Old 07-06-2010, 06:43 PM   #1
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default Really Screeners?

Come on now. I don't know if they are playing games with me or what, but I dont get it.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1130371965
Digitally Manipulated. Umm no it isnt. How could they even come up with that one?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=832221&key=0
Similar to Previous? Really? Just looked through the 150 most recent In-Cab shots and not one is even close.

Reject it for a valid reason, dont play games.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 06:49 PM   #2
Chase55671
RailPictures.Net Crew
 
Chase55671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nitro, WV
Posts: 2,195
Send a message via AIM to Chase55671 Send a message via MSN to Chase55671
Default

Max,

I can see how they found the image to be digitally manipulated. The blur of the background with the flash lighting up the foreground is a unique effect that I'm sure took a while to capture just right. I would explain your process in an appeal if you really like the image.

On the second photo, I believe it was rejected because it looks similar to your accepted in-cab shot that is now the To24. What is the hurry to upload the in-cab photos? I would wait a while before submitting another one and I would say you'll be alright.

Chase
__________________
Chase Gunnoe
Railpictures.Net Crew
Rail-Videos.Net Crew
Click here to view my photos at Railpictures.Net
SLR Night Photography Tutorial | Railpictures.Net Beginners Guide
Chase55671 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 06:51 PM   #3
cblaz
Senior Member
 
cblaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Marlboro, New Jersey
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1130371965
Digitally Manipulated. Umm no it isnt. How could they even come up with that one?
How can they come up with that? Maybe because his hat and the back of his collar is blurred even though he's sitting still?

- Chris
__________________
- Christopher Blaszczyk
My shots on RP: http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=284
cblaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 06:54 PM   #4
Joe the Photog
A dude with a camera
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,922
Default

There appears to be some weird halo effect on the back of the dude's head in the DM'ed shot. It might be from perfectly legit processing or from using a flash, but to the screener looking at the shot for ten seconds or less, it looked Digitally Manipulated.
__________________
Joseph C. Hinson Photography
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 06:56 PM   #5
BurghMan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 130
Default

I don't see any digital manipulation in the first photo, however I think it should have been rejected PEQ. Your previous photo that was accepted was more of a railroad photo since it showed most of the control stand and you can see the tracks ahead thru the front windows.

Although you do have a story to tell in the caption of the second rejection, it is really nothing but a photo of the back of a guy's head and the rear portion of a cab radio.

I believe this is some sort of museum or tourist operation. I'm glad the shots weren't taken on a class one railroad where the engineer could get in trouble for having his feet up in the photo!

(I'm sure I'll get flamed for that last comment!)
BurghMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 06:58 PM   #6
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cblaz View Post
How can they come up with that? Maybe because his hat and the back of his collar is blurred even though he's sitting still?
6/10 second exposure, looks to me like he moved his head by mistake. Otherwise that would be an awesome manipulation, including the reflection of the window with wiper.


I don't care for the shot, however. The side of the neck and behind the ear view, not to mention the arm hair, makes for a poor shot. The interesting cab equipment is viewed from the side so you can't see anything interesting and the microphone cord just doesn't cut it as a substitute.

The other shot, also poor, a big bland box in the foreground, the inside green and outside green runs together, the back of the head and neck is bad, the cutoff arm. Just nothing of interest in the shot at all. Sorry, neither work for me at all.
__________________
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 07-06-2010, 06:59 PM   #7
GMEMD
Member
 
GMEMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 88
Default

Just curious, if that unit's moving, why is the automatic brake valve cut-out, and the reverser removed?

Last edited by GMEMD; 07-06-2010 at 07:26 PM.
GMEMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:01 PM   #8
Joe the Photog
A dude with a camera
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BurghMan View Post
Although you do have a story to tell in the caption of the second rejection, it is really nothing but a photo of the back of a guy's head and the rear portion of a cab radio.
I was thinking the same thing about this shot too. In my TV days, I was always told that the pictures on screen should be telling the viewer what the reporter or anchor is talking about. In this case, we don't "see" enough correlation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BurghMan View Post
I believe this is some sort of museum or tourist operation. I'm glad the shots weren't taken on a class one railroad where the engineer could get in trouble for having his feet up in the photo!
I was kinda thinking the same thing.
__________________
Joseph C. Hinson Photography
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:07 PM   #9
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

I mean its fine if they don't get on I was just peeved with their reasoning.
Chris, I wasn't aware you were with me when the shot was taken. I must have missed you next to me as Kale sat perfectly still in a rocking locomotive and didn't move his head whatsoever to cause a slight blur. Odd.
Chase, It worked just right as it was dark enough out for the flash to illuminate him and have the outside not overexposed.

Also, if it was digitally manipulated I would be proud as hell! It would be an amazing one! Not only would I have had to blur the outside from the front window WITHIN a shadow, also on the side window reflection. lol
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:08 PM   #10
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMEMD View Post
Just curious, if that unit's moving, why is the automatice brake valve cut-out, and the reverser removed?
Push pull, trailing unit.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:09 PM   #11
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

I think that is a movie screen back drop which explains the scratch marks on the sreen in the second photo. It's like a trainer cab.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:11 PM   #12
GMEMD
Member
 
GMEMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
Push pull, trailing unit.
Oh ok, just the shot kind of lead me to thinking it's a lead unit the way he's sitting there.

