08-09-2014, 02:43 PM
|
#1
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,885
|
In Cab PAQ?
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 03:18 PM
|
#2
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 633
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
|
Somewhat surprising as rp.net seems to love cab shots, but somehow it doesn't do it for me. I know not much choice, but photo is pretty cramped for one thing.
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 03:58 PM
|
#3
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Central NC
Posts: 236
|
No ear plugs or safety glasses. I wonder if that may be a contributing factor.
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 05:34 PM
|
#4
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by adickson
No ear plugs or safety glasses. I wonder if that may be a contributing factor.
|
Why would that be a contributing factor?
Is railpictures now the safety police?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
If this is why, this would have been a great spot for a three word comment from the screener to take away all doubt -- "no safety vest"
|
That would take effort... got to commend RP administration for their increased involvement they promised. Guess the updated rejection reasons is enough to pacify the masses for the next year or 2?
I was going to throw my 2 cents in here and say I think they should rejected it for PIQ. Try a B&W conversion, it might look better, but I dont see it as-is
Last edited by troy12n; 08-09-2014 at 05:38 PM.
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 04:40 PM
|
#5
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,885
|
Crap. Could be. I didn't think about that. I shared this with the engineer last night and asked if he minded me posting here and to Flickr. If this is why, this would have been a great spot for a three word comment from the screener to take away all doubt -- "no safety vest"
It's a new rule if that's the case. Admittedly from five years ago --
 | PhotoID: 277641 Photograph © Joey Bowman |
Last edited by Joe the Photog; 08-09-2014 at 04:46 PM.
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 05:45 PM
|
#6
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,268
|
Is there seriously a rule about having a safety vest inside the cab?
I like it though. Should be in.
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 06:19 PM
|
#7
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSX1702
Is there seriously a rule about having a safety vest inside the cab?
I like it though. Should be in.
|
As far as I know, the railroads dont even require them to have the vests on while they are operating the locomotive and in the cab...
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 07:09 PM
|
#8
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,603
|
I can't put my finger on it, but the shot just isn't working for me. Technically speaking, there's a fair amount of fine noise in the dark areas and on his left hand. The top two corners are pretty soft as well. That could be a lens related issue.
Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.
My personal photography site
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 07:43 PM
|
#9
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ellwood City, PA
Posts: 61
|
Totally absurd if this was rejected due to no ear plugs or eye protection.
Now for dark and blurry on the other hand...
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 07:55 PM
|
#10
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,160
|
99% of the screen team and 1% of the RP viewers are deeply concerned about the issues raised here.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 12:05 AM
|
#11
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
|
I think the thread is getting carried away; there is no evidence here that work rules are the issue.
One thought that comes to mind is that maybe the screener doesn't care for the in-your-face hand and the large forearm.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 12:37 AM
|
#12
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I think the thread is getting carried away; there is no evidence here that work rules are the issue.
One thought that comes to mind is that maybe the screener doesn't care for the in-your-face hand and the large forearm.
|
Maybe whomever screened it could speak up and speculation wouldnt be necessary. Like I said, I think personally the shot has other issues, but if they did reject it for the reasons speculated, that's ridiculous
Last edited by troy12n; 08-10-2014 at 12:45 AM.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 12:59 AM
|
#13
|
Met Fan
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,038
|
The picture is all engineer and not enough train. I think you needed a winder lens to get more of the cab and to make him smaller. (This is all in regards to framing.)
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 03:26 AM
|
#14
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 24
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks
The picture is all engineer and not enough train. I think you needed a winder lens to get more of the cab and to make him smaller. (This is all in regards to framing.)
|
Honestly, that's kind of how I felt as well. I've tried quite a few shots that were more like portraits of various railroad employees doing their job, and they've all been PAQ'd. When including humans, I generally try to think about if the shot would still work if the person wasn't in it.
