Shadow on nose rejection

[John Russell - NZ]

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd

The crop is just a bad composition from inexperience (it's a very old file for me). The lighting overall is subpar at best though. Aside from this instance, it will never be worthy of being shown again for any reason.

Loyd L.

I agree with Jim nothing wrong with the lighting in your green summer shot. It isn't a good example of high sun at all. Nothing wrong with the lighting in my photo either. That was the feedback I got from several train photographers with no contrary comment. The photo, not being able to be rejected for other defect was accepted. The real reason for initial rejection is more probably the subject. No other photos of this train in the RP database that I know of so it's strange.

[bigbassloyd]

I wish I was as easy going on my photography as you all

Loyd L.

[John Russell - NZ]

No point in being harsher than the high sun in this one... https://www.railpictures.net/photo/736255/

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by John Russell - NZ

No point in being harsher than the high sun in this one... https://www.railpictures.net/photo/736255/

While the sun is high, I don't find it objectionable in this example. Had it been taken from track level, yes, but the elevation takes advantage of the sun angle, and most surfaces facing the camera are well lit.

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

While the sun is high, I don't find it objectionable in this example. Had it been taken from track level, yes, but the elevation takes advantage of the sun angle, and most surfaces facing the camera are well lit.

I like it because of the content, not much going on there, 400's used run thru plus the WC power, maybe lost on John, but I do remember the mention of blown out highlights on rooftops. You can't see much of blacked out trucks, I'd say a little high on the exposure. It was either Manitowoc or Sheboygan and the crew didn't care for me hanging around waiting for them to do something.

Bob

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by RobJor

I like it because of the content, not much going on there, 400's used run thru plus the WC power, maybe lost on John, but I do remember the mention of blown out highlights on rooftops.

Bob

Agreed on the blown-out highlights. I was addressing the lighting only - the execution could be better.

[John Russell - NZ]

Originally Posted by RobJor

I like it because of the content, not much going on there, 400's used run thru plus the WC power, maybe lost on John, but I do remember the mention of blown out highlights on rooftops.

Bob

My guess is that the content was why the photo screener gave it the green and why it has more views than any of mine probably will ever have. Yes, at least it has a well lit nose! I do find it quite harsh though, a better example of high sun that Loyd's photo. Possibly most folks here don't care a bit about high sun.

[bigbassloyd]

I find it as harsh as mine, and several of yours.

Really easy to boff the whites on a drone shot too. Lil bitty sensor can only do so much.

Loyd L.

[JimThias]

Definitely poor processing of an overexposed image. The blown out CH hurts my eyes to look at it. With the right processing it could look a LOT better. Otherwise, nice composition, subject, and scene. I dig it.