Old 03-14-2008, 02:15 PM   #1
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,458
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default BNSF Orange

Has anyone else noticed some of the horribly over saturated orange BNSF photos that get in? I bet I see one or two a day that glow like some nuclear toxic orange. Two of my monitors are calibrated and one isn't and I see the problem when using any of them. Why don't the screeners catch this. I definitely don't want to point fingers at anyone's photos so I will not give examples as I am sure there monitors must just be off but I wouldn't think the screeners monitors would be.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 02:43 PM   #2
ken45
LA&SL Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 700
Default

In my photo editting experience, BNSF Orange is super sensitive to any increases in saturation. Thankfully, I don't have to mess with the saturation too often, however, on my most recent shot, the main subject in my RAW image ended up very washed out. I had to increase the saturation to get the shot like I saw it. I had to compromise with the saturation, but in the end I favored the rock formations, not the train since the train was the secondary subject. Thus the orange is slightly oversaturated, but the warbonnet and UP unit look fine. That's assuming that my shot was one of the ones that drew your ire.
__________________
My Railpictures Shots http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=2561
ken45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 03:05 PM   #3
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
Has anyone else noticed some of the horribly over saturated orange BNSF photos that get in? I bet I see one or two a day that glow like some nuclear toxic orange.
YYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
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 03-14-2008, 03:09 PM   #4
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ken45
In my photo editting experience, BNSF Orange is super sensitive to any increases in saturation. Thankfully, I don't have to mess with the saturation too often, however, on my most recent shot, the main subject in my RAW image ended up very washed out. I had to increase the saturation to get the shot like I saw it. I had to compromise with the saturation, but in the end I favored the rock formations, not the train since the train was the secondary subject. Thus the orange is slightly oversaturated, but the warbonnet and UP unit look fine. That's assuming that my shot was one of the ones that drew your ire.
Ken, I don't know if your shots are at issue, but you should at least look at your software and see if you can change saturation by color channel. In PS Elements, for example, I can easily increase overall saturation and then back down the saturation in the reds and in the yellows. Alternatively, one can mask out the orange and increase saturation on the rest; that's more work. Not being a BNSF shooter, I cannot say how effective this would be.

Here in CSX land I've rarely had a problem; on a few occasions I've chosen to back off on the yellows. One has to be careful, however, as reducing the yellow can throw off foliage (greens mix blues and yellows).
__________________
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 03-14-2008, 03:14 PM   #5
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,038
Default

At the risk of getting myself in lots of trouble with others, I would say that oversaturation period (like you see on CSI Miami) is not that appealing. Clearly from what is being posted however, there are many who do not share this opinion with me.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 03:47 PM   #6
TAMR159
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 367
Default

I'll be the first to admit, I tend to bump up saturation a touch, even if it is a bit overdone sometimes (though primarily because it usually looks a little washed out on my screen). In my eyes, however, the world is a colorful place, and yet all too often I witness slideshows in this area that seem to almost have a "grey film" overlaying them - even brand new units look greyish. All I can say is it is subject to one's taste - it was this way back in the day of slides with the controversial Fuji Velvia film.

Say what you will in response to this - I'm not changing my ways any time soon. In photography, it's all about what you see - and my shots reflect that.
TAMR159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 03:57 PM   #7
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,458
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ken45
That's assuming that my shot was one of the ones that drew your ire.

Ken your shots are a little over saturated but I like that. I try to over saturate my shots slightly also, but I end up losing some of that saturation from my computer to rpnet. Anyone else have color, sharpness, or tint issues after upload? Anyways Ken, the BNSF orange is saturated but it is still BNSF orange. The ones I'm talking about I have noticed that the color will be saturated but also glowing and neon looking.

Image © Paul Duda
PhotoID: 227348
Photograph © Paul Duda
Here is the latest example. I mean no harm by posting this one as there are a lot just like it. Maybe its me.

Compare that pic to my avatar, not that my avatar is 100% right either.

Last edited by travsirocz; 03-14-2008 at 03:59 PM.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 04:09 PM   #8
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
Image © Paul Duda
PhotoID: 227348
Photograph © Paul Duda
Here is the latest example. I mean no harm by posting this one as there are a lot just like it. Maybe its me.
No offense to Paul Duda, whose contributions (northern Ohio generally, I think) are very good, well, well above the RP average, one of those people whose shots have a higher probability of viewing for me. So, I've got nothing against him and lots in favor of him.

