That caption thing

[RobJor]

PhotoID: 750280 Photograph © Mike Bates

I'd think the bridges would be interesting enough to provide some information. Then not even basic information about rail line. I wonder if you go through the trouble to find this location, wait for the train, fly the drone you would not provide some background on a location not that familiar. Many drone shots ae more documentary than anything else?????

Someone remarked on another subject which can apply to this site: ( lots of characters but no story). So some photos, yea most people have some knowledge but still nice fill in.

With minimal effort:

The Three sisters, two Warrens and a Pratt.

https://bridgehunter.com/tx/tarrant/bh61900/
https://bridgehunter.com/tx/tarrant/bh61901/
https://bridgehunter.com/tx/tarrant/bh61902/

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/l...e75330537.html

Bob Jordan

[KevinM]

I guess I have never understood the folks who post images without substantive captions. Perhaps it is because some view photography as art and figure that the picture should tell the story all by itself. My view is that the image can indeed tell a story, but many times, it can only tell so much of the story. The true historians and/or railroad buffs want more than the image can deliver. I'm not much of an artist and I like not to rely on folks imaginations. I prefer to tell the story behind the image, if I can. For that reason, I consider myself a sort of photojournalist, vs. an artist. Obviously, I wish I could deliver art as well, but I think my pen is better than my eye. And from a historical perspective, I think that images which have good captions are more valuable to future viewers than ones which stand alone. During this pandemic, I spent at least an hour a day, preserving all of my RP captions in the metadata of the image files, just to make sure that stuff survives at least as long as I do.

[Grewup on the CW]

Yep, throw my hat in the "aggravated at the no caption ring"! I was like cool! I gotta check this out an learn something more about Who, what where and why.....3 separate bridges parallel to each other....... some many questions and all we got was a picture. What a educational disappointment for those of us whose curiosity was garnered at the thumb nail.
That was like getting my favorite cake without the icing........

[TedG]

I share the aggravation with lack of captions. But...

Originally Posted by KevinM

I guess I have never understood the folks who post images without substantive captions. Perhaps it is because some view photography as art and figure that the picture should tell the story all by itself. My view is that the image can indeed tell a story, but many times, it can only tell so much of the story. The true historians and/or railroad buffs want more than the image can deliver. I'm not much of an artist and I like not to rely on folks imaginations. I prefer to tell the story behind the image, if I can. For that reason, I consider myself a sort of photojournalist, vs. an artist. Obviously, I wish I could deliver art as well, but I think my pen is better than my eye. And from a historical perspective, I think that images which have good captions are more valuable to future viewers than ones which stand alone. During this pandemic, I spent at least an hour a day, preserving all of my RP captions in the metadata of the image files, just to make sure that stuff survives at least as long as I do.

"Not much of an artist"? Someone's being a little too modest. Witness:

PhotoID: 750256 Photograph © Kevin Madore

/Ted

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by TedG

I share the aggravation with lack of captions. But...



"Not much of an artist"? Someone's being a little too modest. Witness:

/Ted

Ted, I struggle with sunrises and sunsets. If you look at all of the sunrise shots of 611 from that event last October, you'll see a wide range of edits. Some are bright, some are darker and some are darn near silhouettes. Some look like they were taken on Mars, with colors that just aren't real. My general approach is to make the image look as much as possible like my eye saw it, yet I think that sometimes, the viewers prefer the nuclear test look. Obviously, I want people to like the images, but I'm not willing to go off the deep end to get the views.

When you have a minute, go take a look at the variety of takes on that scene and let me know what you think. I actually thought about starting a thread on that scene, because so many people shot it, and the results are all over the map. The only thing that's stopped me is that I don't like making negative comments about other people's photography, although privately, there are some images from that day that just leave me scratching my head. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[TedG]

Trust me, Kevin, I've looked at them. In fact, I think I OD'd last Oct/Nov on 611 images. Now I just happened to pick your recent addition as an example. But it did, in fact, stand out to me.

I think your approach--make it as much as possible like your eye saw it--is the right one.

You should start a thread about that scene. It might generate some interesting discussion, hopefully without turning negative.
/Ted

[Joseph Cermak]

Originally Posted by KevinM

I guess I have never understood the folks who post images without substantive captions.

