Old 12-08-2013, 05:43 PM   #1
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default Explain this... rejected appeal

THIS is acceptable and the kind of image RP would like in it's database:

Image © Mitch Goldman
PhotoID: 212386
Photograph © Mitch Goldman


7,352 views
25 favorites
9 comments

THIS is unacceptable, unappealing and definitely NOT the kind of image that RP finds acceptable to include within it's database:



http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...76&key=9526174


/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 05:45 PM   #2
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Maybe they realized they made a mistake accepting the first one?
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 06:07 PM   #3
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
Maybe they realized they made a mistake accepting the first one?
Admin knows best - the first was rejected also.

'Course, the viewing audience are all idiots.

7,352 views
25 favorites
9 comments

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 06:11 PM   #4
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
'Course, the viewing audience are all idiots.

7,352 views
25 favorites
9 comments
The shot was also submitted in 2007... it's had some time to accumulate views.

I dont know, I am just speaking for myself, I dont see much in the shot that is appealing. The rejected shot very obstructed. Much moreso than the accepted one you use as a comparison.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 06:34 PM   #5
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

It's judgement call territory when you get to this stuff. I'll bet you that the same screener might have accepted the shot on another day. The appeal judge probably didn't see enough to reverse the screener.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 06:36 PM   #6
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
The shot was also submitted in 2007... it's had some time to accumulate views.
Well, for comparison - this shot was submitted in 2008:

Image © troy12n
PhotoID: 246242
Photograph © troy12n


1,004 views
3 favorites
and no comments.

Not everyone likes everything - if I were a screener, I would not reject a wreck shot nor a Darwin shot simply because "I" didn't like it. It just seems rules and guidelines serve little point on RP. If RP admin served on the US Judicial System, "in the case of ________, from 2007" would not apply as rules are rewritten every single day by the unanimous consensus of 2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
I'll bet you that the same screener might have accepted the shot on another day.
EXACTLY.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 06:39 PM   #7
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

By the way - enjoy the image, there is not otherwise a single image in the database of an EBT steel box car - as noted to the screener.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 06:47 PM   #8
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,778
Default

I applaud your drive Mitch. However, it should be apparent to you by now that no one (in the RP command) appears to care. How many times do we need to drive this road and swear over the potholes?

Loyd L.
__________________
What used to be is no more

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 07:03 PM   #9
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
I applaud your drive Mitch. However, it should be apparent to you by now that no one (in the RP command) appears to care. How many times do we need to drive this road and swear over the potholes?

Loyd L.
Here, here.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 07:32 PM   #10
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Would you have been happy if they rejected it for foreground clutter?

I dont think I have seen you this worked up since your dog shot didnt get on.

Last edited by troy12n; 12-08-2013 at 07:35 PM.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 07:34 PM   #11
WMHeilman
Senior Member
 
WMHeilman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Napoleon, OH
Posts: 486
Default

Did you ever think maybe they accepted the first one because it actually has an artsy look to it, and rejected the second one because it looks like a shitty roster shot of something behind some trees?
WMHeilman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 07:41 PM   #12
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WMHeilman View Post
Did you ever think maybe they accepted the first one because it actually has an artsy look to it, and rejected the second one because it looks like a shitty roster shot of something behind some trees?
But they rejected BOTH images. Only an appeal got the first WELL RECEIVED image on.

And no, it never occurred to me that the second one, well received by others outside of RP, was in fact a "shitty roster shot" of the ONLY example of an EBT steel box car on RP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
Would you have been happy if they rejected it for foreground clutter?

I dont think I have seen you this worked up since your dog shot didnt get on.
Troy - no, it would not have made me feel better if rejected for "foreground clutter" since A) That was the entire point of the composition (it's an abandonment shot, not a roster shot) and B) The first shot, nearly IDENTICAL was accepted.

Not worked up - just making a point to the def ears of admin.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 07:45 PM   #13
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
Troy - no, it would not have made me feel better if rejected for "foreground clutter" since A) That was the entire point of the composition (it's an abandonment shot, not a roster shot) and
I guess abandoned shots dont need to comply with the rules then? I guess that makes sense because a lot of them I see on here are cloudy day, poor weather shots. I am not sure I agree with your logic, but hey...

Quote:
B) The first shot, nearly IDENTICAL was accepted.
I dont think they are as identical as you make them out to be.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 07:56 PM   #14
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I guess abandoned shots dont need to comply with the rules then? I guess that makes sense because a lot of them I see on here are cloudy day, poor weather shots. I am not sure I agree with your logic, but hey...
If one shot got in (and was very well received by the RP audience at large as represented by views, favorites and commentary), then why not another that is "similar" yet taken on a different date, different season, of a different subject?



Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I dont think they are as identical as you make them out to be.
Not as identical of your SOU 630 example, for sure, but both are of abandoned, rarely presented freight cars buried behind a curtain of trees. I could crop out the interesting dual-gauge tracks to make them more similar if that helps make my point?

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 07:59 PM   #15
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

I dont know what more to say. Certainly someone appreciates those types of shots, I cant explain the actions of the screeners on a good day with my own shots which may be borderline rules violations.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 08:24 PM   #16
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

The first shot looks nice, the second shot looks like crap and should have gotten a PEQ, not a a similar to previous.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 08:43 PM   #17
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I dont know what more to say. Certainly someone appreciates those types of shots, I cant explain the actions of the screeners on a good day with my own shots which may be borderline rules violations.
I appreciate em, and the time and research Mitch does on the captions should have some merit also. these types of scenes are not going to be around forever, as they slowly succumb to mother nature.
I know how ya feel Mitch, I went back a few years ago to visit the site of the one below during winter only to get the PEQ


Image © Bill Grenchik
PhotoID: 213385
Photograph © Bill Grenchik
sd9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 08:56 PM   #18
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumForce View Post
The first shot looks nice, the second shot looks like crap and should have gotten a PEQ, not a a similar to previous.
Like the screener, you failed to read my statement and just made quick judgement based on your own personal perception of the image.

It was rejected for PEQ - as was the first similar image.

I was able to adequately convey my vision to admin and the first shot was accepted on appeal to great applaud (by way of views, favorting and commentary).

But the past has no bearing on the present on RP.

By the way - I have no great appreciation for this image but I have no objection to it being accepted nor would I resort to calling it "shit". I'm glad it got on. While I'm not a fan, I understand others might be - apparently 6, lol. None-the-less, it could inspire others to shoot something other then diesel wedgies.

Image © Brent Kneebush
PhotoID: 319517
Photograph © Brent Kneebush


/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 08:59 PM   #19
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Do you have a frame with more of the track and less space above the roof of the car?
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 09:21 PM   #20
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Do you have a frame with more of the track and less space above the roof of the car?
Charles, an interesting thought! While this is uncropped and as I intended to present it - an abandoned box car in the woods, I am open to suggestions.

I could crop tighter and remove the sky and position the one of a kind steel box car higher in the frame and make it less centered - though, I would've assumed such an issue would've been specified via a rejection of "bad crop".

I like it as is - maybe I'll have a chance to share it elsewhere where the screening process is much less a hassle - like Trains Magazine or Railfan and Railroad, lol.

(Interesting observation, again - and I'll definitely take a second look. Thanks!)

/Mitch

Last edited by Mgoldman; 12-11-2013 at 01:35 PM.
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 09:24 PM   #21
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Yeah, no idea if it would make a difference. Just when looking at it the first time I didn't notice the track. Second time I thought I'd like to see more of it and don't need the sky.

Probably won't matter. Just a gut reaction.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 10:06 PM   #22
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,645
Default

Son of a gun, if it doesn't in fact look pretty good cropped tighter - in fact, it's more in line with the "accepted" crop from 2007, albeit, a different freight car, location and season.

Name:  EBT BC Woods Crop LR.jpg
Views: 464
Size:  357.2 KB

Worth a resubmission or would the RP database be better off without a single example of an EBT steel box car? Since inclusion would mean all patrons without advanced notification would in fact be forced to view at least the thumb, I'll put it up for a vote. Submit or save the hard drive space for more GEVO's?

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 10:10 PM   #23
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Submit.

(extra needed text so that I can post this)
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2013, 10:13 PM   #24
wds
Senior Member
 
wds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Submit.
I agree, but wait until tomorrow, and do it at a different time of day! My money's on black!
__________________
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
wds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2013, 01:18 AM   #25
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

You guys care way to much about being "well received" and Favorited and commented on. I don't understand that. I have seen some real crap get "well received."

As for your shot, Mitch, it looks like a simple snapshot and not well thought out at all. The cropped down image is MUCH better. As for my lever shot, a lot of thought went into that but looking back on it 5 years later when I have learned so much, I really wish I had done some things differently with it. I will do it again sometime. Also comparing current day shots to the standards of 5 years ago doesn't really jive at all.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce 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 09:23 PM.


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