But the saturation on this particular shot is just insane, extreme, not representative. Even if one is a Velvia fan.
__________________
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 03-14-2008, 04:36 PM   #9
RicHamilton
Senior Member
 
RicHamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 171
Default

I've noticed the same problem on a couple of CN ones as well.
__________________
Ric Hamilton
Berwick, NS
http://home.xcountry.tv/~r.hamilton
RicHamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 08:53 PM   #10
TAMR159
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 367
Default

Never mind that it is a brand spanking new unit, whereas the SD70ACe in your avatar has collected plenty of dust, grime, etc. I've seen numerous BNSF units on their first run, and the orange on them is enough to burn your eyes out. The crossing box, trees, weeds, etc. all look right on to me...all in all, I think he did bump it up a touch, but not nearly as much as everyone seems to be whining about on here...it was probably minimal at best. I could easily jump ship and talk about some of the images with a "grey film" over them that find their way on here, but I'm not going to hijack an already pointless thread.

Just remember, photos are what you make of it! This is an art form here, there is no right or wrong way to do it. If you say the saturation is bad in one photo, then why is a black and white photo okay? Or a sepia tone image? When you start limiting your photography and imposing restrictions, all you are doing is limiting how far your photography can go, whereas in my opinion, it should be a limitless medium of expression - no rules, no right or wrong, just how you see what is in front of you.

Paul, if you read this, keep at it man, you've got some good stuff. Don't let the whiners get you down!
TAMR159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 09:14 PM   #11
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAMR159
I'm not going to hijack an already pointless thread.
C'mon, Nick, we discuss things about RP here. There is a difference between "I disagree" and "I think this is pointless" and I think you blew it here.

Quote:
Just remember, photos are what you make of it! This is an art form here, there is no right or wrong way to do it. If you say the saturation is bad in one photo, then why is a black and white photo okay? Or a sepia tone image? When you start limiting your photography and imposing restrictions, all you are doing is limiting how far your photography can go, whereas in my opinion, it should be a limitless medium of expression - no rules, no right or wrong, just how you see what is in front of you.
Agreed, as far as general photography and as far as "limiting your photography". Disagree as far as RP goes. For the same reasons (inverted?) that RP is not the be-all end-all of photography, it is reasonable to discuss limits that RP places or should place on shots in the database, without implication that such limits should govern the hobby generally.

Quote:
Paul, if you read this, keep at it man, you've got some good stuff. Don't let the whiners get you down!
Agree with the first; as for the second, there is a big difference between "whiners" and "reasonable objectors."
__________________
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 03-14-2008, 09:14 PM   #12
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,038
Default

Wow, Nick... not sure what to say. Every post on here was highly complimentary of Paul (and rightly so, he's an extremely talented photographer).

Seems like you are trying to create a fight where there is none.

As much as you have a right to enjoy oversaturation, I have a right not to enjoy it. I prefer realism.

(As an aside, I actually agree with your assessment of Paul's shot, which I didn't find oversaturated, like I have found some from others in the database.)
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 09:22 PM   #13
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,884
Default

Nick;

You said everything that I was thinking. Too many photographers try to impose limits or definitions on what photography is. That's just wrong. This is an art form. Obviously, everyone will have their own preferences but those preferences are theirs, not everyone's. In the past few weeks, I've had guys on other boards tell me I'm not a "real" photography because I don't use filters and because I tend to underexpose my shots in order to bring out more color on sunny days in processing. This thread reminds me of that.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 09:28 PM   #14
TAMR159
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 367
Default

Well, personally, I just find it rather pointless in calling people out on the forums and going over what you dislike about their work. The rejection advice given on these forum is helpful to those in need, but complaining (don't deny it Janusz, you know perfectly well that was the intention when this thread was posted) just seems so pointless. I distinctly recall people from this very thread complaining about me when I uploaded "too many" shots from a certain chase with a Southern Belle KCS SD70ACe. Who cares? Just don't look at the photos then - problem solved! I say the same thing to the people who insist on complaining about Railpictures.net all the time - just don't visit the site anymore.

In regards to limitations to photography and Railpictures.net, I'll put it simply - if it wasn't up to the standards, would they have accepted it? Since it is in the database, I have to argue that it is up to their standards and thus your argument seems almost counterproductive.

In general, however, this one goes into the same category as the more "artsy"/abstract shots - just because you don't like (or in some cases, don't understand) them, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be on this site. This site appeals to a broad range of people with very different styles of photography and post-processing, regardless of what some people think is technically sound and "the correct way". Since the two Chris' own this site, their opinions are ultimately the only ones that matter in this scenario, and even then, so long as the photographer is happy with their work, why should either of the Chris' opinions matter?

Last edited by TAMR159; 03-14-2008 at 09:32 PM.
TAMR159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 09:54 PM   #15
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAMR159
I distinctly recall people from this very thread complaining about me when I uploaded "too many" shots from a certain chase with a Southern Belle KCS SD70ACe.
In the interest of truth, uhm.... that might have been me.




Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 10:48 PM   #16
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
You said everything that I was thinking. Too many photographers try to impose limits or definitions on what photography is. That's just wrong. This is an art form. Obviously, everyone will have their own preferences but those preferences are theirs, not everyone's. In the past few weeks, I've had guys on other boards tell me I'm not a "real" photography because I don't use filters and because I tend to underexpose my shots in order to bring out more color on sunny days in processing. This thread reminds me of that.
Am I just crazy, then, to think there is a difference between discussing photography in general and discussing the RP website?

Now, I know one can make the argument (Sean, where are you?) that RP screening choices affect how people approach rail photography in general. But I don't think that is what this thread is about. Or perhaps should be about.

Maybe I should turn the question around, and ask why it is inappropriate to discuss RP screening standards on an RP forum, or why in such discussions there often seem to be posts accusing such discussion of being an assault on photography and its diversity in general.
__________________
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 03-14-2008, 10:56 PM   #17
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,196
Default

Well, Nick, maybe I'm just tired, or maybe in my older age I don't feel like debating everything, but I am not going to respond point by point. I will simply say that RP is a form of a community in a limited way, and that people will discuss issues of various sorts, and that is not pointless. It is being human, and while any number of human discussions may be pointless (Britany!) I don't see this as one; you disagree. The Chris's do with the site what they want and they may, or may not, take an interest in what site participants are thinking about.
__________________
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 03-14-2008, 11:59 PM   #18
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,884
Default

I don't think I feel as strongly about this as Nick seems to. I just thought this particular thread was on the verge of going overboard. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, which to me is what Nick was saying, but not what Travis was saying. But basically I don't feel like going into a big thing about this. When we're out shooting or when we're processing our shots, we tend to all do them the way we want to do them. As it should be.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2008, 12:39 AM   #19
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,458
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

I posted this because RPNet Screeners have their standards and are very strick with what they want on their site. I am just suprised the screeners let them in.

Yes, photography in general has no limits and shouldn't. I am just talking about RPNet.

I used Paul Duda pic only as an example (only because it was the first one I found) and did not mean any disrespect. Lets just say his screen is out of calibration a touch and it probably looks good to him, while he is wondering how all these other washed out BNSF loco shots get in. Who knows. I am really critiquing the screeners not the photographers.

Yes it is a new unit but there are some very old BNSF units that should be faded but are actually glowing orange much worse then Pauls.

I also see some red locomotives like CN get this way.

case closed. lol
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2008, 03:35 AM   #20
TAMR159
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 367
Default

Well, frankly, I utilize Railpictures.net for a few primary reasons: first of all, they have helped me significantly with my photography, and continue to do so. I am grateful that such a site exists, as many of the local photographers seem to think telewedgies are about as good as it gets. I've decided to push past that and take my photography to an entirely different level, and to repeat myself, Railpictures.net has helped me significantly in this quest. The other reason I submit my photos here is for exposure (since this site is very well known in the railroad/railfan world, and well respected for the many quality images it hosts).

Beyond that, I don't know if I would necessarily go so far as to label it a "community". To be honest, I have a hard time at times labeling the railfanning world in general as a community - after all, I'm just a guy who never outgrew his childhood love of trains and railroading. While I will gladly go to bat for this site amidst a crowd of disgruntled railfan photographers, I really lack the desire (and time for that matter) to actively participate in a community setting (short of the occasional rant, hence this thread). I have been losing interest in these forums as of late, primarily due to threads like these, and I assure you that others feel the same way...

Railpictures.net is what it is. It has worked perfectly fine thus far, hence it's phenomenal success...so why change a proven system? As the saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I will sum my entire rant up with this: the screening process is largely determined by the opinion and tastes of the screeners - this is just pure common sense. And I know many people fight this, proclaiming certain decisions aren't correct, such as the issue with image saturation. Now, let me ask you this - why is your opinion better than that of the screeners? All I've seen is several people sinking to the same level by the way of judging photos based on their own personal opinions...thus I really see no need for change, as this alternative is no better - it's just an "Us vs. Them" debate. And thus, I say things are fine they way they are...
TAMR159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2008, 06:05 AM   #21
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAMR159
.

In regards to limitations to photography and Railpictures.net, I'll put it simply - if it wasn't up to the standards, would they have accepted it? Since it is in the database, I have to argue that it is up to their standards and thus your argument seems almost counterproductive.

ok, here's my two cents, when you talk about standards you have to remember there are several people screening these pics, so define standards.
I have had countless pics rejected for something only to see others accepted in the data base;
for example ;

rejected
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=410637327

accepted;
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=227404

and then I had the one rejected for a small shadow torwards the back of the engine (can't link to it because its to old in the reject data base)only to see the same day this one accepted;
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=221144

so when you say "up to the standards" that may very from time to time

and one more thing that's what this board is all about, there's nothing wrong about critiquing others work, as long as it's in a productive way and we learn from it,
that's my two cents
sd9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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 09:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.