Old 02-23-2017, 03:20 PM   #1
Heymon
Senior Member
 
Heymon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 125
Default Station interior rejection

So I have had several station interior shots accepted in the past, but it seems like those might be falling out of favor (doubtful) or my shot is deficient in some way.

This was rejected on poor aesthetics, but is not much different than others I have gotten in so just want some feedback.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...28&key=7495934

Thanks,
Andre
Heymon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2017, 04:51 PM   #2
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,760
Default

There's not a whole lot of supporting detail within the shot that says "Railroad" to me, and I've been there many times. It's a little dark, and the cutoff person in the foreground is distracting to me as well. The distortion needs addressed too.

I can see it being rejected for both aesthetic and technical reasons.

Loyd L.
__________________
What used to be is no more

My personal photography site

Last edited by bigbassloyd; 02-23-2017 at 04:58 PM.
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2017, 06:25 PM   #3
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,232
Default

Lack of RR content didn't hurt this one.
Image © Matt Donnelly
PhotoID: 587047
Photograph © Matt Donnelly
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/

Last edited by miningcamper1; 02-23-2017 at 06:29 PM. Reason: revision
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2017, 03:51 AM   #4
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miningcamper1 View Post
Lack of RR content didn't hurt this one.
Image © Matt Donnelly
PhotoID: 587047
Photograph © Matt Donnelly
One bad decision doesn't deserve another.

Loyd L.
__________________
What used to be is no more

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2017, 04:31 AM   #5
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,024
Default

A few observations:

- The Donnelly shot is brighter.

- The Donnelly image has some symmetry to it....the arches are centered. That's the biggest plus in my opinion. The off-center arches in the rejected shot are just driving me nuts....and I'm not even an artsy-fartsy type.

- The Donnelly shot doesn't have the distracting, shadowy figure of a person in the foreground who is cut off just below the waist.

All of that stuff really differentiates the accepted shot. Just my $.02.
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Lots of Steam Railroad stuff there from all over the US.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2017, 05:57 AM   #6
Heymon
Senior Member
 
Heymon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 125
Default

Well, I think Mr. Donnelly covered it! Funny, I did a search trying to find out if anyone had done interiors of that station and did not find any using the search terms I thought would apply (Union Station), which I thought was odd. Anyway, my shot was at night, hence darker, but still its too similar to Matt's to be worth pursuing. I took a bunch of other interior shots there, maybe I'll find one a bit different to try.

I disagree that there has to be a train for an interior shot to work. Look at all the shots of Grand Central. I do agree that the passenger could be a bit distracting, though I judged her to be part of the scene. The rejection reason is clearly inconsistent, but not going to worry about that. If they wanted to reject for unlevel or something in that vein I could see it, (it is a bit unlevel I notice now but I am not seeing the assymetry).

I appreciate the feedback.

Andre
Heymon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2017, 08:10 AM   #7
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,232
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heymon View Post
Well, I think Mr. Donnelly covered it! Funny, I did a search trying to find out if anyone had done interiors of that station and did not find any using the search terms I thought would apply (Union Station), which I thought was odd.
The RP search box can be very finicky at times, but "Washington Union Station" did the trick.

FWIW, I like the colors in the arches better in yours.
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2017, 04:26 PM   #8
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heymon View Post
If they wanted to reject for unlevel or something in that vein I could see it, (it is a bit unlevel I notice now but I am not seeing the assymetry).

I appreciate the feedback.

Andre
Hi Andre,

I would disregard my comment about the symmetry issue. I was looking at it under a slightly higher magnification last night and saw something I didn't like. I don't see that as I view it now, although I do agree it is not quite level. Honestly, I think the darkness and the cut-off figure are the issues. If you had someone dart into the picture, did you not shoot another frame or two after she cleared the edge of the frame? I probably would have just deleted this frame in-camera and shot a few more when the scene was a bit cleaner.
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Lots of Steam Railroad stuff there from all over the US.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2017, 05:04 PM   #9
Mberry
Senior Member
 
Mberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 640
Default

Station shots are tough to get on..... I managed to get this one on, somewhat surprisingly. In hindsight I'm not sure the B&W edit works that well.