__________________
Photos now. Sleep later.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 03:44 AM
|
#15
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by B7BBQ
Honestly, that's kind of how I felt as well. I've tried quite a few shots that were more like portraits of various railroad employees doing their job, and they've all been PAQ'd. When including humans, I generally try to think about if the shot would still work if the person wasn't in it.
|
Well that doesn't work, sometimes the human makes the scene and without them you simply don't have a shot.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:39 PM
|
#16
|
Met Fan
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumForce
Well that doesn't work, sometimes the human makes the scene and without them you simply don't have a shot.
|
This is true - but there is a difference (perhaps just in the mind of the beholder) between an image of railroading with a human at the center of it and a picture of a human who happens to be railroading - and I see that is the difference in Joe's image... he caught the latter.
Now, is that easily defined, like had he been pulled out 10mm more to make the operating stand more prominent? Not really, but there is something there to that. It is more about capturing the interaction between man and machine than it is about capturing man.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 01:55 AM
|
#17
|
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 185
|
Your subject is stiff, like he's enduring something worse than his last root canal. If you got him to loosen up, show a little personality, photo would improve hundredsfold.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:25 AM
|
#18
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,632
|
One screener simply didn't like it. That's the grounds enough for a rejection.
No rules and never mattered whether there is similar and worse in the database.
You can appeal and see if another screener likes it.
Personally, I don't like it either - looks either staged or posed, (even if not).
I'd have accepted it - it meets rules and guidelines in place and was nicely captured, the composition is nice, angle appealing, perfectly exposed and sharp, but again, this is RP - none of that seems to carry enough weight.
/Mitch
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:29 AM
|
#19
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,885
|
I'll look through other shots. Not staged or posed; train was rolling down the tracks. I am having lens issues though. Not sure why I chose to carry that one, but it's not in my bag anymore.
Is the attachment any better?
Last edited by Joe the Photog; 08-10-2014 at 02:33 AM.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:33 AM
|
#20
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
|
Mitch, I respect the hell out of you but good god your black helicopter stuff gets old.
There are a lot of issues with this photo and it simply doesn't work in my eye. So instead of giving a long laundry list of items to fix and then someone getting pissed off when they fix each one and get another they give it a PAQ right off the bat.
Seems to me they are doing EXACTLY what you have wanted them to do all this time, flat out say we don't want this, don't waste our time.
Or we could make a ginourmous conspiracy theory out of the whole thing, I guess that is way more fun.
And Joe, not digging the second one either.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:34 AM
|
#21
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,885
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumForce
There are a lot of issues with this photo and it simply doesn't work in my eye.
|
Feel free to list them all. That was kinda the point of this thread.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:35 AM
|
#22
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,632
|
If it was a lens issue - don't you think they would tell you.
I mean it - don't you go ahead and think they would tell you - they won't. Lol.
PAQ I think is the call here - and perhaps because it simply looks staged. You can
be running down the track at speed and still have an uncomfortable look captured
when a person knows they are being photographed.
Or, it is soft, noisy and looks like it was taken by a cell phone. Yeah, that's it -
that seems to be the call with every photo that is ever rejected eventually.
/Mitch
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:39 AM
|
#23
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
|
Second one could be a worker handling a valve or other setting just about anywhere. Not obviously RR enough for my tastes.
From a non-RR perspective, no oomph in it, nothing that says "interesting".
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:44 AM
|
#24
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
|
Color, Grain, Crop, Noise, Soft, Blurry, Angle, Exposure, Lighting.
I really dig your stuff, Joe and this is in no way representative of your work. The color noise in his shirt and face is really glaring, maybe has something to do with the image being dark and you trying to make something out of it?
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
Last edited by MagnumForce; 08-10-2014 at 02:49 AM.
|
|
|
08-10-2014, 02:51 AM
|
#25
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,885
|
So you're saying Wyatt would cuss at me and call me names if I posted this to his little FB group?
In any event, I'll put this one in my personal collection for the time being.
Last edited by Joe the Photog; 08-10-2014 at 02:54 AM.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:52 PM.
|