Opinion

[adickson]

Thoughts on the attached picture? I am super picky about graininess. I'm on the fence about this one.

[KevinM]

Hi Anthony,

I wouldn't worry about the graininess in this one. I think the screener will reject it instantly because he won't be able to tell what the heck it is. Others may have differing opinions, but I would not submit something like this.

[Mgoldman]

I'm with Kevin on this one... unless you have the pixels to crop tighter. Even then, not much detail or enough a scene captured to make it worth much more then a glance.

/Mitch

[RobJor]

If the persons head were not chopped in half and it were cropped a little tighter with some more detail in the foreground which does lead your eye in, I could see it as an art photo. In defense of the idea I have seen some night photos accepted which are mostly black nothing with a headlight around the curve and maybe some track visible.

[adickson]

Well, bummer. I am not concerned about RPs interest in it. I have my sights set on CRPA! This is turning out to be one of the shots I love and others are less than enthused with. I might try to work a retake and get a bit closer. That way I have the negative space but hopefully be able to use a more favorable ISO and capture more details of the scene. Hopefully get something between the first photo and the 2nd attached photo (current crowd favorite)

[JimThias]

A guy checking some duct work in a factory?

[adickson]

Originally Posted by JimThias

A guy checking some duct work in a factory?

Without a doubt a caption would be needed. Most folks haven't seen the behind the carbody doors let alone the underside of the dynamic brakes. A definite no go for RP but like I said, I'm going for a different audience.

[JRMDC]

But Anthony, you haven't really said what audience you are going for. Or rather, if you are going for CRPA-type stuff, you haven't said why it works for them. The biggest problem I have is the lack of obvious RR content - even for CRPA, that is a typical element. My second issue is that it's a shot of an arm. I've zoomed in a bit and it's an arm and some greenish surfaces. The flashlight is lighting up something uninteresting, a panel door or some such. Not working for me at all, compositionally or otherwise. Sorry.

[adickson]

I am a sucker for the low, single light source, photos. However, with y'alls input in mind, I took some lights with me and we staged a re shoot. Night and day from the first. Plenty more to look at.

[troy12n]

What the hell exactly are we looking at here? And why should it be accepted on railpictures?

[John West]

In a way I like the first better than the second, simply because it is more abstract. But that said, neither does a whole bunch for me. The second would be a nice illustration for an instruction manual perhaps, but even for that the dark out of focus upper left hand corner detracts. And if it were an instruction manual the guy should probably should have a hard hat on. The kind of image you seem to be after has some interesting potential, but I think you need to go after some strong graphics (which you tried in the first, but it didn't work) or something else to catch the viewers interest (a guy with a flashlight doesn't do it for me). But the basic idea is interesting.

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by adickson

I am not concerned about RPs interest in it. I have my sights set on CRPA!

I wouldn't expect them to fare any better with a sophisticated crowd.

Doesn't work for me, although that probably isn't a sophisticated enough answer.

Loyd L.