What the .....

mrl-jim · 07-11-2011, 04:27 AM

Just havin` a browse and came across this.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=368332

What the ....

stlgevo51 · 07-11-2011, 04:41 AM

Your link doesn't work. Was it a photo?

mrl-jim · 07-11-2011, 05:09 AM

link fixed, sorry for inconvenience.

Freericks · 07-11-2011, 05:13 AM

I'm going to take a guess here and say that I'll bet the screener hit accept by accident.

mrl-jim · 07-11-2011, 05:18 AM

nose not lit, non descript location, etc

AntD. · 07-11-2011, 06:09 AM

Accident my a$$!!! Bull crap is more like it

mrl-jim · 07-11-2011, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntD.

Accident my a$$!!! Bull crap is more like it

Totally agree

Hatchetman · 07-11-2011, 01:38 PM

I'm OK with it.

KevinM · 07-11-2011, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrl-jim

Just havin` a browse and came across this.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=368332

What the ....

Frankly, I'm not sure what the point of this thread is. Is the issue with the RP Screening Team for allowing this image into the data base, or is the issue with the photographer and/or the image itself? "What the...." is not terribly descriptive.

If the issue is with the RP Screeners, the thread is a waste of time. RP owns the site and therefore, they get to decide the content. I personally believe they try to be fair to all of the contributors, but there's no law that says they have to be. We also have to remember that they screen a lot of photos, and from time to time images that probably do meet the published standards will be rejected, and images that probably don't meet the standards will get in. There is an appeal process for the former, and for the latter, well.....folks don't have to click if they don't want to.

If the issue is with the photographer or his image, the thread is also pointless. Publicly embarassing the person by holding the image up and soliciting nasty comments will not likely change anything and just reflects poorly on the people who start the discussion or contribute their rotten tomatoes.

If the image is really that irritating to anyone, why not send a personal e-mail to the photographer and say: "Hey so-and-so, I was just looking at your shot and on my tube, I see a greenish tint...or the trucks look pretty dark, or the crop looks kinda tight." Make a gentle suggestion as to what the person can do to improve it. RP offers a re-upload option for any accepted photo, in which the photographer can submit improved versions without fear of rejection/removal. I use it myself and I constantly maintain a list of accepted shots that I want to go back to and work on again. My experience is that folks generally care a lot about what people think of their stuff and they do want to improve. My experience is also that they respond better to friendly advice and tips than they do to ridicule.

Greg P · 07-11-2011, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinM

Frankly, I'm not sure what the point of this thread is. Is the issue with the RP Screening Team for allowing this image into the data base, or is the issue with the photographer and/or the image itself? "What the...." is not terribly descriptive.

If the issue is with the RP Screeners, the thread is a waste of time. RP owns the site and therefore, they get to decide the content. I personally believe they try to be fair to all of the contributors, but there's no law that says they have to be. We also have to remember that they screen a lot of photos, and from time to time images that probably do meet the published standards will be rejected, and images that probably don't meet the standards will get in. There is an appeal process for the former, and for the latter, well.....folks don't have to click if they don't want to.

If the issue is with the photographer or his image, the thread is also pointless. Publicly embarassing the person by holding the image up and soliciting nasty comments will not likely change anything and just reflects poorly on the people who start the discussion or contribute their rotten tomatoes.

If the image is really that irritating to anyone, why not send a personal e-mail to the photographer and say: "Hey so-and-so, I was just looking at your shot and on my tube, I see a greenish tint...or the trucks look pretty dark, or the crop looks kinda tight." Make a gentle suggestion as to what the person can do to improve it. RP offers a re-upload option for any accepted photo, in which the photographer can submit improved versions without fear of rejection/removal. I use it myself and I constantly maintain a list of accepted shots that I want to go back to and work on again. My experience is that folks generally care a lot about what people think of their stuff and they do want to improve. My experience is also that they respond better to friendly advice and tips than they do to ridicule.