I'm with you 100%. It's nice to have more information about the image to at least answer the basic questions of what, where, and possibly why (if it's something unique or unusual). It's easy to not read it if a viewer isn't interested, but if it's not there at all, those that want information are left without any. Unfortunately, when I got in to this hobby, the local railfan community around me looked on long captions with disdain and I was constantly berated to "writing a novel of a caption" if it was a mere two sentences and being told all you should put is "train @ location" and nothing more. A very strange stance to take and the historical and documentation aspect of this hobby certainly suffers because of it.

[TedG]

There are occasions, however, where NO caption would actually be better. I won't mention the photographer, but here's the text of the caption:

"Long gone are the days of seeing 2 axle EMD power regularly on intermodal trains, and long gone are the days of Conrail. ..."

/Ted

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by TedG

There are occasions, however, where NO caption would actually be better. I won't mention the photographer, but here's the text of the caption:

"Long gone are the days of seeing 2 axle EMD power regularly on intermodal trains, and long gone are the days of Conrail. ..."

/Ted

I found one! I don't think it pulled intermodals.

[miningcamper3]

Originally Posted by TedG

"Long gone are the days of seeing 2 axle EMD power regularly on intermodal trains, and long gone are the days of Conrail. ..."

/Ted

[Chorus]
Those were the days, my friend
We thought they'd never end
We'd sing and dance forever and a day...

[TedG]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

I found one! I don't think it pulled intermodals.

Attachment 9814

An EMD Model 40! There's one on the Walkersville Southern as well. I don't think they assign it to their intermodals though.

/Ted

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by TedG

There are occasions, however, where NO caption would actually be better. I won't mention the photographer, but here's the text of the caption:

"Long gone are the days of seeing 2 axle EMD power regularly on intermodal trains, and long gone are the days of Conrail. ..."

/Ted

In all seriousness, I attribute this to someone trying to create an interesting caption, which is better than no attempt at all. The 2-axle reference is likely a rookie mistake, as I think the author is a relatively new contributor, although I didn't try to find the image to confirm.

The larger transgression for me is where historical accuracy is ignored in the rush to tell a good story without researching the facts. In the past couple of months, I have "learned" that Allentown Yard was a Reading facility (it was CNJ and later Lehigh Valley) and the R&N/NS tracks through Glen Onoko are former CNJ (the CNJ and LV consolidated PA trackage in the 1960's and the CNJ in this area was abandoned in favor of the LV). If these inaccuracies of which I am aware exist (I commented both photos), how many "stories" about areas where I am much less familiar are rewriting history on this site?

[RobJor]

Doug, probably no news to you but JIC, TRP magazine covers that area and I think just had info on this topic. Anyway, a magazine I like, well sized photos and detailed captions you can follow easily. He is not tied to the standard magazine formats. I don't care for peanuts sized photos and long winded articles.

Photos with out captions, the old joke, "Like reading a dictionary, lots of characters but no plot.

Bob

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by RobJor

Doug, probably no news to you but JIC, TRP magazine covers that area and I think just had info on this topic. Anyway, a magazine I like, well sized photos and detailed captions you can follow easily. He is not tied to the standard magazine formats.

Bob

Thanks, Bob. I am well acquainted with TRP. Mike Bednar does a lot of the work for TRP. Mike is a former LV, CR, and R&N employee, and I've known Mike for years. I last saw Mike at a funeral a month or two before the pandemic.

[TedG]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

The larger transgression for me is where historical accuracy is ignored in the rush to tell a good story without researching the facts. In the past couple of months, I have "learned" that Allentown Yard was a Reading facility (it was CNJ and later Lehigh Valley) and the R&N/NS tracks through Glen Onoko are former CNJ (the CNJ and LV consolidated PA trackage in the 1960's and the CNJ in this area was abandoned in favor of the LV). If these inaccuracies of which I am aware exist (I commented both photos), how many "stories" about areas where I am much less familiar are rewriting history on this site?

Geez. I just hope my research is valid, so I don't offend our resident expert.

PhotoID: 752863 Photograph © Ted Grumbine

/Ted

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by TedG

Geez. I just hope my research is valid, so I don't offend our resident expert.


/Ted

Ya done good.

You did the research. I'm certainly no expert, but I make no statements in my captions that i didn't look up if I don't have firsthand knowledge. Even then, I usually verify.