Old 04-27-2007, 01:36 AM   #1
Amo de trenes
Banned
 
Amo de trenes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Somewhere in North America
Posts: 32
Default Wedge Shot?

Well, last week I had a shot rejected cuz it was a "wedge" shot . What is that?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Picture.jpg (211.8 KB, 572 views)
Amo de trenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 01:44 AM   #2
PLEzero
Senior Member
 
PLEzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh,PA
Posts: 675
Default

This photo suffers from a bad angle, meaning that it’s far too simply composed. 'Wedge' simply enough refers to the angle of the train resembling a wedge. The front of the train is large and fades to a smaller proportion on the right side of the photo. This is merely a case of dull composition and distracting shadows. Try to not stand so close to the tracks next time, it will allow for a bit better composition.
__________________
Brad Morocco
Candyland, PA
My Flickr Photos
My RP.net Photos
PLEzero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 01:54 AM   #3
Amo de trenes
Banned
 
Amo de trenes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Somewhere in North America
Posts: 32
Thumbs up

Thanks, PLEzero, I was kinda expecting something like "rpl is making progress" or "3 accounts, sure to have found it out by now". Glad to see you were able to get over (sorry if that sounded rude) me supposedly being "rpl".
Amo de trenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 02:04 AM   #4
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Hmmmm, could just be coincidence, but that shot attached above was taken with a Fuji Finepix. Kinda odd that rpl also used a Finepix:

http://www.railpictures.net/forums/s...53&postcount=3

I'm just sayin'..........
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 02:08 AM   #5
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amo de trenes
Well, last week I had a shot rejected cuz it was a "wedge" shot . What is that?
I don't recall "wedge shot" being a category of rejection, and there are certainly plenty of accepted wedgies on RP. Next time please post within the three-day window that rejects are kept on the database and provide a link to the reject so we can read what was said.
__________________
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 04-27-2007, 04:40 AM   #6
Everywhere West
Member
 
Everywhere West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I don't recall "wedge shot" being a category of rejection, and there are certainly plenty of accepted wedgies on RP. Next time please post within the three-day window that rejects are kept on the database and provide a link to the reject so we can read what was said.
I just had a reject for that, but more important is the screeners standards are on an ever increasing measure, There are plenty of pictures in the data base that wouldn`t get accepted today. Also: as you get a considerable amount in the data base they seem to be more tolerant from an individual standpoint.
__________________
"You ain't stopping at this hotel, kid. My hotel! The stars at night, I put 'em there. And I know the presidents, all of them. And I go where I damn well please. Even the chairman of the New York Central can't do it better. My road, kid, and I don't give lessons and I don't take partners. Your ass don't ride this train!"
Everywhere West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 04:48 AM   #7
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

What was the additional text following the 'Wedge Shot' reject? Just curious as I haven't seen it...yet!
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 05:35 AM   #8
Everywhere West
Member
 
Everywhere West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
What was the additional text following the 'Wedge Shot' reject? Just curious as I haven't seen it...yet!
- Bad Angle: This rejection applies to going away shots which are typically not accepted unless they feature unique composition or rare subject material. This can also apply to images where part of the train is cut off in which case we would suggest, show us more than just a wedge angle of a train.
__________________
"You ain't stopping at this hotel, kid. My hotel! The stars at night, I put 'em there. And I know the presidents, all of them. And I go where I damn well please. Even the chairman of the New York Central can't do it better. My road, kid, and I don't give lessons and I don't take partners. Your ass don't ride this train!"
Everywhere West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 05:44 AM   #9
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Oh, so not 'Wedge Shot' but rather Bad Angle. Yeah, they're not too keen on the power and some of the cars...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 06:38 AM   #10
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

I think sometimes it's easy to default to a particular rejection when a screener simply does not like the shot. There is something unappealing about this shot. Not sure if it's the angle, lighting, shadows, etc. SOMETHING is there that the screener didn't care for. I've seen plenty of shots from a similar angle, so it can't be entirely because of that. If the lighting was perfect, less background clutter to the left, no distracting shadows, unique train, etc., and the angle was EXACTLY the same, I doubt they would have rejected for bad angle or wedgie.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 08:51 AM   #11
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,909
Default

Don't overlook the distracting shadows on the lead engine or the fact that the shot looks to be unlevel.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 01:43 PM   #12
Amo de trenes
Banned
 
Amo de trenes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Somewhere in North America
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
What was the additional text following the 'Wedge Shot' reject? Just curious as I haven't seen it...yet!