+1

A gentle answer turnth away wrath.

BrandonT · 07-12-2011, 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinM

Frankly, I'm not sure what the point of this thread is. Is the issue with the RP Screening Team for allowing this image into the data base, or is the issue with the photographer and/or the image itself? "What the...." is not terribly descriptive.

If the issue is with the RP Screeners, the thread is a waste of time. RP owns the site and therefore, they get to decide the content. I personally believe they try to be fair to all of the contributors, but there's no law that says they have to be. We also have to remember that they screen a lot of photos, and from time to time images that probably do meet the published standards will be rejected, and images that probably don't meet the standards will get in. There is an appeal process for the former, and for the latter, well.....folks don't have to click if they don't want to.

If the issue is with the photographer or his image, the thread is also pointless. Publicly embarassing the person by holding the image up and soliciting nasty comments will not likely change anything and just reflects poorly on the people who start the discussion or contribute their rotten tomatoes.

If the image is really that irritating to anyone, why not send a personal e-mail to the photographer and say: "Hey so-and-so, I was just looking at your shot and on my tube, I see a greenish tint...or the trucks look pretty dark, or the crop looks kinda tight." Make a gentle suggestion as to what the person can do to improve it. RP offers a re-upload option for any accepted photo, in which the photographer can submit improved versions without fear of rejection/removal. I use it myself and I constantly maintain a list of accepted shots that I want to go back to and work on again. My experience is that folks generally care a lot about what people think of their stuff and they do want to improve. My experience is also that they respond better to friendly advice and tips than they do to ridicule.

I totally agree! I'm glad somebody said something to stick up for the photographer!

Slickrick339889 · 07-12-2011, 05:13 AM

Looking at the photographer's name I was really hoping we had an MLB player railfan...

Freericks · 07-12-2011, 05:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinM

If the issue is with the RP Screeners, the thread is a waste of time. RP owns the site and therefore, they get to decide the content. I personally believe they try to be fair to all of the contributors, but there's no law that says they have to be. We also have to remember that they screen a lot of photos, and from time to time images that probably do meet the published standards will be rejected, and images that probably don't meet the standards will get in. There is an appeal process for the former, and for the latter, well.....folks don't have to click if they don't want to.

I never saw the issue as being with the photographer (although I could be being naive about it). The question seemed to me to be how did this image with a number of issues that would clearly exclude it from the data base still become part of the data base.

If I am correct about that, I believe it is a legitimate question to ask - not to attack anyone (on the staff of RP or photographers), but so that the community on a whole may understand why an image that does not adhere to the stated submission guidelines is accepted.

If it was a mistake, so be it. If it was a case where the screener felt the photo belonged, so be it.

But there is nothing wrong with seeking knowledge and understanding of how and why.

Joe the Photog · 07-12-2011, 03:08 PM

Arghh!!!!!!! Reporting marks, people! Reporting marks!

Greg P · 07-12-2011, 06:42 PM

Perhaps it was included under the "Special Move-Cannot be Reproduced"

KevinM · 07-13-2011, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks

The question seemed to me to be how did this image with a number of issues that would clearly exclude it from the data base still become part of the data base.

Hi Charles,

Yes, I suspected that the question you pose was the central one in the mind of the person who started this thread, but that is also why I said the thread was pointless. You and I have both been around this site long enough to know that the ownership rarely comments on perceived screening errors here in the forums. That's a no-win subject they don't care to visit and if I put myself in their place, I'd probably avoid that fray as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks

But there is nothing wrong with seeking knowledge and understanding of how and why.

Totally agree. But I've read enough of your stuff and you've probably read enough of mine that we both know neither one of us would attempt to initiate an intelligent and civil discussion on this subject with an opening statement such as: "What the...."

Freericks · 07-13-2011, 03:18 AM

Kevin,

I agree 100% with everything you said. The thread title was a poor choice.

CF