I am being a steam engine

[ccaranna]

Originally Posted by Chris Kilroy

You're dead wrong, Chuck. I screened this shot and after careful (at least 5 minutes of) consideration accepted it with no need for an appeal. I personally think this is an outstanding effort, and the only reason I was hesitant to accept it was because of the backlash I knew would be headed our way if I did; but that wouldn't be fair to the photographer, so I accepted it.

When I screen photos, I pay no allegiance to anyone. I've rejected more photos from other screeners than I can count, and will continue to do so if I feel it's justified. I screen based on the image, not who took it. I do feel that this is an incredible shot, with enough of a motive (showing the railroad's small overall scale relative to the rest of its surroundings) to merit a place in our database. Comparing it to any other photos that may have been rejected is absolutely apples to oranges.

Rail photography is inherently very subjective. With a shot like this, there are probably going to be a fairly equal number of people on both sides of the fence as to whether it has a place here or not. If it's not your cup of tea, skip over it.

After all, I'd love to reject about 90% of the "3/4 angle of common engine in perfect light idling in the yard" shots that come through the queue for "Could you possibly find anything more boring to shoot a picture of?" ... but I don't, because even though they aren't my cup of tea, lots of other people enjoy them.

I just wanted to come back and say that I don't personally have a problem with the shot, it's very nice and I could go on about it's positive attributes, even though it is not *my* cup of tea as far as train pictures are concerned.

Also, I have no problems with images that push the envelope, because believe me, I'm tired of roster shots and common angles in vanilla light with little or no scenic accompinament as well as the next guy.

My only beef is; even though it was denied that the photographer was not considered in determining the picture's acceptance, I still feel that it was. I don't wish to attack anyone or the site owners for that matter since I really do enjoy this site; it's just extremely frustrating for those of us that try to think outside the box to continually get offerings rejected that are anything but a standard, well-lit, 3/4 wedge. And as far as train pictures go, the image that started this thread is really pushing it.

I can live with my stuff not being good enough, but when I see a really subjective photo like that make it in by a contributor that's vehemently complained here in the past, I start to question what's really going on behind the scenes. This also holds true with some other folks that used to be RP.net haters as well, as I've noticed they've returned and are getting some images accepted that most of us could never dream of ever seeing make it.

I'm making this a bigger deal than it is by replying here, but I just wanted to post a follow up to my original post and Chris's response.

Thanks,

Chuck

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by ccaranna

My only beef is; even though it was denied that the photographer was not considered in determining the picture's acceptance, I still feel that it was.

Look, you can feel that way, but you have no basis for that feeling so I would suggest you keep it to yourself. At least that is my one opinion.

it's just extremely frustrating for those of us that try to think outside the box to continually get offerings rejected that are anything but a standard, well-lit, 3/4 wedge.

Ok, now we get to an underlying issue. One impossible to discuss, however, without examples of rejected images. Please reply and attach some, and we can continue the discussion and get somewhere with it.

I can live with my stuff not being good enough, but when I see a really subjective photo like that make it in by a contributor that's vehemently complained here in the past, I start to question what's really going on behind the scenes.

Has Alex Ramos been a vehement complainer in this forum? I missed that. Please post some links to those threads, if you can still find them. My view is that Alex is only an occasional visitor here, and I don't recall any complaints from him.

[Ween]

Originally Posted by John Ryan

I get plenty of rejections, perhaps as many as some of the people here who post constantly about their rejections. Things are not as easy as they seem.

That's the thing...non-screeners don't get to see what type of shots and how many of them get rejected from some of those folks who push the envelope. John Ryan, a much better photographer than me, gets rejections; I rarely see any. But he shoots a much wider variety of things than I do as I tend to focus on the 'vanilla.' For every one or so 'questionable' ones gets through, I'm guessing there's many more that get rejected, regardless of who took the shot.

Has Alex Ramos been a vehement complainer in this forum?

