OMG, He's on the Wrong Side, What Will We Do?

[Holloran Grade]

Well, RP is still befuddled with dark side shots.

Reason(s) for Rejection: - Poor Lighting (High Sun): The angle of the sunlight is too high, a common problem in the summer months of year on mid-day shots.




See the plow and the trailing cars around the corner?

Not high sun, I just chose to stand on the dark side because it made a better picture and I was unconcerned about creating more cookie cutter media.


Ergo, nothing has changed.

Now I think I will go back into hibernation.

[JimThias]

Of course it's not high sun. You're supposed to stop reading after "Poor lighting."

[bigbassloyd]

I'm befuddled as well. Does having the majority of the visible side of the train dark constitute artistry?

Looks like a poorly lit basic wedge to me. But again, I just take crappy train photos.

Loyd L.

[Holloran Grade]

Originally Posted by JimThias

Of course it's not high sun. You're supposed to stop reading after "Poor lighting."

As resident grammar nazi, you know that is not how the sentence is constructed.

The words contained in parenthesis clarifies the phrase before it.

Further, the description following the parenthetical clause removes any ambiguity as to what the author was referring to.

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

..............Looks like a poorly lit basic wedge to me.

Yes, because when presented with the scene in the picture, you can only look at the train.

You completely miss the picture - it is much more than just a train.

This is due to your Pavlovian way of looking at the railroading world through a lens, brought to you by the folks at RP.

There is no understanding of the purposeful juxtaposition of light and dark, no comprehension of complex compositions, or artistic expression.

Only rigid standards that result in uniform compositions and that certain 3/4 look that people have come to know and expect.

Hence the reason why a great number of the images posted on any given day, all look alike.

Imagine what the world must have looked like before the cookie cutter images became the accepted way?

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by Holloran Grade

Yes, because when presented with the scene in the picture, you can only look at the train.

You present a scene heavily biased towards the train (i.e a train and a signal), and expect someone to do what?

You completely miss the picture - it is much more than just a train.

You could have fooled me with this example.

This is due to your Pavlovian way of looking at the railroading world through a lens, brought to you by the folks at RP.

Quite the contrary. They rejected it didn't they?

There is no understanding of the purposeful juxtaposition of light and dark, no comprehension of complex compositions, or artistic expression.

How dare they strip you of your artistic license to deliver us poorly lit, basic compositions under the guise of Art...

Only rigid standards that result in uniform compositions and that certain 3/4 look that people have come to know and expect.

Like your shot, except with better lighting?

Hence the reason why a great number of the images posted on any given day, all look alike.

You've got me there.

Imagine what the world must have looked like before the cookie cutter images became the accepted way?

So give them something quality that breaks the mold. Shooting standard stuff from the dark side doesn't cut it IMO.

Loyd L.

[CSX1702]

I'm getting the feeling Loyd's not a fan.

[nikos1]

Don't feed the troll

[magicman_841]

Seriously?

You're telling me this was the only good shot you could find on Cajon Pass with that light? Shooting around that corner in the background would have solved your sun problem. Worst case, just telemash the hell out it to minimize the straight-on light.

This isn't rocket science. Just work with the light you have.

[Chris Z]

The best way to nail that shot is to stand directly between the rails.

Chris Z

[Holloran Grade]

Originally Posted by Chris Z

The best way to nail that shot is to stand directly between the rails.

Chris Z

LOL!

The best comment yet.

Originally Posted by magicman_841

This isn't rocket science. Just work with the light you have.

Ya mean like this?

PhotoID: 426025 Photograph © EL ROCO Photography

[MagnumForce]

Using a horrible example to try to prove a point again.

It is a poorly lit 3/4 wedge, there is nothing more to it. Absolutely nothing out of the box or artistic about it.

[Holloran Grade]

Originally Posted by MagnumForce

It is a poorly lit 3/4 wedge,

According to what?

Or who?

Or why?

RP?

Who made them, or anyone else the authority on the rules of railroad photography?

(The answer is YOU did, not me.)

Originally Posted by MagnumForce

Absolutely nothing out of the box or artistic about it.

Really?

If that side had light, then why in your opinion why would it continue to be rejected?

[WMHeilman]

Why do you keep uploading stupid shitty shots?

[Holloran Grade]

Originally Posted by WMHeilman

Why do you keep uploading stupid shitty shots?

Can you explain the basis for your belief that it is a "stupid shitty shot?"


And you realize that using the word "stupid" and "shitty" to describe the same noun in the same sentence is redundant and repetitive?

[CSX1702]

Well it was bound to happen.

[MagnumForce]

Who made the rules? Well it surely wasn't RP unless you are clueless about railroad photography as a whole and people like Lucius Beebe and Charles Clegg, or Jim Shaughnessy, Phil Hastings, Dick Steinheimer, Robert Hale, or Mel Patrick.

Those guys and more are the fathers of railroad photography. I would love to find Beebes "Sun at your back, Rods down, 3/4 wedge" quote as I know it's in Mixed Train Daily somewhere but don't want to read for an hour to prove a point.

The rules of good railroad photography existed long before RP came around.

As for your second question, no, it would not continue to be rejected because it is a properly lit 3/4 wedge. While not exciting, it does have a place in railroad photography, in fact it is a basic tenant of railroad photography but it must follow the rules. If it has something more, or adds some drama it is a rule that can be broken, but again your photo is not an example of any of this.

[MagnumForce]

Oh and just to bug you.

PhotoID: 406686 Photograph © Brent Kneebush

[CSX1702]

Originally Posted by MagnumForce

Oh and just to bug you.

Jeez, did you get black lung when that one went by?

[MagnumForce]

I knew what the train was that was coming, knew it was on one and knew that these coal trains from the Appalachian always have a ton of dust blowing off them.

Taking all that into account I decided to shoot it from the dark side to accentuate the dust and show it at all since shooting from the north side of one would have hemmed things in anyway.

It worked well, and I was hacking afterwards.

[MagnumForce]

PhotoID: 407320 Photograph © Wyatt M. Heilman

Another view from Wyatt a few miles west of where I was in town. That is amongst the dustiest one I have ever seen.

[bigbassloyd]

And it appears another lost soul has been freed from the damnation of a life on Railpictures. May your artistic vision return to a former glory that has to this point, been suppressed so harshly.

Loyd L.

[Mberry]

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

And it appears another lost soul has been freed from the damnation of a life on Railpictures. May your artistic vision return to a former glory that has to this point, been suppressed so harshly.

Loyd L.

And suddenly no one's posted anything in the last 8 hours!

[Joe the Photog]

It was a slow motion melt down, months in the making. I prefer the quick flame outs. HG couldn't even get that right.

[MagnumForce]

What did I miss?

[MagnumForce]

Oh he's banned, HA!