Old 03-04-2012, 04:27 AM   #1
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb Poor Image Quality - WTF is That?

A new rejection beyond PEQ - "poor image quality" what the hell is that all about?

Name:  Thermite Welding C 800.JPG
Views: 344
Size:  266.6 KB

This is the result of a fix for "too much grain."

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 03-04-2012 at 04:33 AM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 05:06 AM   #2
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Go back to the grainy one and try Neat Image on it... try it in small doses... as the line between grainy and smudged is a thin one.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 02:20 PM   #3
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Go back to the grainy one and try Neat Image on it... try it in small doses... as the line between grainy and smudged is a thin one.
Agreed - I will work on it.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 04:45 PM   #4
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

I don't know, but I think it needs a bit more contrast.

You don't know what "poor image quality" is? I'll send you a box or two of my slides...
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 05:43 PM   #5
Hatchetman
Part-Time Railfan
 
Hatchetman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,381
Default

Might work in contrasty B&W. that takes out some of the color noise.
Hatchetman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 08:23 PM   #6
HaltonRailfan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 18
Default

Poor Image Quality is sometimes their "WE Don't like it" rejection.
HaltonRailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 08:25 PM   #7
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaltonRailfan View Post
Poor Image Quality is sometimes their "WE Don't like it" rejection.
I don't believe this is true. PEQ or Poor Esthetic Quality is, though.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 08:36 PM   #8
HaltonRailfan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
I don't believe this is true. PEQ or Poor Esthetic Quality is, though.

Thats why I said "sometimes".
HaltonRailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 11:22 PM   #9
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Perhaps you misspelled "sometimes" when you meant "never, or only coincidentally"?

Spell check doesn't catch everything!
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2012, 01:39 AM   #10
HaltonRailfan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Perhaps you misspelled "sometimes" when you meant "never, or only coincidentally"?

Spell check doesn't catch everything!
So? Who cares?
HaltonRailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2012, 03:05 AM   #11
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaltonRailfan View Post
So? Who cares?
Flew over your head, huh?

You responded to a very clever joke (that had a smiling face there just in case you weren't sure it was a joke).
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2012, 03:10 AM   #12
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaltonRailfan View Post
So? Who cares?
Swing and a miss.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 02:27 AM   #13
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaltonRailfan View Post
Poor Image Quality is sometimes their "WE Don't like it" rejection.
Yes, that is what the "WTF" is all about.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatchetman View Post
Might work in contrasty B&W. that takes out some of the color noise.
It could....

But it is the variety of different colors and in certain places that caught my eye on this one, so I want to keep it color.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2012, 03:44 AM   #14
Dennis A. Livesey
Senior Member
 
Dennis A. Livesey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,986
Default

Very cluttered over all.
The flame has to compete with the ugly lights in the background.
The main human is blurred and looking away from the main interest.
To me here PEQ="We don't like it."
__________________
Dennis

I Foam Therefore I Am.

My pix on RailPics:

I am on Flickr as well:

"Dennis is such a God, he could do that with a camera obscura and some homemade acetate." Holloran Grade

"To me it looks drawn in in Paintshop. It looks like a puddle of orange on the sky." SFO777
Dennis A. Livesey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2012, 08:59 PM   #15
gp9fl9
Junior Member
 
gp9fl9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Attleboro
Posts: 13
Default How can this be fixed ?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...22&key=5211169

What is wrong with this image for a 1966 126 film color negative? The B&M did not look perfect during this era. I have been uploading a lot of images for a fellow railroader/railhead. I am trying to convince him that his early work is great. So far Railpictures,net has rejected 2 out of 3. I grow sad about this.
__________________
Don Haskel

Last edited by gp9fl9; 03-11-2012 at 09:05 PM. Reason: Add more information.
gp9fl9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2012, 10:48 PM   #16
jac_murphy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 378
Default

Don, the photo looks to me to be somewhat oversharpened, which may be leading to the PIQ reject. Awesome photo though... hope it makes it on.

-Jacques
jac_murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 12:43 AM   #17
Hatchetman
Part-Time Railfan
 
Hatchetman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,381
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gp9fl9 View Post
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...22&key=5211169

What is wrong with this image for a 1966 126 film color negative? The B&M did not look perfect during this era. I have been uploading a lot of images for a fellow railroader/railhead. I am trying to convince him that his early work is great. So far Railpictures,net has rejected 2 out of 3. I grow sad about this.
Looks pretty good to me. I dunno, what are you using to scan? 126 film doesn't give you much to work with.
Hatchetman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 01:49 AM   #18
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gp9fl9 View Post
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...22&key=5211169

What is wrong with this image for a 1966 126 film color negative? The B&M did not look perfect during this era. I have been uploading a lot of images for a fellow railroader/railhead. I am trying to convince him that his early work is great. So far Railpictures,net has rejected 2 out of 3. I grow sad about this.
Great shot, please keep working on it. And while you're at it, it needs a little CW rotation.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 02:32 AM   #19
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,042
Default

I think you oversharpened it. Just a touch less... and maybe a very light go over with Neat Image.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 05:31 AM   #20
gp9fl9
Junior Member
 
gp9fl9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Attleboro
Posts: 13
Default

Thanks for all of the comments I will keep working at it.
__________________
Don Haskel
gp9fl9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 06:03 AM   #21
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb Well, now that the thread is going somewhere else.

What "I" was actually impressed about with my original image, was that I captured it on an 8MP HTC cell phone with no tripod, no shutter cord, no fancy white balancing and just a little post processing with the software.

Proof that you can take a decent picture with low tech gear.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 12:17 PM   #22
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holloran Grade View Post
Proof that you can take a decent picture with low tech gear.
Yep. One that gets rejected for PIQ.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.