Old 10-13-2008, 09:35 PM   #1
rino54
Member
 
rino54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 86
Default New rejection categories ?

Good evening ?

I was wondering if two new categories could be introduced for screeners to help them to reject some of the pictures. The misuse of Photoshop tools creates really unreal (and sometimes ugly) pictures.

First one would be abuse of saturation tools. Just have a look to these shots :
Image © Matthew Hicks
PhotoID: 253837
Photograph © Matthew Hicks

Image © BurghMan
PhotoID: 254920
Photograph © BurghMan


Second would be abuse of highlight tools. Shadows have to be dark and not light like in some pictures.
Image © John Bowler
PhotoID: 254873
Photograph © John Bowler

Image © Dave Toussaint
PhotoID: 254675
Photograph © Dave Toussaint


What do you think about it ?

Renaud
__________________
Discover my website The Passing Trains, about Railroad Photography: http://kimandrenaud.com/renaud/en/
rino54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2008, 10:03 PM   #2
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

My views:

Matt's shot: I believe the orange trees are larches, and from personal experience I know their color can be pretty strong. I do find the greens in the shot too strong. However, the core issue is the HDR processing of the shot and it has been discussed elsewhere in that regard.

burghman's: I think it is too saturated, but I have not been to the location in question so ultimately it is only my speculation. I do know that a bit of saturation is popular (there is a reason people loved to shoot Fuji Velvia back in the day!) and seems to be a part of photography these days.

John's: the shot looks fine to me

Dave's: to me, the HDR applied here is waay too strong so I agree with you. If Dave is willing, I would love to see him post a version to the forum with the HDR applied in about half-strength, so we can get a feel for the possible variations. Maybe a new HDR thread?

BTW it is a very nice shot and I favorited it despite the HDR.

In general, HDR and pseudo-HDR processing is relatively new on RP and I think it will be a while before things settle down to more of a standard.
__________________
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 10-13-2008, 10:11 PM   #3
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

I think Burghman's looks fine to me. Being a native Pennsylvanian, the fall colors look about right. Also, look at the train itself...nothing looks over saturated on it (but, it's not like you can't use selective saturation these days ).

Dave's HDR shot looks like most HDR shots: fake. Sorry, I'm just not a fan.

I'm still waiting for Matt to post a link or attachment to the unprocessed version of his shot which he can't seem to figure out how to do...
__________________

Last edited by Ween; 10-13-2008 at 10:17 PM.
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2008, 10:45 PM   #4
ottergoose
American Gunzel
 
ottergoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 1,626
Send a message via AIM to ottergoose Send a message via Yahoo to ottergoose
Default

There's already a rejection reason for saturation, and overdone HDR would fit within the excessive manipulation (or over processed?) category.

I don't have an issue with any of example shots, they all look pretty nice to me...
__________________
Nick Benson | Pictures | Website | Flickr | Profile | JetPhotos | Twitter
ottergoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 01:17 AM   #5
John Ryan
Senior Member
 
John Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 497
Send a message via AIM to John Ryan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rino54
Good evening ?

What do you think about it ?
I think the best idea for a new rejection category would be "Wedge Photo." 250,000 photos on this site is enough that the screeners could start really restricting what gets in. Why have quantity when you could have quality; the first criticism that comes up in conversations about RailPictures is always, "But I have to wade through so much crap to find the good stuff." Here's an opportunity to change that.
John Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 01:42 AM   #6
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,740
Default

I've been accused of over saturating on my fall shots, but its really that bright down here! I don't feel those linked shots are completely out of bounds

now, if there is a category for "Abuse of the word Photographer".. nail me everytime

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
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 02:21 AM   #7
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,899
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ottergoose
I don't have an issue with any of example shots, they all look pretty nice to me...
I second that emotion. I'm itching to get some HDR software.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 02:31 AM   #8
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

now, if there is a category for "Abuse of the word Photographer".. nail me everytime