One time, his first post, ~3 years ago, but this was a classic thread. Several of the old regulars, two ex-screeners, AB(2) when he was still learning (ha ha), a handful of banned folks, and a forecast of RP's downfall!
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=2444

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by Ween

One time, his first post, ~3 years ago, but this was a classic thread. Several of the old regulars, two ex-screeners, AB(2) when he was still learning (ha ha), a handful of banned folks, and a forecast of RP's downfall!
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=2444

Wow!

Boy, Alex had some interesting shots, even back then.

[ottergoose]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

Wow!

Boy, Alex had some interesting shots, even back then.

Agreed... some of those rejected shots are outstanding.

[trainboysd40]

Interesting to see some of the people that were banned, too. Some are obvious as to why (And also obvious as to whom I'm talking about) but some seem mild-mannered and level headed.
Makes you wonder who's next...

[ottergoose]

Originally Posted by trainboysd40

Interesting to see some of the people that were banned, too. Some are obvious as to why (And also obvious as to whom I'm talking about) but some seem mild-mannered and level headed.
Makes you wonder who's next...

I would imagine that some of them probably participated in other threads were they were less than civil

[trainboysd40]

Huh, I could have sworn I put a different smiley in that post.
Yeah, some posts can get a little...out of hand, sometimes...

[River Rails Photography]

Originally Posted by Ben Kopicz

(sarcastically) LOL

I just do not see how i work my ass off to try and get a really great photo which is denied and he takes a picture of lights in fog and gets it accepted.

Dude...... did you even LOOK at the photo in depth?

[Joe the Photog]

I think his shot through the broken window of a ghetto car of the SP E unit is heads and shoulders above the three pixels of light that is allegedly a train shot. As much as I love artistic shots, I still come here to see shots of trains, not skylines.


Joe

[Joe the Photog]

Originally Posted by River Rails Photography

Dude...... did you even LOOK at the photo in depth?

Not the dude you are asking, but, yeah, I did and I think it's about as much a train shot as Star Wars is a tear jerker.

I still can't see the train.


Joe

[River Rails Photography]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

Not the dude you are asking, but, yeah, I did and I think it's about as much a train shot as Star Wars is a tear jerker.

I still can't see the train.


Joe

So, perhaps this will help some of you?

[Darryl Rule]

Nope, still no train. Just 3 spots of light. Sorry.

[River Rails Photography]

Originally Posted by Darryl Rule

Nope, still no train. Just 3 spots of light. Sorry.

3 spots of light=train.

[chris crook]

Originally Posted by Darryl Rule

Way to be right top of things. That photo was discussed right above your posts.

Yea, made it clear earlier that I am an idiot.


I don't think the argument is favoritism but inconsistency between screeners.


Hey Joe, is there only one way to take train picture? You don't even have to look at it, it can just flash past on a page full of thumbs. Why not open the place up to a little more outta the box stuff once in a while? You seem almost offended it got in. You can't see it, but don't you know it is there? You know, those three bright lights in that oh-so-familiar triangle?

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by chris crook

You know, those three bright lights in that oh-so-familiar triangle?

We call those UFO's here..

Loyd L.

[milwman]

[quote=chris crook]Yea, made it clear earlier that I am an idiot.


I don't think the argument is favoritism but inconsistency between screeners.

You will have that there human, think there trying and still doing ok mostly

[River Rails Photography]

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

We call those UFO's here..

Loyd L.

You know, FOX news has been getting boring around here.

[quiksmith10]

Originally Posted by John Ryan

Before anyone alleges any favoritism, this tiny train photo:



... took no less than four tries to get accepted. I think if there were any favoritism it wouldn't have been an uphill battle. I get plenty of rejections, perhaps as many as some of the people here who post constantly about their rejections. Things are not as easy as they seem.

It's an excellent photo as far as the execution but the overall quality is horrible. The photo should have been rejected for the high-level of grain. Other than that, it's golden.

John, I'm just curious as to what film speed you used to shoot this image. I'm also wondering, did you use any type of lightening tool on it? When ever I've used something of the sort, I have noticed that it does make the grain become more prevalent.