Image © Michael Berry
PhotoID: 496419
Photograph © Michael Berry
Mberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2017, 05:57 PM   #10
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

As with many things RP, there seems little rhyme/reason why some shots get in and others don't. In this case, though, the half-person definitely detracts from the shot.

This one got on, somehow, years ago

Image © Janusz Mrozek
PhotoID: 361809
Photograph © Janusz Mrozek


At the time I found the many ads in the station for Jet Blue amusing.
__________________
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 02-26-2017, 12:24 AM   #11
Heymon
Senior Member
 
Heymon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 125
Default

If the half person was the problem I think the rejection would have been for foreground obstruction or something "fixable" (as in, "If that wasn't there it would be good"). I have basically viewed the Poor Aesthetic Quality rejection as unfixable. I have another shot so I may as well test the theory with your suggestions in mind and see what happens.

Andre
Heymon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 05:29 AM   #12
Heymon
Senior Member
 
Heymon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 125
Default

As I suspected, the PAQ rejection is terminal:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...61&key=3352344

Still, I think it is a strange rejection since it is an accurate depiction of the station, and I don't think there are any glaring faults in the photo this time.

Andre
Heymon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 06:08 AM   #13
John West
Senior Curmudgeon
 
John West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mill Valley, CA
Posts: 1,081
Cool

In my view it cries out for perspective correction and some color balance change (have no idea what the real thing looks like). The attached is a quick and dirty idea of what I think looks a bit better. If the original allows it I would try to get the whole first arch in and crop out some of the floor in the foreground. But this is just me.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	2062.1488070815.jpg
Views:	208
Size:	752.9 KB
ID:	9380  
__________________
John West
See my pix here and
here and here
John West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 06:19 AM   #14
ATSF666
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 129
Default

My guess is it who is reviewing the photo. I have some station shots on, and some that have been rejected for the same reason. No rhyme or reason, but that is the way of RP for better or worse.
__________________
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 02:26 PM   #15
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John West View Post
In my view it cries out for perspective correction and some color balance change (have no idea what the real thing looks like). The attached is a quick and dirty idea of what I think looks a bit better. If the original allows it I would try to get the whole first arch in and crop out some of the floor in the foreground. But this is just me.
Not just you John.... When an image has strong perspective issues, I also like to see at least some attempt at correction. Granted, in most cases, it means you'll lose part of the image, but it's just not pleasing to my eye to have so many elements of a photo leaning so heavily. I like this submission better than the original, but I would still do some perspective correction and I would bring up the shadows quite a bit. I still believe that human eyes would see this scene brighter than the photo.

In the end, it may not matter what you do with it. As others have noted, it is all in the eyes of the screener you get. As for the "pass" on the Matt Donnelly image....well.....he's Matt Donnelly and I believe he shoots for Amtrak. You can read into that whatever you like, I guess.
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Lots of Steam Railroad stuff there from all over the US.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 03:06 PM   #16
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
One bad decision doesn't deserve another.

Loyd L.
Also, legit, that submitter gets mad leeway on his submittals, he's the king of blown out skies. I'm not a fan of these type shots.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2017, 05:32 PM   #17
Heymon
Senior Member
 
Heymon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinM View Post
Not just you John.... When an image has strong perspective issues, I also like to see at least some attempt at correction. Granted, in most cases, it means you'll lose part of the image, but it's just not pleasing to my eye to have so many elements of a photo leaning so heavily. I like this submission better than the original, but I would still do some perspective correction and I would bring up the shadows quite a bit. I still believe that human eyes would see this scene brighter than the photo.

In the end, it may not matter what you do with it. As others have noted, it is all in the eyes of the screener you get. As for the "pass" on the Matt Donnelly image....well.....he's Matt Donnelly and I believe he shoots for Amtrak. You can read into that whatever you like, I guess.
In looking at the Donnelly version that was accepted, it is leaning equally to my rejections. I think that just about all of my station interiors have that type of wide-angle distortion. As you know, correcting the perspective cures the lean but costs detail so I tend not to do it. I realize that it bothers some people, but I think many tend to look past it when it comes to these types of shots (and the prevalence of such shots being accepted supports that).

