Cloudy Thoughts

Joseph Cermak · 10-31-2017, 01:32 PM

Looking for thoughts on this photo:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...25&key=8891309

bigbassloyd · 11-01-2017, 02:12 PM

I would have to agree. Overall the composition is a bit awkward too.

Loyd L.

Joseph Cermak · 11-01-2017, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

I would have to agree. Overall the composition is a bit awkward too.

Loyd L.

Any input on composition? This is pretty heavily cropped, I was trying to create something with a post rain mood and cropped around the bridge.

ShortlinesUSA · 11-01-2017, 02:29 PM

Looks like the camera shook just a bit, to me. Nothing is really crisp, at least on my monitor. For cropping, I think I would prefer the entire bridge structure be shown instead of cut off on the top right.

troy12n · 11-01-2017, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

I would have to agree. Overall the composition is a bit awkward too.

Loyd L.

Very awkward, almost forced. The cut off part of the girders upper right is particularly frustrating. The choice to frame the shot, whether intentional or not, by the bridge structure doesn't work for me

bigbassloyd · 11-01-2017, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Cermak

Any input on composition? This is pretty heavily cropped, I was trying to create something with a post rain mood and cropped around the bridge.

Cutting the top right of the bridge off isn't very appealing. I would also question whether or not a landscape composition from a further back vantage point may have been more productive for the bridge.

Loyd L.

miningcamper1 · 11-01-2017, 05:12 PM

Perhaps a frame with the train exiting the bridge will please the court.

Joseph Cermak · 11-01-2017, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Perhaps a frame with the train exiting the bridge will please the court.

I do have frames of that but they are more generic/cloudy IMO. This has the loco smoke and the dark/wet bridge rails which I felt added something to the scene.

I do agree with the chopped off top of the bridge and will have to see if I have room in the crop to not do that. Not sure why I didn't do that in the first place.

JimThias · 11-01-2017, 06:12 PM

Step back more, allow the train to get close to entering the bridge for better subject framing (more centered within the bridge structure), and for Pete's sake, don't cut off the top of the bridge!

troy12n · 11-01-2017, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Perhaps a frame with the train exiting the bridge will please the court.

If I was to guess, he's standing too close and doesn't have a shot like that.

That would have been my choice. I never shoot through a bridge to get a shot on the other side, it almost never works for a lot of reasons.

jac_murphy · 11-01-2017, 09:27 PM

Agree with what others have said. Too tight on all sides and the train should be a bit closer to the bridge (but not "touching" the structure!) to better fill in the space. The lighting is what it is, fix those issues and it might have a shot - probably wouldn't hurt to selectively lighten the bridge members a tad. It's also unlevel.

-Jacques

RobJor · 11-01-2017, 11:52 PM

I took a quick stab at it. I cropped off the top and right. This gets rid of some sky, the top of the bridge is still missing but doesn't just look like a mess-up and the right and left are more symmetrical. Darkened the sky and cloned out the partial crossing gate. Brightened up the ROW to give it a little glisten and tried to sharpen the foreground.

Think the problem is the location, the other side is a better bridge shot as the line curves away and you have the road to stand up on.

bob jordan

Joseph Cermak · 11-02-2017, 12:14 AM

I have more in the frame and opened it up to include the top of the bridge. That was a mistake on my part to crop it out. I also have frames from the train exiting the bridge, but in my mind it is much more generic. I selected the shot through the bridge because of the loco smoke, the headlight glint on the railhead, and that it was something different to overcome the cloudy conditions. I have attached both for comments.

troy12n · 11-02-2017, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Cermak

I have more in the frame and opened it up to include the top of the bridge. That was a mistake on my part to crop it out. I also have frames from the train exiting the bridge, but in my mind it is much more generic. I selected the shot through the bridge because of the loco smoke, the headlight glint on the railhead, and that it was something different to overcome the cloudy conditions. I have attached both for comments.

My advice would be go back on a better day. None of those shots are very compelling. And i'm not sure this is a very good photo location to begin with.

miningcamper1 · 11-02-2017, 05:16 AM

I like the exiting shot. I'll save it whether it gets on RP or not.

