A couple I think are fine

troy12n · 11-09-2010, 01:10 AM

The first, a night photo, gets underexposed. I think there is sufficient detail, I dont want it to end up like some on here that look like cloudy day shots: http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=873999&key=0

Second is a bridge shot. This is taken from about 300ft ABOVE the ROW, at an angle, and it is coming towards me on a curved trestle believe it or not: I thought the first one was fine, it was actually level based on my bubble level I shoot with.

Was hit with the Unlevel: http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1038829914

I obliged them, even though the scene, looked at from my original vantage point, would not look like this with the human eye, got cropping: http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=873998&key=0

I think it is sufficiently composed, and although you can only see the lead unit and about 35% of the trailing unit, I think it is good, well lit photo.

Thoughts on these 2 scenes?

Joe the Photog · 11-09-2010, 01:13 AM

You've got a way to go on the night time shot before it looks like it was taken in the daylight. Just work on exposure and/or brightness some. On the F shot, not knowing the location at all, I have to wonder why you went tight on the lead unit and didn't show us the scene. There's plenty of detail shots of those units. Show us the terrain. Other than that, I don't have an opinion on the levelness really.

troy12n · 11-09-2010, 01:18 AM

I know it dont matter as far as getting it on, but the reason I am so tight on that one is because I had enough time to pull off the road and take the shot, if I had a little more time I would have changed from the 70-200 that was on it to something else, like a 50. That was as wide as I could go. If you all think it's too tight, I will accept that.

It's also a pretty tight location, with trees on either side of the river, it would have been a better vertical crop with a wider lens, but like I said, I didnt have the time.

Freericks · 11-09-2010, 01:48 AM

I agree with Joe... lighten the night shot a bit... it can still be night.

The F shot is just too tight and here's why... it's very clearly moving and very clearly on an interesting looking bridge, but it's cropped so tight that we can't see these things. Sorry.

JRMDC · 11-09-2010, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

I obliged them,

No. With respect to unlevel, you most certainly did not oblige them. Verticals need to be vertical. Yours are not.

troy12n · 11-09-2010, 02:06 AM

If you look at the first one, it is pretty much there. Like I said, I was shooting from above and to the right, and it is on a curve, so I'm not sure how much better it could be. The cropping comments are legitimate however.

JRMDC · 11-09-2010, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

If you look at the first one, it is pretty much there. Like I said, I was shooting from above and to the right, and it is on a curve, so I'm not sure how much better it could be. The cropping comments are legitimate however.

Nope, sorry, look again. Look at the verticals in the girders. MAYBE you leveled on the right edge, you certainly didn't level on the verticals in the center.

Angle doesn't matter, above, below, curve. The only thing that throws off a vertical is grade. Verticals must be vertical.

Chase55671 · 11-09-2010, 07:14 AM

Really really really like that first one, as it is. The signals pop out at you, the stars are nice, and the composition is strong. Perhaps a bit of brightening may help, but I really do like it as is.

Chase

crazytiger · 11-09-2010, 03:42 PM

I agree with Chase on the night shot. As for the F shot, I too wondered why you were so tight. Also, you really unleveled the shot that wasn't perfectly level to begin with, level off the yellow bars on the side of the train and you're level. Problem I see is that you are too tight and coming from a ridiculously weird angle.

bigbassloyd · 11-09-2010, 04:20 PM

The night shot is too dark

It needs at least a half stop of correction.

Loyd L.

troy12n · 11-09-2010, 04:55 PM

Half stop correction indeed

While I am at it, does anyone think these 3 work?
http://troy12n.rrpicturearchives.net...spx?id=2299799
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=872081&key=0 (got rejected soft, admittedly background is indeed soft, it happens when you shoot at bigger apertures)
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=730952301 (Cropping, had not revisited it yet. It is already cropped pretty heavily from the original)

JRMDC · 11-09-2010, 05:16 PM

Night signals: doesn't work for me. The signals are far apart with a big empty in the middle. I would like to see the shot taken from much further away, which will put the signals together as one cluster, right now they are two separate objects and it doesn't hold together for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

While I am at it, does anyone think these 3 work?
http://troy12n.rrpicturearchives.net...spx?id=2299799

You need to do it like this

PhotoID: 309799
Photograph © Janusz Mrozek

rail grinding: looks too dark, re crop I don't see the point of so much width, nor of the emphasis on the rails in the foreground and cutting off the detail of the grinding device at the top. I would have the sparks at the lower rule of thirds location, you have it above the middle.

troy12n · 11-09-2010, 06:22 PM

Great shot, how did you guess the exposure on that since it was backlit? I have a hard time on those types of shot, they all end up over or under exposed.

travsirocz · 11-09-2010, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

Great shot, how did you guess the exposure on that since it was backlit? I have a hard time on those types of shot, they all end up over or under exposed.

Practice.

travsirocz · 11-09-2010, 06:34 PM

I'm with J on the signal shot. Too dark and the composition doesn't work with the signals being so far apart at that distance and angle.

JRMDC · 11-09-2010, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

Great shot, how did you guess the exposure on that since it was backlit? I have a hard time on those types of shot, they all end up over or under exposed.

I don't recall, but the EXIF says I was on Av, so the camera just handled it. For all I know it may have in fact been over or underexposed, but I would have just corrected that in processing. It must have been close enough.

troy12n · 11-09-2010, 07:00 PM

I have a vertical shot with just 1 signal, but thought it was interesting with the backs of the signal on the left being illuminated due to the design of the N&W and PRR CPL's. When I get home I may process one of those and throw it up on RRPA to get an opinion.

troy12n · 11-10-2010, 04:12 AM

Got the night one on, I felt pretty strongly about this one. We just dont get clear nights where you can see real stars around here with all the light pollution. This was a perfect night with a full moon in just the right spot. Perfect timing.

PhotoID: 344682
Photograph © Troy Nolen

coborn35 · 11-10-2010, 04:56 AM

Must be a long grade crossing eh Troy....

troy12n · 11-10-2010, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coborn35

Must be a long grade crossing eh Troy....

No, just a convienient road right next to the track. You can see it in this picture. I was standing approximately near where the front of the locomotive is in this picture, on the side of the ROAD.

coborn35 · 11-10-2010, 06:04 AM

Is that so? Must've missed the road going between the tracks...

Chase55671 · 11-10-2010, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coborn35

Is that so? Must've missed the road going between the tracks...

Did you even compare his night time photo to the daylight one? Obviously you didn't, or else you wouldn't of made such a dumb comment. I've been to that spot and the CPL's are angled a bit. That makes for a real nice shot from the road. Plus, you throw in 70mm worth of telephoto distortion. He's not standing on the crossing..

Chase

coborn35 · 11-10-2010, 06:22 AM

From the night shot, looks like he is right between the rails. Day shot showed nothing to hint otherwise, from the angle. If he was standing on the road, the rails should be on his left, or his right, not on both sides.

Chase55671 · 11-10-2010, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coborn35

From the night shot, looks like he is right between the rails. Day shot showed nothing to hint otherwise, from the angle.

I've attached a map.. Once you consider the telephoto distortion, it's easy to tell the photo was taken from public property.

Besides, if there was a train in the block, why would Troy stand in between the tracks for 178"?

Chase

coborn35 · 11-10-2010, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase55671

Besides, if there was a train in the block, why would Troy stand in between the tracks for 178"?

Chase

Clearly you have never seen foamers at their best.