Old 09-06-2008, 09:35 PM   #1
NYC Nick
Member
 
NYC Nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Elyria, Ohio/Kent, Ohio
Posts: 64
Default Blurry?!?

I took this photo when the Norfolk Southern OCS came through on August 7, 2008. The man waving is the president of Norfolk Southern, so I thought the photo would surely be excepted. It was rejected for being "blurry". I personally don't see it, but I was wondering if there was any way to fix the picture.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=518028081

Last edited by NYC Nick; 09-06-2008 at 09:38 PM.
NYC Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 09:49 PM   #2
PLEzero
Senior Member
 
PLEzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh,PA
Posts: 675
Default

It might not be blurry but it is soft.
__________________
Brad Morocco
Candyland, PA
My Flickr Photos
My RP.net Photos
PLEzero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 10:18 PM   #3
River Rails Photography
Banned
 
River Rails Photography's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 404
Send a message via AIM to River Rails Photography
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PLEzero
It might not be blurry but it is soft.

.....and unlevel, poorly cropped, over contrasted....
River Rails Photography is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 10:31 PM   #4
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by River Rails Photography
.....and unlevel, poorly cropped, over contrasted....
It looks level to me, the verticals look vertical. The contrast is tough, but the issue is really the harshness of high sun light combined with main element of the shot being poorly lit because of the position of the sun. It is cropped much too tightly for my tastes.
__________________
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 09-06-2008, 10:34 PM   #5
River Rails Photography
Banned
 
River Rails Photography's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 404
Send a message via AIM to River Rails Photography
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
It looks level to me, the verticals look vertical. The contrast is tough, but the issue is really the harshness of high sun light combined with main element of the shot being poorly lit because of the position of the sun. It is cropped much too tightly for my tastes.


I sometimes have a tendency to see bad cropping as unlevel when it is cropped so tightly like this.....


Oh yea, and, no women?!
River Rails Photography is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 10:51 PM   #6
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Nick can you show us the original? It may help.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 05:48 AM   #7
stevenmwelch
Senior Member
 
stevenmwelch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minot, ND
Posts: 720
Send a message via AIM to stevenmwelch Send a message via Yahoo to stevenmwelch
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PLEzero
It might not be blurry but it is soft.

The rest of the train is super blurry, Brad.

SMW- or my eyes are bad
__________________
Steven M. Welch
Minot, ND
I gots my floaties and I'm ready to go railroadin' in Minot.
My Photos on RP
My RP Rejects and then Some
stevenmwelch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 06:40 AM   #8
Joe M
Junior Member
 
Joe M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 12
Default

I have to agree the Image looks really soft. The crop isn't that great either what I would have done was place the subject in the lower left rule of thirds and shown the rest of the train in the shot, but thats just the way I would have done it.

Joe M

Last edited by Joe M; 09-07-2008 at 06:43 AM.
Joe M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 07:30 AM   #9
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

I have to agree that its soft, not blurry. The cropping could be a little looser along the left side and bottom. Its over exposed imo too.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 01:57 PM   #10
River Rails Photography
Banned
 
River Rails Photography's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 404
Send a message via AIM to River Rails Photography
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Watain
I have to agree that its soft, not blurry. The cropping could be a little looser along the left side and bottom. Its over exposed imo too.
That's the thing that gets me- it's overexposed, but the over contrasted nature of it just makes it seem underexposed. And that's the problem with so many of these rejects- all the contrast and softness make it just an overexposed and poor image quality, with the occasional bad cropping cropping and / or unlevel. I would have rejected it for overexposure and poor image quality.

Last edited by River Rails Photography; 09-07-2008 at 01:59 PM.
River Rails Photography is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 02:14 PM   #11
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by River Rails Photography
That's the thing that gets me- it's overexposed, but the over contrasted nature of it just makes it seem underexposed. And that's the problem with so many of these rejects- all the contrast and softness make it just an overexposed and poor image quality, with the occasional bad cropping cropping and / or unlevel.
Superficially this seems reasonable, but any amount of thought, and...

"so many of these rejects" - what are you referring to? All RP rejects? "problem A and problem B, with the occasional problem C and problem D" - what does this mean, you list common rejection reasons, to what end?

Quote:
I would have rejected it for overexposure and poor image quality.
Earlier in this same thread, you said

Quote:
....and unlevel, poorly cropped, over contrasted....
So what is your view? Look, I'm one of those least likely to bash you here. But please try harder to be coherent and make contributions in your posts. Think more and write less, I suggest.