In that vein, I am beginning to cry foul a bit based on an examination of his accepted shots and my own. Perspective distortion is not the issue, I don't think. Neither is "poor aesthetics". That would mean the shot is grossly deficient or not "railroady" enough. It is entirely possible the screener doesn't like these types of shots, but then the screener is inconsistent with the site specifications. There are a number of "styles" I don't like, but I would accept them based on the parameters of the site regardless of my personal preferences. If my shot were distorted too much, the screener should know about perspective correction and rejected it for distortion. If it was too dark, they could say something about that. But to say poor aesthetics is perplexing. I was joking to myself that maybe Donnelly is a screener and doesn't want competition, but maybe the screener is his friend.

Andre

PS The station was quite dark, actually. My shot was at ISO 2500 f4.3 and I brightened it a bit after that. It is a reasonably accurate rendition as far as I recall. But I can go brighter if that's what it takes...
Heymon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2017, 12:27 AM   #18
John West
Senior Curmudgeon
 
John West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mill Valley, CA
Posts: 1,081
Red face

I think Janusz covered it pretty well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
As with many things RP, there seems little rhyme/reason why some shots get in and others don't.
__________________
John West
See my pix here and
here and here
John West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2017, 04:16 AM   #19
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heymon View Post
I was joking to myself that maybe Donnelly is a screener and doesn't want competition, but maybe the screener is his friend.

Andre
No, Donnelly isn't a screener, but the RP folks clearly have "arrangements" with some of the various railroad company Photographers such as Matt Donnelly, Kevin Burkholder and Casey Thomason.
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Lots of Steam Railroad stuff there from all over the US.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2017, 01:42 PM   #20
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinM View Post
No, Donnelly isn't a screener, but the RP folks clearly have "arrangements" with some of the various railroad company Photographers such as Matt Donnelly, Kevin Burkholder and Casey Thomason.
Oh, I didn't know he was a company photographer, that explains it. Different set of rules, gotcha!
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2017, 03:56 PM   #21
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 774
Default

Another station fail.

I only submit once in a while but saw this thread so just for curiosity.???

Clearly railroad related, typical "old time" Station with "new time" travelers I thought was OK.

Of note, only one customer watching the station TV.

Corrected for exposure rejection. Corrected for Hue. Then the final rejection.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...69&key=9988071

Bob Jordan
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	RailPicsLaCrosse-Rev2.jpg
Views:	171
Size:	1.07 MB
ID:	9381  
RobJor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2017, 06:42 PM   #22
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,232
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobJor View Post
Another station fail.

I only submit once in a while but saw this thread so just for curiosity.???

Clearly railroad related, typical "old time" Station with "new time" travelers I thought was OK.

Of note, only one customer watching the station TV.

Corrected for exposure rejection. Corrected for Hue. Then the final rejection.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...69&key=9988071

Bob Jordan
Quite a visual statement about our modern times. Ultra-casual dress, eyes glued to smartphones...
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2017, 01:57 AM   #23
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,807
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miningcamper1 View Post
Quite a visual statement about our modern times. Ultra-casual dress, eyes glued to smartphones...
Been in an airport lately?
__________________
.
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 02-28-2017, 03:41 AM   #24
SAR Connecta
Member
 
SAR Connecta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Durban - South Africa
Posts: 67
Default

What a pity Rob, love the photo / scene - vintage ticket kiosk, clock and benches! I have two "railway" clocks in my little private South African Railway museum.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	SAR Clock 1.jpg
Views:	167
Size:	404.3 KB
ID:	9382   Click image for larger version

Name:	SAR Clock 2.jpg
Views:	168
Size:	862.1 KB
ID:	9383  
SAR Connecta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2017, 01:28 AM   #25
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 774
Default

Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


Ok, John, try to "fix" this one.!!! Smile

Bob
RobJor 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 04:07 PM.


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