Loyd L.
Same here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ryan
I think the best idea for a new rejection category would be "Wedge Photo." 250,000 photos on this site is enough that the screeners could start really restricting what gets in. Why have quantity when you could have quality; the first criticism that comes up in conversations about RailPictures is always, "But I have to wade through so much crap to find the good stuff." Here's an opportunity to change that.
I personally disagree, in my experience its harder for me to get a Wedgie accepted than anything else, so maybe its restricted to some degree. IMHO I think having a ''common angle'' rejection would be unfair to a lot of contributors(pretty much everyone me included). Now if they want to restrict something, I have seen photos accepted just here lately from 2008 with questionable image quality.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 02:39 AM   #9
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ryan
I think the best idea for a new rejection category would be "Wedge Photo." 250,000 photos on this site is enough that the screeners could start really restricting what gets in. Why have quantity when you could have quality; the first criticism that comes up in conversations about RailPictures is always, "But I have to wade through so much crap to find the good stuff." Here's an opportunity to change that.
I agree and disagree. My view, maybe I expressed it before, don't remember, is this. RP is a combination of the major leagues and the minor leagues. The minor leagues are the wedgies and the major leagues are the more interesting stuff. The key is that RP gets the minor league players in the game. Then, some fraction of them move up to the major leagues. But without the minor leagues the entire enterprise cannot carry its weight, costwise, and it doesn't happen. Furthermore, without the minor leagues, talent does not develop for the major leagues. It works. RRPA cannot feed the RP major leagues, only the RP minor leagues can. One has to get in the game, and RRPA is not the game, RP is the game.

If you get rid of the minor leagues, the wedgies, the entire thing goes away.

Maybe the screeners could click on a "wedge" category and then those who want to can exclude that category of pictures.

I'm a wedgie avoider but I generally click on at least one every time I do a viewing session. There are always reasons to look at a well-exposed, ordinary shot.
__________________
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 10-14-2008, 03:27 AM   #10
MDH
Senior Member
 
MDH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I agree and disagree. My view, maybe I expressed it before, don't remember, is this. RP is a combination of the major leagues and the minor leagues. The minor leagues are the wedgies and the major leagues are the more interesting stuff. The key is that RP gets the minor league players in the game. Then, some fraction of them move up to the major leagues. But without the minor leagues the entire enterprise cannot carry its weight, costwise, and it doesn't happen. Furthermore, without the minor leagues, talent does not develop for the major leagues. It works. RRPA cannot feed the RP major leagues, only the RP minor leagues can. One has to get in the game, and RRPA is not the game, RP is the game.

If you get rid of the minor leagues, the wedgies, the entire thing goes away.

Maybe the screeners could click on a "wedge" category and then those who want to can exclude that category of pictures.

I'm a wedgie avoider but I generally click on at least one every time I do a viewing session. There are always reasons to look at a well-exposed, ordinary shot.
I think this is a well thought out response, but I'd also note more basically that this is "railpictures.net" NOT "artphotos.net". While I too often appreciate the more artistic shots (and strive to make my shots better) there are also many people out there who really want to see the trains - roster shots or tight wedgies - for a variety of reasons. I'm a model railroader also and can see the value in closer, basic shots for modeling purposes. New/interesting/different power - I want to see it. And this is the only place I can go to find a good minimum quality level if I'm looking for something in particular like that so this is where I'd start.

To exclude 'basic wedge shots' would not only exclude many photographers (who may never progress to 'good enough' for the site otherwise) but would also lose a significant constituency of people who want to see train pictures and not "3 points of light" or "tiny train in a river valley" or "rusting railroad paraphernelia" shots. The more "artistic" shots add considerable spice to the site and often attract high views (if done well), but if that was the only thing on here I probably wouldn't have even started contributing. I'm glad I did start and trying to add photos here has really "pushed" my development as a photographer (if I can make that claim!) and now I have a few night shots, glint shots, detail shots, etc. also.

It's pretty quick to skim through the thumbnails and only click on the ones you're interested in so I find it interesting how much people complain about shots, or types of shots they don't personally like.