Sorry for the harshness; I'm trying to help you, hope I have.
__________________
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 09-07-2008, 02:20 PM   #12
River Rails Photography
Banned
 
River Rails Photography's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 404
Send a message via AIM to River Rails Photography
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
"so many of these rejects" - what are you referring to? All RP rejects? "problem A and problem B, with the occasional problem C and problem D" - what does this mean, you list common rejection reasons, to what end?
By "so many of these rejects" I am referring to alot of rejects here seem to have the same problems over and over. Where one problem leads to another, or at least something that seems to.

Quote:
So what is your view? Look, I'm one of those least likely to bash you here. But please try harder to be coherent and make contributions in your posts. Think more and write less, I suggest.
My view is that after thoroughly examining the photo, after you said:

Quote:
It looks level to me, the verticals look vertical. The contrast is tough, but the issue is really the harshness of high sun light combined with main element of the shot being poorly lit because of the position of the sun. It is cropped much too tightly for my tastes.
I realized that this was true, and the cropping was quite misleading.


Quote:
Sorry for the harshness; I'm trying to help you, hope I have.
I don't mind. You have indeed helped.
River Rails Photography is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 05:02 PM   #13
NYC Nick
Member
 
NYC Nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Elyria, Ohio/Kent, Ohio
Posts: 64
Default

A couple people have commented on the bad contrast in the picture. I think that may have been from me trying to sharpen the picture, and not doing a good job. As far as psting the original, unmosified version of the picture, I keep trying, but someting (the website?) won't let me.
NYC Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 05:15 PM   #14
River Rails Photography
Banned
 
River Rails Photography's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 404
Send a message via AIM to River Rails Photography
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC Nick
A couple people have commented on the bad contrast in the picture. I think that may have been from me trying to sharpen the picture, and not doing a good job. As far as psting the original, unmosified version of the picture, I keep trying, but someting (the website?) won't let me.
Sharpening the photo has NOTHING to do with contrast. They are COMPLETELY different things...... trying to sharpen the photo is no excuse. Don't blame the website for not being able to post the original either. Chances are you saved it as the wrong file type or it is too large. You can email me the photo @ riverrailsphotography@gmail.com and I will post here for you, if you like.
River Rails Photography is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 05:29 PM   #15
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by River Rails Photography
Sharpening the photo has NOTHING to do with contrast. They are COMPLETELY different things......
Actually, this forcefully expressed statement is just plain wrong. Sharpening basically increases contrast between adjacent pixels along a line. (I could go into the concept of acutance, actually, but I just don't know that stuff well. There is a page on luminous landscape about it.) There is a reason that, if you use unsharp mask (the PS sharpening process) with parameters like 20/60/0 instead of the typical sharpening parameters like 75/0.6/0, you get something called "local contrast enhancement." So he could have gone in the wrong direction with his choice of sharpening parameters. Unlikely, and maybe sharpening can't affect the distribution across the histogram to a significant extent, but your statement is wrong and so does not clarify.

And, for that matter, NYC Nick wasn't "blaming" the website, he was expressing an uncertainly as to why he couldn't get his pictures attached. He didn't come across as stupid - why are you using ALL CAPS to make your points, as though he can't hear or is ignorant?
__________________
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 09-07-2008, 05:31 PM   #16
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by River Rails Photography
Sharpening the photo has NOTHING to do with contrast. They are COMPLETELY different things...... trying to sharpen the photo is no excuse. Don't blame the website for not being able to post the original either. Chances are you saved it as the wrong file type or it is too large. You can email me the photo @ riverrailsphotography@gmail.com and I will post here for you, if you like.
Whoahhhh Boy calm down. Yelling is no way to make friends.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 05:40 PM   #17
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC Nick
A couple people have commented on the bad contrast in the picture. I think that may have been from me trying to sharpen the picture, and not doing a good job. As far as psting the original, unmosified version of the picture, I keep trying, but someting (the website?) won't let me.
If you want you can send it to me and I can try editing it for you.

Last edited by Walter S; 09-08-2008 at 12:17 AM.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 08:02 PM   #18
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,803
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
He didn't come across as stupid - why are you using ALL CAPS to make your points, as though he can't hear or is ignorant?
As someone who uses "all caps" to emphasize a word occasionally, as you would in speech with inflection, I don't find it a problem at all that he used it in this case. I DO have a problem with what he said, but you have already addressed that, so I won't bother.

A person could use all caps or italicize a word or whatever, but I don't think anyone's intention by doing so is to make someone appear to be deaf or ignorant.