Last edited by GMEMD; 07-06-2010 at 09:20 PM.
GMEMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:11 PM   #13
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

If it was a trailing unit, what are the marks outside the window on top of the blurred green?
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:12 PM   #14
Joe the Photog
A dude with a camera
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
Also, if it was digitally manipulated I would be proud as hell! It would be an amazing one! Not only would I have had to blur the outside from the front window WITHIN a shadow, also on the side window reflection. lol
You might have missed the part where they view these images for a very short period of time and then move on to the next shot. Then you made the sarcastic comment to Chris that you missed him standing in the cab next to you. But then you use the reverse logic when you get mad at the screeners for why the rejected the shot. They weren't standing with you in the cab either, so they can't possibly know for certain whether the shot was DM'ed. They just know that something doesn't look real right to them.

In fact, you kinda gave them a reason to reject the shot since you admitt the dude suffers from at least a little motion blur. Maybe 0.6 seconds was too long to hand hold a shot from inside a moving loco rocking back and forth.
__________________
Joseph C. Hinson Photography

Last edited by Joe the Photog; 07-06-2010 at 07:18 PM.
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:15 PM   #15
GMEMD
Member
 
GMEMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz View Post
I think that is a movie screen back drop which explains the scratch marks on the sreen in the second photo. It's like a trainer cab.
I noticed that, something definetly weird there.
GMEMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:24 PM   #16
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMEMD View Post
I noticed that, something definetly weird there.
Im thinking they are branches from the initial flash.
__________________
Walter Scriptunas II
Scriptunasimages.com
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:51 PM   #17
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

I dont really think it's fake, the hat can be explained by him moving his head or the motion of the cab. However the caption of the second one isnt entirely accurate since you mentioned it is a push-pull at the end of the train. If that matters.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 08:11 PM   #18
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter S View Post
Im thinking they are branches from the initial flash.
Correct. Kind of a neat effect. Sorry I didn't realize the screeners couldn't tell what a motion blur was, and no it wasn't handheld. Also thanks to Dewitz for calling me a liar indirectly.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 11:52 PM   #19
rathman11
Senior Member
 
rathman11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bolivar, MO
Posts: 243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter S View Post
Im thinking they are branches from the initial flash.
The closer you look at it the more obvious it is that they are indeed branches. You can actually see the leaves attached to the branches.
__________________
Jason R.

My RP photos

Flickr Photos
rathman11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2010, 12:48 AM   #20
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,666
Default

Looks good to me. Maybe it looked "too good" to the screener. The flash makes for nice lighting and a sharp locked in initial exposure. Nice job.

I'd appeal - hopefully the screener was looking for confirmation before just accepting on faith alone.

I did not take note of your top of last 24, but, maybe the same as similar was due to this image looking like the rejected image prior. Though, they look different to me.

Best of luck. With results like that, no need to play it safer with a faster shutter speed - good gamble!

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2010, 12:52 AM   #21
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cblaz View Post
How can they come up with that? Maybe because his hat and the back of his collar is blurred even though he's sitting still?

- Chris
His head may have been going forward, and with a slow enough shutter speed that blur would appear. I see some evidence of blurring around other areas of his head as well.

Max, do you really think they are intentionally playing games with you, or perhaps the screener just looked at it quickly and easily mistook it for being a fake blur? Did you use the California blur filter for that?


Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
Correct. Kind of a neat effect. Sorry I didn't realize the screeners couldn't tell what a motion blur was, and no it wasn't handheld. Also thanks to Dewitz for calling me a liar indirectly.
Come on, Max. You criticize Travis for indirectly calling you a liar, yet it's ok for you to criticize the screeners by indirectly calling them uneducated?
__________________
.
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

Last edited by JimThias; 07-07-2010 at 12:59 AM.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2010, 01:04 AM   #22
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

It's a long exposer with fill flash, Thats all you need to put in the comment box as you up load it. I had the same happen to me with this shot and a nice short what I did got pasted the digital manipulated photo.
Image © Scott Marsh
PhotoID: 288988
Photograph © Scott Marsh
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2010, 01:42 AM   #23
LSRC Railfan
Senior Member
 
LSRC Railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 274
Default

I think you're missing the fact that you just got this photo on.

Image © Max Medlin
PhotoID: 330461
Photograph © Max Medlin
LSRC Railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2010, 01:50 AM   #24
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by milwman View Post
It's a long exposer with fill flash, Thats all you need to put in the comment box as you up load it. I had the same happen to me with this shot and a nice short what I did got pasted the digital manipulated photo.
Image © Scott Marsh
PhotoID: 288988
Photograph © Scott Marsh
What was on the back of the engineer's shirt that you felt had to be blurred out? Rather jarring.
__________________
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 07-07-2010, 01:54 AM   #25
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

His name and I didn't ask him if he wanted his name on the net so rubbed it out. Felt it was the right thing to do.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman 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 02:59 AM.


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