My 1 cent (was 2 before the market went down)

Michael
MDH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 03:31 AM   #11
chris crook
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Zanesville Ohio
Posts: 246
Default

The last two points are very fine points indeed, and the best argument not to restrict photos any more than they already are.
__________________
contrarian

Flickr: Armco_block
chris crook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 03:43 AM   #12
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Michael, I agree. RP wears multiple hats, successfully in my view. Not easy to satisfy multiple constituencies, but it works.
__________________
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 10-14-2008, 03:49 AM   #13
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Getting rid of wedgies = getting rid of daily traffic/contributions = more animosity against the site = loss of revenue. Not a smart business decision.

Expanding on what's acceptible = potential to increase daily traffic/contributions = more revenue. But then you sacrifice purity!
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 03:56 AM   #14
John Ryan
Senior Member
 
John Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 497
Send a message via AIM to John Ryan
Default

Janusz (and group),

You must understand that I'm a "bomb-thrower" by trade, and I delight in provoking a good discussion - which is exactly what happened here. You are correct in your assertion that railpictures does encourage refinement in some photographer's styles. And you are also correct in asserting that RRPA is not going to be a production factory for good photographers, as there's no onus on "measurable quality" there.

I'm not for the complete ban of wedge shots, but i'd like to see fewer of them. It isn't hard to learn the technical end of photography without resorting to cliche angles.

* disclaimers apply; I take wedge photos.
John Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 04:05 AM   #15
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

I happen to like wedgies, having thumbed through my Dad's Lucius Beebe books a least a hundred times each when I was a young kid!

I also really like roster shots... as I'm a locomotive guy.

In fact, up until recently, I used to look at the majority of calendar shots and think, "Nice photo, but he didn't really get much detail of the engine from that angle..."

And as much as I do love getting artsy now myself (well, as artsy as I can get... my getting artsy is sort of like Archie Bunker doing a Pas de Deux with Ralph Cramden...) I am much more likely to admire a nicely lit, dead on boring roster shot of an Erie Lackawanna GP35 than I am a good deal of the Screener's Choices! And I'll remember it for a lot longer than some gorgeous, stunning, beautiful shot in which I get to once again play the always fun game of "Find the Train."

Last edited by Freericks; 10-14-2008 at 04:07 AM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 04:07 AM   #16
J Douglas Moore
Senior Member
 
J Douglas Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: "It's a dry heat" Arizona
Posts: 716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ryan
Janusz (and group),

You must understand that I'm a "bomb-thrower" by trade, and I delight in provoking a good discussion - which is exactly what happened here. You are correct in your assertion that railpictures does encourage refinement in some photographer's styles. And you are also correct in asserting that RRPA is not going to be a production factory for good photographers, as there's no onus on "measurable quality" there.

I'm not for the complete ban of wedge shots, but i'd like to see fewer of them. It isn't hard to learn the technical end of photography without resorting to cliche angles.

* disclaimers apply; I take wedge photos.
Would your "wedgie" ban include avatars??
__________________

"Thanks for looking"

It is a proven fact that birthdays are good for you. The people with the most always live longer!
J Douglas Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 04:14 AM   #17
ottergoose
American Gunzel
 
ottergoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 1,626
Send a message via AIM to ottergoose Send a message via Yahoo to ottergoose
Default

Doesn't everyone want to see more of what they want and less of what they don't?

I think there's a pretty good balance of work here now... here's 7% of what's been uploaded today:

Image © Dave Schauer
PhotoID: 255186
Photograph © Dave Schauer


Image © MrDan
PhotoID: 255183
Photograph © MrDan


Image © edja noezsanto nitijoso
PhotoID: 255175
Photograph © edja noezsanto nitijoso


Image © Craig Williams
PhotoID: 255176
Photograph © Craig Williams


Image © Chris Butts
PhotoID: 255167
Photograph © Chris Butts


Image © William E. Griffin, Jr.
PhotoID: 255161
Photograph © William E. Griffin, Jr.


Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


Image © Rail Archive Stephenson
PhotoID: 255109
Photograph © Rail Archive Stephenson


Image © Mike Bjork
PhotoID: 255074
Photograph © Mike Bjork


Image © John Bowler
PhotoID: 255067
Photograph © John Bowler


Image © Jim Thias
PhotoID: 255034
Photograph © Jim Thias


Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


Image © Michael Da Costa
PhotoID: 255017
Photograph © Michael Da Costa


Image © John Ryan
PhotoID: 254981
Photograph © John Ryan


Where else are you going to find that many solid shots covering so many different aspects of train photography? Rosters, newsworthy, artsy, North America, Europe, history, scenery, detail...
__________________
Nick Benson | Pictures | Website | Flickr | Profile | JetPhotos | Twitter

Last edited by ottergoose; 10-14-2008 at 04:19 AM.
ottergoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 04:21 AM   #18
ottergoose
American Gunzel
 
ottergoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 1,626
Send a message via AIM to ottergoose Send a message via Yahoo to ottergoose
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Douglas Moore
Would your "wedgie" ban include avatars??
:: Points out that an overhead isometric illustration of a locomotive is not a wedige ::

__________________
Nick Benson | Pictures | Website | Flickr | Profile | JetPhotos | Twitter
ottergoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 03:51 PM   #19
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

So what is the official definition of a wedgie? What exceptions are acceptable? Should there be a more stringent screening of wedgies shot in the west where, honestly, you'd have to be really lazy or new to the area to shoot a wedge given the fantastic, open scenery? You can shoot non-wedgies in the east, but it generally takes more effort than to simply pull over, shoot a fantastic scene, drive off to next awesome vista beside the friggin' road like out west.
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here

Last edited by lock4244; 10-14-2008 at 05:37 PM.
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 06:00 PM   #20
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lock4244
So what is the official definition of a wedgie?
You are bringing up some very ugly Junior High memories for me with that question.

Last edited by Freericks; 10-14-2008 at 06:33 PM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 06:45 PM   #21
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks
You are bringing up some very ugly Junior High memories for me with that question.
As I've posted in the past:
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	bully_wedgie.jpg
Views:	66
Size:	11.7 KB
ID:	3420  
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 07:00 PM   #22
JMeade
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 54
Default

Getting back to the saturation debate. Some cameras don't capture a rich variation of colors as the higher tier ones. I'm a Canon user and I know for sure that a 5D and 1Dx cameras have a more accurate color composition than a xxD camera. We have the saturate to compensate for that.

I do agree that if a few colors are blown out due to saturation it should be rejected. An easy fix would be to desaturate the colors that are overblown in Photoshop.
JMeade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 07:30 PM   #23
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMeade
Getting back to the saturation debate. Some cameras don't capture a rich variation of colors as the higher tier ones. I'm a Canon user and I know for sure that a 5D and 1Dx cameras have a more accurate color composition than a xxD camera. We have the saturate to compensate for that.

I do agree that if a few colors are blown out due to saturation it should be rejected. An easy fix would be to desaturate the colors that are overblown in Photoshop.
Accuracy of and variation in colors and saturation are not the same thing. The saturation level of any image from any camera can be increased or decreased and that can be done overall or by color range. 5D and 1D cameras do not systematically increase saturation compared to other Canon cameras (although, if shooting jpgs, one can change in-camera settings to raise or lower saturation). That is not their advantage.
__________________
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 10-14-2008, 07:30 PM   #24
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

I shoot with a Nikon D200. Typical processing for me includes a bump in the saturation of 5 to 8 in CS3, though I can't recall what the 5 to 8 is a measure of... %? I like to think my shots are close to what the eye sees in terms of colour saturation, though there will always be variances. I don't prefer oversaturated shots, but they seems to please the screeners and the public in general.
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 09:23 PM   #25
rino54
Member
 
rino54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 86
Default

Hello,

Wow! so many contributions in a day!

Well my message was not against any photographer. I'm going to check about this HDR thread because to my knowledge it's not easy to do moving subject in HDR.

About saturation, I agree about the way some digital cameras are "oversaturating" sont colours like red or orange. And many fall pictures in rp look "too much".

Anyway, thanks for your comments

Renaud
__________________
Discover my website The Passing Trains, about Railroad Photography: http://kimandrenaud.com/renaud/en/
rino54 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 10:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.