In the past with me, you've addressed this issue you have with people using caps to emphasize a word or a point, and I really don't understand why it bothers you so much. These are simply words on a screen, and vocal inflection is lost, so using a technique such as all caps or italics to emphasize a word shouldn't be a big deal. Do you have an issue with people who emphasize words with inflection when you speak to them in person, too?
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 08:05 PM   #19
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Sharpening the photo has NOTHING to do with contrast. They are COMPLETELY different things......
And yet again River Rails shows he doesn't know what he's talking about...is that 'Banned' label for real?
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 08:46 PM   #20
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
In the past with me, you've addressed this issue you have with people using caps to emphasize a word or a point, and I really don't understand why it bothers you so much. These are simply words on a screen, and vocal inflection is lost, so using a technique such as all caps or italics to emphasize a word shouldn't be a big deal. Do you have an issue with people who emphasize words with inflection when you speak to them in person, too?
All caps is, in my experience, considered a form of shouting. (Perhaps that is only the case when the full statement is all caps.) At any rate, even if not, it is a form of inflection, as you say, a very strong form in my view, and the question is whether the strong inflection is appropriate.

When one says COMPLETELY (and NOTHING just before it), it is hard to avoid the conclusion (perhaps for me only! I guess I am about to find out!) that the writer feels the other person is some combination of a) unable to read the sentence and in need of basic guidance, and b) was a bit of a dunce in making a connection between A and B.

How could it be otherwise than b), since obviously any normal person would have easily realized that A has NOTHING to do with B and A and B are COMPLETELY different. A and B are so far apart that how could anyone muck them together? Got to be a fool to mix A and B together, so much of a fool that you will miss the point if I only write nothing and completely, so to be sure that you don't miss the point, I had better write NOTHING and COMPLETELY and then maybe you will get it.

That is how I see the use of caps in this case. And in this case in particular, where the words being capitalized are extremes, the effect is much stronger.
__________________
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 09-07-2008, 08:46 PM   #21
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 NYC Nick
The man waving is the president of Norfolk Southern, so I thought the photo would surely be excepted. It was rejected for being "blurry". I personally don't see it, but I was wondering if there was any way to fix the picture.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=518028081
I'm not sure why they would accept a picture based solely on someone in it. There are probalems with thisshot aside frombeing blurry that I think makes it a perfect candidate for your personal collection. It looks like it is cropped down significantly from the original or somethng. I'm trying to think of why the image is of such poor quality.

But one thing that really bothers me about the shot is the reflection in the window. I think in some cases, a reflection could make the shot look better and more artistic. In this case, I think it detracts.

Somewhere in the database, I remember a shot much like this one, paned, perhaps, that is better than this one. I'd strike this one up to a number of things working against you and move on.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 08:51 PM   #22
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Oh man...

And you guys get on my back for agruing semantics.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 08:51 PM   #23
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,899
Default

If the whole post had been in all caps,then I'd see your point, J. But SOMETIMES I do think it is appropiate to use caps for one word to make your point.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 09:02 PM   #24
EMTRailfan
Senior Member
 
EMTRailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: I can be found railfanning the abandoned B&O Northern Sub.
Posts: 1,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC Nick
As far as psting the original, unmosified version of the picture, I keep trying, but someting (the website?) won't let me.
You DO have to downsize when trying to add an attachment for the forums, and as it says at the 'Attach Files' button, only: bmp doc gif jpe jpeg jpg pdf png psd txt zip. Not sure of the exact pixel size, but 'save for web.' seems to work. Don't use 'save for web' to upload to the DB though.
__________________
A Picture Is Worth 1000 Words. A Memory Is Worth 1000 Pictures.

Last edited by EMTRailfan; 09-07-2008 at 09:05 PM.
EMTRailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 09:19 PM   #25
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,803
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
All caps is, in my experience, considered a form of shouting. (Perhaps that is only the case when the full statement is all caps.)
I stopped reading after this sentence in parenthesis. Looks like you understand after all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMTRailfan
You DO have to downsize when trying to add an attachment for the forums, and as it says at the 'Attach Files' button, only: bmp doc gif jpe jpeg jpg pdf png psd txt zip. Not sure of the exact pixel size, but 'save for web.' seems to work.
This is correct (but you didn't have to yell about it. hahaha)

I'm still a little uncertain on the max file size as well. Usually when saving a picture for an attachment, I try to keep it between 100-150k. I think I've even gotten one on that was as large as 175-200k, but I swear other times in the past I've gotten an error message (too large?) when trying to put one up around 125k. It certainly seems a little inconsistent at times.
JimThias 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 04:37 PM.


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