You say the "Best rr photos on the net" ?

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

Maybe someone can adapt this for caption purposes.

https://www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html

This looks like a variation on a game called "BS Bingo", which made the rounds at my company back around the year 2000, when the engineers in our management structure were eased out in favor of MBA types who could speak this language ultra-fluently. I don't miss those days.

Edit... The game noted above came with a bingo card that was populated with popular management phrases. The idea was that you'd sit in a meeting, and every time one of the managers coined one of the terms, you'd put an "X" on the square. When you had a full row, you were supposed to shout "Bullsh*t", although most people just whispered it, which typically triggered a round of chuckles that none of the managers understood.

[Grewup on the CW]

Umm, no discredit to the photographer, its a neat pic but shouldn't this pic be on Jetphotos.com?? The Tram that just happens to be sitting there, rather obscured, is definitely not the subject matter for a railroad website.

PhotoID: 735035 Photograph © Gábor Kovács Dödi

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by Grewup on the CW

Umm, no discredit to the photographer, its a neat pic but shouldn't this pic be on Jetphotos.com?? The Tram that just happens to be sitting there, rather obscured, is definitely not the subject matter for a railroad website.

I'm OK with it but wondered about the viability of the airline, bad time to start out. Then there is the company name at least in the Merica vocabulary. And finally, visually it is hard to tell how close the plane is, first I thought the plane was just added but I see the crowds looking up, wonder if that would be allowed here?

Bob

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by RobJor

I'm OK with it but wondered about the viability of the airline, bad time to start out. Then there is the company name at least in the Merica vocabulary. And finally, visually it is hard to tell how close the plane is, first I thought the plane was just added but I see the crowds looking up, wonder if that would be allowed here?

Bob

"Wizz Air", I love it! Instead of a barf bag in your seat-back pocket, they give you a piddle-pack.

Although there is a depth of field compression effect that probably makes the aircraft look closer to the crowd and structures than it really is, I have no doubt it is lower and closer than would ever be allowed in the US. Over a populated area, the altitude limit in the US would be 1,000 ft. above ground and no closer to any structure than that distance. Those limits can be waived in an airshow setting, where crowd location is controlled, but not in a downtown location like this. For instance, at an airport, the Thunderbirds or Blue Angels can overfly the crowd at 500 AGL, as long as they are in level flight (not doing any aerobatics). Aerobatic performances in jets must be 1,500 ft. from the crowd, regardless of the altitude. The distance decreases to 500 ft. for props.

Suffice it to say that some countries don't have much in the way of rules. The limits are solely defined by the size of the pilots testicles.

[ShortlinesUSA]

So, what were y'all saying about photos with no captions? Try this one on for size:

PhotoID: 735508 Photograph © Joseph T. Wagner

[Grewup on the CW]

Originally Posted by ShortlinesUSA

So, what were y'all saying about photos with no captions? Try this one on for size:

Now that is informative!

[Mike Wilson]

Originally Posted by Grewup on the CW

Now that is informative!

Hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the majority of the general public can only last through about three sentences of that before it becomes way overly wordy. While information is always helpful, as a photography website, the picture should speak more than the caption.

[Joseph Cermak]

Originally Posted by Mike Wilson

Hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the majority of the general public can only last through about three sentences of that before it becomes way overly wordy. While information is always helpful, as a photography website, the picture should speak more than the caption.

Better to have more information and skip reading it than have no information and be left guessing what to try and look up if trying to find information.

Not saying their isn't a balance of how much info to include in a caption (also dependent on where it's being published), but overall I think it's better to have more and some people skip it than have nothing.

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by Mike Wilson

Hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the majority of the general public can only last through about three sentences of that before it becomes way overly wordy. While information is always helpful, as a photography website, the picture should speak more than the caption.

Mike,

While you have may have a valid point that some captions may be too verbose for some viewers, I think that you undervalue a caption. The prettiest photo in the world is world is worthless without context. Many of the photos without captions leave me with more questions than answers, so I tend to skip past them. I would much rather have the option of skipping past the words if a particular caption loses me. If a photo captures my eye, I want to know why a train was there, what it was doing, and something about its surroundings..