I cant remember exactly, but it was something like: "Standard 3/8 wedge shot". It was also rejected for bad cropping.
Amo de trenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 02:19 PM   #13
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
I think sometimes it's easy to default to a particular rejection when a screener simply does not like the shot. There is something unappealing about this shot. Not sure if it's the angle, lighting, shadows, etc. SOMETHING is there that the screener didn't care for. I've seen plenty of shots from a similar angle, so it can't be entirely because of that. If the lighting was perfect, less background clutter to the left, no distracting shadows, unique train, etc., and the angle was EXACTLY the same, I doubt they would have rejected for bad angle or wedgie.
Only thing I see vary is shots focusing on locomotives such as this one:

Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 172393
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus


Whether or not they get rejected for bad angle seems to vary. If I am in a good enough position for a shot like this, I shoot as much of the train as I can since they seem to have a better chance of acceptance.
__________________
- My photos at RailPictures.net
- My videos at Rail-Videos.net
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 08:06 PM   #14
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Becker
Only thing I see vary is shots focusing on locomotives such as this one:

Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 172393
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus


Whether or not they get rejected for bad angle seems to vary. If I am in a good enough position for a shot like this, I shoot as much of the train as I can since they seem to have a better chance of acceptance.
Yeah, the whole 'motive' behind that shot was to have the focus fall squarely on the engines since it's pretty rare to see three Sante Fe-lettered Warbonnets running elephant style in 2007. Trying to highlight the power, especially if it's something rare, unique, or not often seen, with one or two cars trailing is where the screener's (thankfully) make 'exceptions.' Like this one:
Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 176193
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus


Other times if it's to show the scenery or background, you'll see those shots:
Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 168914
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus

Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 157846
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus


Or if the train's on a curve:
Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 175080
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus


Or you're showing a detail shot that modelers might use:
Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 172273
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus


So, yeah, there are plenty of exceptions to the 'rule,' but having a shot of a UP SD70M, another engine trailing and one or two cars and you're running the risk of Bad Angle. I hate cutting off the the end of the train if I can help it, but sometimes those 'rules' are made to be snapped (pun intended)...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 09:58 PM   #15
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
Yeah, the whole 'motive' behind that shot was to have the focus fall squarely on the engines since it's pretty rare to see three Sante Fe-lettered Warbonnets running elephant style in 2007.
And yet, the image is unlevel. That seems to get overlooked quite often as well.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 11:18 PM   #16
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
And yet, the image is unlevel. That seems to get overlooked quite often as well.
By less than 0.5 degrees (if that, and if you can tell by the thumbnail, you're a better man than me). So, someone questioned the composition, another on it being unlevel...anyone else want to take a shot at this apparent piñata shot? C'mon, give it a whack!
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2007, 11:52 PM   #17
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
By less than 0.5 degrees (if that, and if you can tell by the thumbnail, you're a better man than me). So, someone questioned the composition, another on it being unlevel...anyone else want to take a shot at this apparent piñata shot? C'mon, give it a whack!


Actually, I noticed the unlevel nature (0.77 clockwise on my screen) when I looked at the full size. I've become particularly picky of unlevel shots over the last year, and even the slightest bit catches my eye.

Here is an example of a shot that I absolutely love (one of the my faves on railpics) that I WISH the photographer would have leveled before submitting:

Image © Matthew Hicks
PhotoID: 178093
Photograph © Matthew Hicks


Level your shots, people!!!
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 02:29 AM   #18
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,909
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
So, someone questioned the composition, another on it being unlevel...anyone else want to take a shot at this apparent piñata shot? C'mon, give it a whack!
Well, I did hear a report that not only did it leave a nasty message for Alec Baldwin's daughter, but it was also at dog fights on Michael Vick's property.




Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 02:59 AM   #19
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
Yeah, the whole 'motive' behind that shot was to have the focus fall squarely on the engines since it's pretty rare to see three Sante Fe-lettered Warbonnets running elephant style in 2007. Trying to highlight the power, especially if it's something rare, unique, or not often seen, with one or two cars trailing is where the screener's (thankfully) make 'exceptions.'
I guess I'm failing to see the logic behind this idea. With rare power I would think you would want to try to get a good picture, rather than trying to focus on the power and get a crappy picture. It's no fun to look at a picture with good power only to have the composition of the picture...suck. If I want to focus on the power, I'll take a roster or a zoom shot.
Just think how much better of a picture of the SD75Ms you would have if you taken it properly.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 03:55 AM   #20
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
With rare power I would think you would want to try to get a good picture, rather than trying to focus on the power and get a crappy picture. ...Just think how much better of a picture of the SD75Ms you would have if you taken it properly.
Why do you say it's a crappy picture? It turned out exactly how I, the photographer, wanted it to. Isn't that success?

I don't understand your logic: "with rare power I would think you would want to get a good picture rather than just trying to focus on the power..." The power is was what made the photo, IMO. From this location (and there aren't many at 1542L that you can shoot an eastbound train), I had the option of this, a telemash, or profile. I had already shot this power profile:
Image © Chris Paulhamus
PhotoID: 172433
Photograph © Chris Paulhamus


And I didn't think I had enough nose light for a telemash. I could have stood right next to the tracks and taken a wider 3/4 wedge shot, but I liked this option better as you can see all three engines.

