Subject too far away

[Daniel SIMON]

The shot below has been rejected with the reason that the subject is too far away.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...59&key=4502121

I have found a lot of pictures on RP where the train is very small in the landscape. Please do not get me wrong. I have nothing against the photographers or the against the pictures that I have attached below. These are all master shots (they all got a Screener choice).

My photo could have been rejected for other reasons (comments welcome) but I can hardly agree with the given rejection reason.

Kind regards,
Daniel

PhotoID: 506545 Photograph © John Crisanti

PhotoID: 495405 Photograph © Mike Danneman

PhotoID: 494585 Photograph © Matt C. BatrynRodriguez

PhotoID: 474510 Photograph © John Crisanti

PhotoID: 459891 Photograph © John Crisanti

PhotoID: 389148 Photograph © Nick DAmato (Diamond D)

[BobE]

Nothing wrong with putting your train in a large landscape. Good photo. I can't provide any more insight as to why it was rejected than what has been said here dozens of times before.

If you get a second chance, a couple of suggestions. Level horizon. Seems that the train is going downhill slightly.

Second, cropping. Your subject is very close to bisecting the frame horizontally. Try cropping from the bottom, or better, add sky at the top. I'd hate for you to lose all those dandelions in the foreground.

[conrail1990]

Your foreground is very uninteresting to me. I think the shot would work better if taken at the fence line rather then including the fence line.

[JRMDC]

Daniel, sorry to say, but your shot does not compare in compositional quality to the examples you show. The issue is not that the train is small, the issue is that the train is small in a not-so-interesting way.

No different, conceptually, than a backlit shot being rejected by RP but a backlit shot with interesting light and composition being accepted.

[Daniel SIMON]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

Daniel, sorry to say, but your shot does not compare in compositional quality to the examples you show. The issue is not that the train is small, the issue is that the train is small in a not-so-interesting way.

No different, conceptually, than a backlit shot being rejected by RP but a backlit shot with interesting light and composition being accepted.

Hi Janusz,

I must agree with you on the compositional issue. This is certainly why my shot has not got a Screener choice ........

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by Daniel SIMON

Hi Janusz,

I must agree with you on the compositional issue. This is certainly why my shot has not got a Screener choice ........

As you have many, many other shots of much higher quality, you need not feel too badly about this one not getting on.

[Chase55671]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

Daniel, sorry to say, but your shot does not compare in compositional quality to the examples you show. The issue is not that the train is small, the issue is that the train is small in a not-so-interesting way.

No different, conceptually, than a backlit shot being rejected by RP but a backlit shot with interesting light and composition being accepted.

Will be hard to provide more helpful or accurate commentary than the nail-on-the-head statements above.

Chase

[miningcamper1]

This is nowhere near the "Where's Waldo" category. And definitely not among the 85-90% of shots that don't interest.

Still, there's a 99% probability I would have shot from the fence line.

[JimThias]

The dirt road isn't doing you any favors. I probably would have stood at the far edge of the road but still included the fence line (which I like for a foreground element).