As I have said before, I would not be against the addition of a "caption missing" rejection.

[Mike Wilson]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

Mike,

While you have may have a valid point that some captions may be too verbose for some viewers, I think that you undervalue a caption. The prettiest photo in the world is world is worthless without context. Many of the photos without captions leave me with more questions than answers, so I tend to skip past them. I would much rather have the option of skipping past the words if a particular caption loses me. If a photo captures my eye, I want to know why a train was there, what it was doing, and something about its surroundings..

As I have said before, I would not be against the addition of a "caption missing" rejection.

Good points especially when you're unsure of location and what-not, but I wouldn't say I undervalue a caption. Every photo needs a caption and I certainly understand its importance in describing a scene. I'm just arguing that the skill of getting your point across in a concise manner is something that should be used more and is something I am always striving to attain. It's certainly not easy.

Your mileage may vary...

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

If a photo captures my eye, I want to know why a train was there

Because the tracks were

what it was doing

Being a train

and something about its surroundings..

Here is a train on the tracks being a train in the woods?

Don't think I won't use that on my next upload

Loyd L.

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

I want to know why a train was there...

To move stuff!

Actually, the date, the place name (or "between point A and point B"), and the direction of travel will usually satisfy my curiosity. More info can be good reading (or not).

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

Don't think I won't use that on my next upload

Loyd L.

Don't think I won't ask questions.

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

To move stuff!

Actually, the date, the place name (or "between point A and point B"), and the direction of travel will usually satisfy my curiosity. More info can be good reading (or not).

Origin and destination are good, but industries served, commodities hauled (don't say passengers , pulpwood, or other obvious lading), and descriptions of building along the tracks also are interesting.

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

Because the tracks were


Loyd L.

Oh, yeah?

PhotoID: 730960 Photograph © Mark MacDougall

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

Oh, yeah?

Ok, I'll give you that one.

Loyd L.

[ShortlinesUSA]

Hahaha!!! Oh, what? Too soon?

Originally Posted by Decapod401

Oh, yeah?

[Joseph Cermak]

So I guess it's okay to photoshop doors closed to avoid the "open cab door" rejection now.....

PhotoID: 740683 Photograph © Jay Brown

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by Joseph Cermak

So I guess it's okay to photoshop doors closed to avoid the "open cab door" rejection now.....

Should have photoshopped some better lighting while he was at it.

Loyd L.

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by Mike Wilson

Hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the majority of the general public can only last through about three sentences of that before it becomes way overly wordy. While information is always helpful, as a photography website, the picture should speak more than the caption.

I don't know how I missed this discussion, since I am probably one of the worst offenders, when it comes to lengthy captions. At least I TRY to use paragraphs!

A few thoughts on this.....

I tend to lean toward Doug's approach with regard to viewer reaction. It is better to have a story there for folks who are inclined to read them. Folks who just like to look at the pretty pictures are welcome to ignore the text.

I also tend to picture myself as a photojournalist vs. an artistic photographer. I am an engineer by training, and I don't have much artistic talent. I think that anyone can learn basic composition and the angles that people like with practice, but to regularly generate stuff that the artsy crowd fawns over probably requires a talent that people were born with. I enjoy watching folks like that do their thing. As a friend of mine once said, watching a real artist at work is like having someone give you the answers to the SATs.....you know the answers, but you still don't understand the questions.

Lastly, there is nothing that frustrates me more than looking at an old railroad photo, and not knowing a thing about what I am looking at. No date, no location, no locomotive number, no context. Some day, when I fly west (that's pilot jargon for DIE), someone will probably pitch all of my stuff into a dumpster. But if by some miracle that doesn't happen, I want my stuff to have some context, so the guy or gal who looks at it 100 years from now isn't as clueless and frustrated as I am, when I look at an old black and white print with no documentation at all.

[RobJor]

LOL - and Locomotive is NS but CSX Sub so is that a NS red flag.

PhotoID: 741968 Photograph © Tom Binger