Needs more sharpening though.

And maybe cut the brightness of the sign by half.

JimThias · 11-02-2017, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

My advice would be go back on a better day. None of those shots are very compelling. And i'm not sure this is a very good photo location to begin with.

I disagree. If he backs up quite a bit and zooms in a little, he'll be able to better emphasize the old bridge and ROW on the left. With some sunshine and nicely framed loco about to exit the bridge, it would make for a nice scene. I'd probably try one with some snow, too.

PhotoID: 270688
Photograph © Jim Thias

miningcamper1 · 11-02-2017, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias

PhotoID: 270688
Photograph © Jim Thias

Good grief. Yet another road swallowed by G&W.

Best get the holdouts before they turn orange.

troy12n · 11-02-2017, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias

I disagree. If he backs up quite a bit and zooms in a little, he'll be able to better emphasize the old bridge and ROW on the left. With some sunshine and nicely framed loco about to exit the bridge, it would make for a nice scene. I'd probably try one with some snow, too.

PhotoID: 270688
Photograph © Jim Thias

I understand it can be done, your specific location affords you a straight-on shot without standing in the middle of the gauge because the rail curves not far after the trestle.

I'm not sure if his location allows that. Also it appears to be a double track bridge span where only one is used, and there appears to be overgrown brush and crap in the way of the other span.

It might be possible, I don't know the location.

I don't object to girder bridge shots in general, just the execution on this one, and location doesn't seem like it lends itself to the shot because of other uncontrollable factors

Decapod401 · 11-02-2017, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

Also it appears to be a double track bridge span where only one is used, and there appears to be overgrown brush and crap in the way of the other span.

That brush is part of the story - emphasizes the abandonment of the other track.

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n

I don't object to girder bridge shots in general, just the execution on this one, and location doesn't seem like it lends itself to the shot because of other uncontrollable factors

Although the closest span is a through girder bridge, I think that you are referring to the other two spans, which are through truss bridges. I object to side views where the power is inside the truss - they constitute an obstruction rejection IMO.

RobJor · 11-02-2017, 11:17 PM

Gonna really hate this one. Surprised a little accepted. Lighting was from a movie company illuminating the bridge so still existing light and I know.......

Bob

Decapod401 · 11-03-2017, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobJor

Gonna really hate this one. Surprised a little accepted. Lighting was from a movie company illuminating the bridge so still existing light and I know.......

Bob

It's interesting on some levels, but there's no doubt that the truss members are obstructing the locos. If the truss members were trees in a rural setting, I doubt that the screener could find the rejection button fast enough.

Joseph Cermak · 11-03-2017, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Decapod401

It's interesting on some levels, but there's no doubt that the truss members are obstructing the locos. If the truss members were trees in a rural setting, I doubt that the screener could find the rejection button fast enough.

I think the same would hold true if this were a daytime shot, the night lighting is what makes it work with the truss "obstruction" imo

Decapod401 · 11-03-2017, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Cermak

I think the same would hold true if this were a daytime shot, the night lighting is what makes it work with the truss "obstruction" imo

I agree that the lighting helps to mitigate the obstruction, but I've seen plenty of daylight through truss shots posted here.

troy12n · 11-03-2017, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Decapod401

That brush is part of the story - emphasizes the abandonment of the other track.

I would have to see the shot. It looks like a pile of dirt and brush completely obstructing most of everything, and i don't really think that tells much of a story

troy12n · 11-03-2017, 04:20 PM

I just looked on google earth, and the position where the photographer was standing, assuming I am at the right spot (it's the only truss bridge in the area), is pretty flagrant trespassing. Having to walk a fair bit of private property, up an embankment and cross the tracks and a tight area with tangent track on both sides of the bridge.

So I don't think there was much room to get much else as far as photo angles. Definitely not a spot I would try. If there was more room I would try to incorporate the double track main this bridge passes over. The abandoned bridge span seems like nothing of interest.

I have no idea about the railroads around this area, but some quick google earth investigation shows a LOT of abandoned railroad infrastructure including 2 fair sized yards