Old 02-12-2020, 08:10 AM   #1
Daniel SIMON
Senior Member
 
Daniel SIMON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 326
Default Game rules for "foreground clutter"

Sometimes I find it hard to understand why the rules of the game for "foreground clutter" can vary from one member to another. I have choosen these two examples, but I could have found others.

REJECTED:
https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...21&key=9162581

ACCEPTED:
Image © Ddrennenphoto
PhotoID: 724878
Photograph © Ddrennenphoto

Image © Ddrennenphoto
PhotoID: 725350
Photograph © Ddrennenphoto
Daniel SIMON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2020, 08:33 AM   #2
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,230
Default

Image © Tom Farence
PhotoID: 725163
Photograph © Tom Farence

I won't repeat what I said when I saw this one!
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/

RP Photos: www.railpictures.net/miningcamper1/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2020, 02:26 PM   #3
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,758
Default

Your rejected image is the textbook definition of obstruction. The grass, tree, house, fence, etc. is not supporting the composition. The shot could easily be cropped to lose the left third of the image and not lose anything.

The first image you linked, while highly obstructing to the locomotive, does have composition interest to it. Not sure it deserves a spot here because of that however. I can understand why the second image was accepted because the foreground blur does offer more support to the composition in a panning shot.

So in conclusion, The screener(s) do whatever they see fit and we just accept it or move on. Judging by the site activity over the last couple years, the latter seems prevalent.

Loyd L.
__________________
What used to be is no more

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2020, 03:34 PM   #4
Daniel SIMON
Senior Member
 
Daniel SIMON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
Your rejected image is the textbook definition of obstruction. The grass, tree, house, fence, etc. is not supporting the composition. The shot could easily be cropped to lose the left third of the image and not lose anything.

The first image you linked, while highly obstructing to the locomotive, does have composition interest to it. Not sure it deserves a spot here because of that however. I can understand why the second image was accepted because the foreground blur does offer more support to the composition in a panning shot.

So in conclusion, The screener(s) do whatever they see fit and we just accept it or move on. Judging by the site activity over the last couple years, the latter seems prevalent.

Loyd L.
Many thanks for your comments Loyd. How would you judge this one ?

Image © Bill Edgar
PhotoID: 725368
Photograph © Bill Edgar
Daniel SIMON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2020, 04:38 PM   #5
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 772
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel SIMON View Post
Many thanks for your comments Loyd. How would you judge this one ?

Image © Bill Edgar
PhotoID: 725368
Photograph © Bill Edgar
This unit is not moving so that is only view available short of a weed wacker plus the weeds supplement the abandoned story so I am OK with it.

As far as yours, given the type of line it is I consider weeds part of expected scene which is pleasant so could be accepted.

I am not a fan of posing tractors, cars, cute kids etc in front of subject or backsides of fans taking photos(ok for your loca show) but will own up to this one which was complete serendipity.

Image © Robert Jordan
PhotoID: 589896
Photograph © Robert Jordan


Bob

Last edited by RobJor; 02-12-2020 at 04:43 PM.
RobJor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2020, 05:14 PM   #6
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,758
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel SIMON View Post
Many thanks for your comments Loyd. How would you judge this one ?

Image © Bill Edgar
PhotoID: 725368
Photograph © Bill Edgar
The weeds do support the composition as it lends credence to it being an abandoned / broken / forgotten locomotive that hasn't moved in some time. I would have probably accepted it.

Loyd L.
__________________
What used to be is no more

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2020, 06:24 PM   #7
Grewup on the CW
Senior Member
 
Grewup on the CW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobJor View Post
This unit is not moving so that is only view available short of a weed wacker plus the weeds supplement the abandoned story so I am OK with it.

As far as yours, given the type of line it is I consider weeds part of expected scene which is pleasant so could be accepted.

I am not a fan of posing tractors, cars, cute kids etc in front of subject or backsides of fans taking photos(ok for your loca show) but will own up to this one which was complete serendipity.

Image © Robert Jordan
PhotoID: 589896
Photograph © Robert Jordan


Bob
Just cannot go wrong with a classic Mustang (sorry Chevy lovers, umm not), especially one like this that appears to have been maliciously restored. The train still holds it own.

To the OP - Loyd hit the nail on the head. Weeds in general is gonna kill a "normal" pic especially a loco that is in operation while something that is abandon or rusting away that may hold historical significance will get a pass.
Grewup on the CW 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 06:16 AM.


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