But, next time I'm trackside I'll be sure have the 'Mike B. Rules of Properly Shooting Trains' manual with me! That way I'll avoid any crapiness in the future...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 04:08 AM   #21
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
Why do you say it's a crappy picture? It turned out exactly how I, the photographer, wanted it to. Isn't that success?

I don't understand your logic: "with rare power I would think you would want to get a good picture rather than just trying to focus on the power..." The power is was what made the photo, IMO. From this location (and there aren't many at 1542L that you can shoot an eastbound train), I had the option of this, a telemash, or profile. I had already shot this power profile:

And I didn't think I had enough nose light for a telemash. I could have stood right next to the tracks and taken a wider 3/4 wedge shot, but I liked this option better as you can see all three engines.

But, next time I'm trackside I'll be sure have the 'Mike B. Rules of Properly Shooting Trains' manual with me! That way I'll avoid any crapiness in the future...
Personal success and overall success are different. You got the shot you wanted and that's great. However, a shot like the one originally posted of the SD75M is not a great shot IMO simply because all you can really see is the power. Albeit good power, but if all you want to see is the power, a roster shot is the better option I think.

Good power alone does not make a great shot, regardless of how good/rare it is. The only exception for me is photos from the 60s and 70s, that's when content is more important than composition.

Fact is, the picture of the SD75Ms (172393) isn't a very appealing picture.

The second picture (172433) is an excellent photo I think. I know there are not very many cars visible, but the key difference is that there is something else to look at besides the power and a few cars. There is a nice bridge, a forzen river, etc. unlike the first photo where there is just an open field.

I'm not trying to put you down, but I just don't see how the original photo would be considered good.

Last edited by Mike B.; 04-28-2007 at 04:13 AM.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 06:04 AM   #22
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

We all define success differently, but when it comes down to personal success vs. overall success, I'll chose personal success any day of the week because that's defined by me and no one else. And that's why I take pictures that I like because they're meaningful to me. If someone else enjoys them, then that's great. If not, oh well, it's not gonna stop me from doing what I like.

And, Mike, you're making my point for me and validating the motive behind this shot. The point of the first shot was to focus on the power and you said:
Quote:
a shot like the one originally posted of the SD75M is not a great shot IMO simply because all you can really see is the power.
Mission accomplished! The point was the power and that's what you see! Whether or not it fits somebody else's defintion of "good" is irrelevant to me because the point of the photo was communicated to the viewer.

Quote:
I'm not trying to put you down, but I just don't see how the original photo would be considered good.
It's 'good' in my eyes because it's served its purpose: highlighting the power. One could argue, as you have, that technique-wise there are other potentuially better options available, but that's not how I'm defining the 'success' of this shot.

Thoughts?
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 06:35 AM   #23
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
It's 'good' in my eyes because it's served its purpose: highlighting the power.
Isn't the purpose of taking these photos to actually take good photos? In that aspect, you failed IMO. After all, that's why we're here isn't it?
I'm glad you accomplished your goal of highlighting the power, but why couldn't you highlight it in a different way? Maybe if you turned the camera a little to the left, you could have gotten more of the train in the shot while still getting the wider angle to show the power.
Photos that only show a few cars just bother me.
Again, I'm not trying to be a jerk about this. I actually quite like the majority of your photos.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 06:49 AM   #24
ssw9662
Senior Member
 
ssw9662's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 839
Default

Very interesting...

A search of UP 9063 found the unit exiting South Kearny, NJ on the River Sub where rpl claimed to live one day after the photo date (10/12/04)
__________________
Austin
Canon EOS 7D
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon 50mm f/1.8
My Railpictures.net Photos
flickr
ssw9662 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2007, 06:59 AM   #25
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Isn't the purpose of taking these photos to actually take good photos? In that aspect, you failed IMO.
Yes, but what defines 'good?' It's just like defining success like we just did. In my eyes, this shot is a total success as I've outlined previously.

Quote:
why couldn't you highlight it in a different way?
I think I've covered the background of this shot enough already (i.e. why I chose this angle) and I thought I made my point why in my eyes it was 'good.'

If it's so bad, it's odd that between the two shots, it has more views and comments than the B&W profile shot which you prefer. Not that number of views equals a better photo, but something about it caught the eye of more people and motivated a couple to leave comments. Regardless, I like it, so there's the final judge and jury in my book.

Quote:
Photos that only show a few cars just bother me.
Well, so do people who store their cameras on their sides in the camera bag, so I guess I'm doubly bothersome!!
__________________
Ween 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 06:01 AM.


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