In regards to Alex's shot, after all, it is a "train photo." However, the overall percentage of the train in the shot is 1% (figuratively speaking). If that's the case, you could also classify this shot as being an automotive shot, as you have the little headlight dots for cars. Personally, it's genre strikes me as more of a weather phenomenon type.

Just think, if this photo was posted outside this site (with no ties to railroading), how many people would you think would label this as a train shot or would at the very least point out a train?

It is a superb photo, just not of railroad quality.

[trainboysd40]

Originally Posted by quiksmith10

John, I'm just curious as to what film speed you used to shoot this image. I'm also wondering, did you use any type of lightening tool on it? When ever I've used something of the sort, I have noticed that it does make the grain become more prevalent.

1600 ISO, enough said
Also, F/2.8 for 1/100th...pretty impressive results, if you ask me.
Edit: I just noticed something interesting.
My average views per photo is just 30 shy of the great John Ryan! =O

[Watain]

For me starting out and still a lot to learn, I dont like neither Alex's shot or Ryans. For me I dont see how they can be called train photos, both are spectacular night shots but thats all they are in my eyes. I guess the three microscopic balls of light could be a train. I guess I will always be a train in low sunlight shot type of photog.

[Joe the Photog]

Originally Posted by chris crook

Hey Joe, is there only one way to take train picture?

Yep. That's what I've said all along, that there's one way and only way to take a shot of a train. Glad to figured it out, Chris --

PhotoID: Photograph ©

PhotoID: Photograph ©

PhotoID: Photograph ©

Originally Posted by chris crook

Why not open the place up to a little more outta the box stuff once in a while?

I've probably said it three times in this thread that I personally would like to get more artistic than I am yet. But I don't want to be so artistic that you lose the train. As I said earlier, I come here to see railroad pictures, not sky line pictures. People keep claiming that the triangle of lights are a train. I'll take your word on it.

I respectively say it was a mistake to let this shot in the database. That was my opinion when I first saw it; it's my opinion now and it'll be my opinion pretty much from now on.

By the way, did Alex's photo of the train through a window shot ever get in? Again, much better in my opinion. Atypical, artistic, yet obviously a train shot.


Joe

[River Rails Photography]

Originally Posted by Watain

For me starting out and still a lot to learn, I dont like neither Alex's shot or Ryans. For me I dont see how they can be called train photos, both are spectacular night shots but thats all they are in my eyes. I guess the three microscopic balls of light could be a train. I guess I will always be a train in low sunlight shot type of photog.

How can the train not be seen in John's shot? In the entire bottom half, there is what appears to be a freight facility of some-kind, and next to that..... tracks . If, just if, you are not too presumptuous and follow the train your eye falls on a point of light. This point of light is ????. Yeah, a train . Really, these photo's (at least in my mind) give a whole new vantage point. For example, Alex's could be a bird's eye view. And, John's might be the same. Think about about your work before you criticize others--- you never know when it might come.

[River Rails Photography]

Originally Posted by quiksmith10

It's an excellent photo as far as the execution but the overall quality is horrible. The photo should have been rejected for the high-level of grain. Other than that, it's golden.

John, I'm just curious as to what film speed you used to shoot this image. I'm also wondering, did you use any type of lightening tool on it? When ever I've used something of the sort, I have noticed that it does make the grain become more prevalent.

In regards to Alex's shot, after all, it is a "train photo." However, the overall percentage of the train in the shot is 1% (figuratively speaking). If that's the case, you could also classify this shot as being an automotive shot, as you have the little headlight dots for cars. Personally, it's genre strikes me as more of a weather phenomenon type.

Just think, if this photo was posted outside this site (with no ties to railroading), how many people would you think would label this as a train shot or would at the very least point out a train?

It is a superb photo, just not of railroad quality.

You are no screener, screener calls the shots. Let THEM do THEIR job.


I think it's time for a thread lock before things become ugly.

[Darryl Rule]

Nothing is going to get ugly. People are just stating their opinions, which last time I checked, is the point of the forums. Other than the original post, I think almost everyone who isn't a big fan of the shot has said that the photos overall are nice shots, just not train shots. If the admins are going to lock evety thread where there is a disagreement, then there won't be much point to a forum.