Old 07-21-2010, 04:31 PM   #26
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
As for the railfans, I am really not a fan of those types of shots, but that's just personal preference. If it was a couple kids playing in the river or a family picnicking , that's human interest. A bunch of foamers trying to keep out of each others' way is not AFAIAC.
I'm not a huge fan but I think sometimes they can be enjoyable.

Image © Mitch Goldman
PhotoID: 312974
Photograph © Mitch Goldman


It's just another aspect of the hobby we all enjoy and, if you think about it, it is in fact, another example of a working railroad only the commodity here is the show. By the way, I didn't note any foamers at the charter, only photographers trying to relive or experience first hand what it was like to be around on the Branch in the 50's.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2010, 07:36 PM   #27
Diamond D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
because it completely obstructs the trucks and usually the front plow/pilot/knuckle area of the locomotive.
Sorry in advance, this is not directed at you specifically Troy, but so-freakin'-what? Trains run on bridges that block the view of the trucks, that's reality... do we really not know what diesel locomotive trucks look like? Or a front coupler?

Now that's not to say that RP screeners never let anything in without the trucks showing, I'm sure I have at least a few in my stream with obstructing objects where the overall aesthetic must have outweighed the usual basic criteria, which is exactly the type of decision I'm glad they think about. But I see this sentiment about "trucks" repeated in a lot of places, that somehow a locomotive's wheels are the key to an acceptable train shot... makes no sense to me.

Mitch's shot in question, reminds me a lot of a paced snowplow shot (the kind which, uh oh, sometimes don't show the wheels because the snow is in the way) rushing into and through a sea of leaves. But that said, the light IS pretty flat, which lessens the drama and its appeal to me to some extent.
Diamond D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2010, 06:51 PM   #28
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cblaz View Post
Mitch, you're overlooking the major difference between Ron's pan and yours. In Ron's shot, I can see the entire nose and lead truck of the CSX unit. I don't see how this could get on.

- Chris
Image © John Wiesmann
PhotoID: 332583
Photograph © John Wiesmann


I'll assume it's safe to say that a screener can overlook such issues in an interesting composition.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 02:49 AM   #29
Northern Limits
Senior Member
 
Northern Limits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 611
Default

Mitch, for what it is worth, I really like the shot. The pan is very effective.
The reason for reject is PEQ. To me the locomotive is boringly centered. Can you change the crop, maybe adding something to the left or ???
Change the balance a bit.
__________________
Cheers, Jim.


Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
Northern Limits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 04:17 AM   #30
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Limits View Post
Mitch, for what it is worth, I really like the shot. The pan is very effective.
The reason for reject is PEQ. To me the locomotive is boringly centered. Can you change the crop, maybe adding something to the left or ???
Change the balance a bit.
Hi Jim - I'm glad you liked the shot, at least in concept. I also appreciate your critique and suggestion. I placed the engine in the upper third of the image - any higher and you have too much of an unappealing field while lower you loose the field altogether and replace with an overcast white sky.

I'm letting this one go. Part of my non-RP collection.

Thanks again to all with constructive criticism and advice.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 04:23 AM   #31
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
I'm letting this one go. Part of my non-RP collection.
"letting ... go" = letting go, forever

OR

"letting ... go" = like the dog shot, will reappear in this forum, over and over, as your RP-outrage bone gives you a jolt every now and then?

__________________
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 07-26-2010, 05:28 AM   #32
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

My issue was the comparison to Ron's shot which most here avoided answering directly.

Consequently, with sincere thanks to those who participated, I'm letting go, assuming you, and perhaps Chris let me.*

As for the Dog on a Train - never!

/Mitch

Edit: Add Troy to the list.

Last edited by Mgoldman; 07-26-2010 at 10:51 PM.
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 11:11 AM   #33
california_railfan
Senior Member
 
california_railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 117
Send a message via AIM to california_railfan
Default

I for one am in agreement with Mitch as well, as others, about the lack of consistency lately on RP. The idea of a screening process is great, but if there is no way to gauge the consistency of the screeners in the process, then the process is undoubtedly inaccurate. I would suggest to the Staff that they have some sort of calibration every month. Some sort of poll or quiz that they take individually. It could consisting of a limited amount of images. For example the same 20 images that all the screener's must screen. Each screener has to be able to approve or deny the images *correctly* (for the same reasons as the other screener's) and the results are held until all the screeners have the chance to weight in. If a screener does not do well, or meet the set standard, they are not given permissions to screen that week.

I really enjoy uploading photos for people to see, and RP is definitely the Best place to do so, but I feel a small step such as this would make the process much better and the screening would be much more accurate.

Just a thought...
__________________
Ryan Dadgari
California_railfan
Livermore, CA

My Railpictures.Net Portfolio!

Or

To view my website, click here: Dadgari Photography
california_railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 01:15 PM   #34
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
My issue was the comparison to Ron's shot which most here avoided answering directly.
I think it was answered ad-nauseum, if you agree with the conclusions or not is another story. Jeez, this is going on a week later?
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 02:01 PM   #35
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,020
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by california_railfan View Post
I would suggest to the Staff that they have some sort of calibration every month. Some sort of poll or quiz that they take individually. It could consisting of a limited amount of images. For example the same 20 images that all the screener's must screen. Each screener has to be able to approve or deny the images *correctly* (for the same reasons as the other screener's) and the results are held until all the screeners have the chance to weight in. If a screener does not do well, or meet the set standard, they are not given permissions to screen that week.
Speaking of calibration..... I think we all need some of that occasionally.

Chris Kilroy has indicated here on the forums that a large percentage of the images that go up on the site are screened by just two people. Yes, there are five total Screeners, but two handle most of the load. These are also the two folks who look at appeals. When you appeal, the Screener you get won't be the same one who originally looked at your picture. Therefore, if you appeal and lose, you've essentially gotten the thumbs-down from both of the folks who OWN the site. Since they own the site, they get to decide the content.

In the case of the other Screeners, they are all volunteers. They don't get paid for their time, and I just can't imagine the site owners imposing onerous weekly requirements on folks who graciously offer their time for what can be a thankless job.

We ALL grumble and groan occasionally when an image we happen to like is rejected here....me as much as anyone....but we all have to keep the big picture in mind. We're being allowed to post our work on someone else's site, essentially free of charge. That's a heck of a deal. If we want someplace where we can decide the content, there are a ton of service-providers out there who'd be glad to take our money and set up a site just for us.
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Lots of Steam Railroad stuff there from all over the US.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 04:24 PM   #36
WKUrailfan
Senior Member
 
WKUrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Default

I think RP would have been wise to accept it. Its different, and I think more graphic than an unobstructed pan. Always good to be pushing the envelope. Kudos, mitch.
WKUrailfan 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 08:05 AM.


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