOO MP15AC's. You seem to know everything, so entertain me.

Alec
No Alec, I was simply entertaining John Ryan's point about everything being owned by SOO Line. If that is so, then all the AC44's should have the SOO listed as the railroad they belong too.

Im not trying to make anyone look foolish, I just hate when foamers think they know everything they are talking about, but don't really.
I don't see what your deal is about the WC units. They were owned by the WC (for RP purposes). Why is that hard to get?

More over Alec I could care less what you want or how you search. Its not about you. The point I was defending was how the two gentlemen Chris Kilroy and Chris Starnes made the website to be. They intended for the owning railroad to be shown, so why everyone is attacking me for showing that is beyond me.

I don't understand why it is so hard for people to understand the difference between an owning railroad and reporting marks. You bring up leasers. Last time I checked there are spots for First Union Rail, Helm Financial etc...
The Chicago and Northwestern owns nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. The Chicago and Northwestern doesn't own buildings, engines, cars, or dispatching centers,and it certainly doesn't own the the CNW duo. The CNW duo is owned by the Union Pacific Railroad Company with reporting marks CNW. Its that simple.

Would it be easier the other way? Sure, and thats how I used to do it. But with photos being rejected for bad info, I figured I might as well follow the rules put forth by the RP Administrators, even if no one else does.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 11:27 PM   #43
John Ryan
Senior Member
 
John Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 497
Send a message via AIM to John Ryan
Default

Not widely known, but in addition to leasing companies and bank trusts, individual batches of locomotives could be financed by any private party that the railroad was willing to work with. In the 1970's, Diana Ross and The Supremes, looking for a good investment for their recording income, financed a small batch of GP38's for Grand Trunk Western.

Also, for the record, the CNW duo is leased, not owned by UP, and the lease is up for expiration next year.
John Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 11:30 PM   #44
ssw9662
Senior Member
 
ssw9662's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 839
Default

Did the RP admins ever explicitly specify how they wish to have railroads presented? If so I would like to see the post; if not perhaps a clarification is in order. The Railpictures upload form says:

"Railroad:
The railroad to which the lead locomotive belongs."

This doesn't really make a case for either argument. An unpatched CNW engine may be operated by the UP, but not necessarily owned by them. Frederick and some of the others touched on the subject of leases already.

I am of the opinion that the Railroad field should match what the reporting mark represents, not necessarily the owner of the engine. The way I see it, if we consider CNW 8646 a Union Pacific engine, then we may as well call a GMTX engine on lease to NS a Norfolk Southern engine. And filling in the "official" owner of the engine would be completely impractical.

Of course, I will go by whatever rules the site owners wish to use. Perhaps the answer lies in these photos.

Image © Chris Starnes
PhotoID: 210382
Photograph © Chris Starnes

Image © Chris Starnes - RailCanon
PhotoID: 38815
Photograph © Chris Starnes - RailCanon
__________________
Austin
Canon EOS 7D
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon 50mm f/1.8
My Railpictures.net Photos
flickr

Last edited by ssw9662; 10-25-2010 at 11:38 PM.
ssw9662 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 11:40 PM   #45
crazytiger
Senior Member
 
crazytiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: NS Greenville District
Posts: 1,473
Default

Hey, would the gods mind coming down from Mt. Olympus to tell us what they think?

Edit: Got some from Chris K.
Image © Chris Kilroy
PhotoID: 45426
Photograph © Chris Kilroy

Image © Chris Kilroy
PhotoID: 252509
Photograph © Chris Kilroy

Image © Chris Kilroy
PhotoID: 251875
Photograph © Chris Kilroy
__________________
Peter Lewis | Portfolio | Profile | Flickr | Facebook

Canon EOS 40D
Canon EF 50 f/1.8 II
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM


Quote:
Originally Posted by A Friend
everytime i see non-train photos of yours i think, "so much talent. wasted on trains."

Last edited by crazytiger; 10-25-2010 at 11:48 PM.
crazytiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 11:55 PM   #46
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazytiger View Post
Hey, would the gods mind coming down from Mt. Olympus to tell us what they think?

Edit: Got some from Chris K.
Image © Chris Kilroy
PhotoID: 45426
Photograph © Chris Kilroy

Image © Chris Kilroy
PhotoID: 252509
Photograph © Chris Kilroy

Image © Chris Kilroy
PhotoID: 251875
Photograph © Chris Kilroy

Thank you for finding those, Peter.

Max, would you say the same to Chris Kilroy that you said to me?

Last edited by Freericks; 10-26-2010 at 12:00 AM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 11:55 PM   #47
nikos1
Senior Member
 
nikos1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,775
Default

While this thread continues spiraling down in flames I would like to stop by to say to Alec that CSX still sucks.
__________________


Wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=7861

More wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://nikos1.rrpicturearchives.net/

Video wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's
http://youtube.com/profile?user=nikosjk1
nikos1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 12:11 AM   #48
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

John Ryan keeps raining pwnage down on Max...it's kind of awesome.

To avoid any confusion, I will be listing "Warren Buffett" for all shots of BNSF-led trains...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 12:14 AM   #49
crazytiger
Senior Member
 
crazytiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: NS Greenville District
Posts: 1,473
Default

Chris P, that was awesome about Warren Buffett. I think you need to submit that as a new RR.
__________________
Peter Lewis | Portfolio | Profile | Flickr | Facebook

Canon EOS 40D
Canon EF 50 f/1.8 II
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM


Quote:
Originally Posted by A Friend
everytime i see non-train photos of yours i think, "so much talent. wasted on trains."

Last edited by crazytiger; 10-26-2010 at 12:21 AM.
crazytiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 12:15 AM   #50
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,740
Default

Im just going to stop putting any information period.

Fans of photography don't care about text, and foamers already know everything about what's in the shot.

The end

Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd 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 03:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.