Standing on tracks for photos - Page 2

John Fladung · 10-11-2006, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by becker

SOZ, I'm talking about the point on a thread regarding this off the forums. What may look to be in the center of the tracks may not be. And that should be thought about before making accusations.

--Louis

Can you elaborate on "off the forums" Louis? I'm a little confused about this statement out of the clear blue...

Christopher Muller · 10-11-2006, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Fladung

Can you elaborate on "off the forums" Louis? I'm a little confused about this statement out of the clear blue...

as am I, and probably everyone else.

The photo in question was clearly taken ON the tracks next to the one the train was on. You admitted it in the initial post in this thread, the very first one. There is no way with a 4x zoom this could be a visualization.

PhotoID: 160893
Photograph © Louis Becker

BusyEMT, is this what you are trying to say -that its okay to stand on the tracks- or is this getting mixed up here?

hoydie17 · 10-11-2006, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christopher Muller

as am I, and probably everyone else.

Thirded. Motion carried.

Drewster · 10-11-2006, 05:30 AM

The Rule on the Railroad, is 20ft away from the track, one arms length MINIMUM from the edge of the Tie. But always stay further away from that, NEVER stand, or walk in the middle of the track, and ALWAYS, EXPECT MOVEMENT AT ANY TIME FROM ANY TRACK!

Studogg120 · 10-11-2006, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Studogg120

I don't know... still sounds like a bad idea to me. Whenever I go train watching, I stand at least 20 feet away from the tracks.

Actually I do remember a time I stood basically on the track to get a shot that wasn't worth it. A BNSF train was stopped at a signal waiting to proceed into the LA Harbor. The engineer pointed to a spot in front of the locomotive suggesting a place to take a picture. He was two or three tracks over and there was a pole in my way, I got dangerously close to the rails took the picture and basically ran away from the tracks because I was scared. It still was a bad shot anyway.

becker · 10-11-2006, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christopher Muller

The photo in question was clearly taken ON the tracks next to the one the train was on. You admitted it in the initial post in this thread, the very first one. There is no way with a 4x zoom this could be a visualization.

PhotoID: 160893
Photograph © Louis Becker

Excuse me, where did you read that?

hoydie17 · 10-11-2006, 03:29 PM

I think what Aaron is trying to say is that a telephoto lens can provide the visual image that a person maybe standing on the tracks when in fact they could be on the outside of a curve. So it's important to examine a photo carefully to make sure.

Telephoto lenses have smaller focal areas, hence you can normally tell if it's a long focal length by looking at the periphery of the photo and seeing how much is out of focus.

The photo which Chris pointed out, that is clearly taken from within the guage, or dangerously close to, the adjacent track. The entire image is in good focus which suggests a short focal length, and given the angle to the train, it would appear to be within a few feet of the train's line of advance.

Does that mean that Louis didn't take the necessary precautions? I don't know, I'd like to think he did. My point was, what does that tell some 8 year old kid that looks at that photo?

The bottom line is, and as has been said, If you don't work for the RR, you don't belong on their tracks for any purpose other than to cross at a public grade crossing or by invitation from a RR representative.

Trains are very dangerous, just ask anyone who's had a near-miss or even a not so near-miss with them. They're startlingly quiet even at speed, and the crew may have little to no idea if they've struck you near the tracks.

Sean

Christopher Muller · 10-11-2006, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoydie17

The photo which Chris pointed out, that is clearly taken from within the guage, or dangerously close to, the adjacent track. The entire image is in good focus which suggests a short focal length, and given the angle to the train, it would appear to be within a few feet of the train's line of advance.

Thank you. Glad someone else was able to see it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoydie17

The bottom line is, and as has been said, If you don't work for the RR, you don't belong on their tracks for any purpose other than to cross at a public grade crossing or by invitation from a RR representative.

Exactly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by becker

Excuse me, where did you read that?

You're excused.

Quote:

Originally Posted by becker

What are some of your opinions about standing on tracks adjacent to trains to take photos? Obviously I'm talking about unused/overgrown or unusable sidings. Not main lines.

Ween · 10-12-2006, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by becker

Excuse me, where did you read that?

It doesn't have to be spelled out to make the assumption that this shot was taken on or very, very close to the tracks. My eyes have deceived me before (alcohol was usually a contributing factor, but I'm stone sober now) and this shot 'looks' like it was taken on the tracks or grade crossing.

The easiest way to show it wasn't taken from the tracks and have people know for sure it wasn't is to post an attachment of the uncropped original that shows that you were standing to the right of the tracks at the time. That would spell things out clearly, and would help alot of us recalibrate or eyes and what they're telling us...

Christopher Muller · 10-12-2006, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ween

My eyes have deceived me before (alcohol was usually a contributing factor, but I'm stone sober now) and this shot 'looks' like it was taken on the tracks or grade crossing.

This is your stomping ground Ween, shot here before?

Ween · 10-12-2006, 12:54 AM

No, can't remember shooting in Reynolds...no shots in RP from there for me. The Hillsboro Sub south of Thompson and north of Fargo sees me very little...

E3429 · 10-12-2006, 04:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoydie17

My point was, what does that tell some 8 year old kid that looks at that photo?
Sean

That the whole world needs to be santized to a level that's safe for 8 year olds?

hoydie17 · 10-12-2006, 04:15 AM

Touche' touche'

chauncey87 · 10-15-2006, 03:30 AM

I think asking people to go through the trouble of making sure their telephoto shots or otherwise legal shots don't look like they're taken from on the tracks is asking a bit too much.

I had a lot of people on another forum who thought this photo was taken on the tracks (with a live 3rd rail no less, and right in front of a police booth - as if I were that stupid!) If someone sees it and takes it to mean that it's OK to walk on the tracks then that's their problem. Kids should be taught not to walk on tracks and adults should know better.

And what about special events and excursions, like Metro-North RR's annual Open House? There are plenty of barricades there, but nobody includes the barricades in their photos, so all you see is that the person was standing on the tracks. And what about photos taken past the end of the track, behind a bumper? Should these photos be kept off the Internet and out ofjust because some moron might take it to mean it's OK to walk onto the property? I think not.

If anything, I love the angles I can get when zoomed in, and the head-on-from-behind-a-curve angle is one of my favorites. It's not my job to make my photos child-proof or idiot-proof.

just my 0.02%.

UPTRAIN · 10-15-2006, 07:52 AM

Just remember when you people are standing on the tracks, anymore you're on camera, and they'll get after you if they want to.