Foreground clutter?? Really??

[DWHonan]

Originally Posted by Holloran Grade

Someone with some balls would clone out the pole, and the shrub.

...and then they'd have no wood.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by Holloran Grade

But seriously, yes, the bush is too much because this is essemtialy a roster shot and those must be clear.

Why don't you remove the bush?

A 3/4 yea best be 100% right on and it a bit shadowed in the front.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by magicman_841

Epic nitpick.

Yeah it is, Yeah its a 3/4 and why it got picked on!

[Ron Flanary]

Originally Posted by ACR_Ted

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...56&key=7753195

This is considered foreground clutter?? A few weeds here and there...next time out there I will trim them!

Ted

I wouldn't spend much time with this one. It doesn't do a thing for me photographically speaking. Actually, the foreground weeds improved the composition. I would get closer to the weeds next time and use a wide angle.

[magicman_841]

I'm not saying it's perfect. I'm saying the clutter rejection is a nitpicky rejection. If it had gotten "bad cropping", then yes, I would have agreed.

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by ACR_Ted

A little background...this was an example of "Minuteman Railfanning" as in I found out that morning that it was leaving Tucson 2 hours earlier than what I was told the night before, so I just grabbed the cameras and highballed out there. That curve is 1 of only 2 spots (the other is an outside curve with even more clutter) between Tucson and Yuma where one can get nose light on a westbound train in the morning (and I know not to upload dark nose shots now - this was rejected for bad lighting (http://algomacentral.railfan.net/ima..._9-27-2012.jpg)). I did forget my "real time cloning tool" as well in the rush to get out there, but next time I'll have it with me. That spot is only accessible via 4 wheel drive unless one trespasses, and that area is hot with police now with all of the drug and human smuggling lately. A couple of weeks earlier in that area I heard someone blasting away with a full auto machine gun!

You ventured into an illegal alien war zone to get a wedgie shot? You are a brave soul! I hope you were at least armed to defend yourself.

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by MagnumForce

A bush in the way in 2012 is entirely uncalled for.

Wait we are talking about shrubbery? Oh, well... then forget I said anything.

Did you say "shrubbery"?

[PLEzero]

It could be those 5 pixels of green in the foreground.... or that giant telephone pole blocking the 3rd locomotive and adding nothing pleasing to the image.

[MagnumForce]

Illegal war zone or not, it's not a great image by any stretch.

[Freericks]

Originally Posted by PLEzero

It could be those 5 pixels of green in the foreground.... or that giant telephone pole blocking the 3rd locomotive and adding nothing pleasing to the image.

Or both...

But because it's a 3/4 roster(y) shot of an engine in the data base quite a few times already, I'm going with the five pixels.

PhotoID: 384191 Photograph © Charles J Freericks

[ACR_Ted]

Well the photo was accepted after some cropping:

PhotoID: 413824 Photograph © Ted Ellis

Ron - it was taken at 24 mm on a 7D which makes it about 37 mm full frame - best I can do until I can afford a FF camera!

Jim - yes I am armed with a S&W 9mm semi-auto pistol. I've been shooting photos out at Shawmut for over a quarter of a century and am not about to let some illegals keep me away...but I no longer camp out overnight there by myself.

Ted

[JRMDC]

So what is the lesson here? It was the pole, all along? Since in the original the pole was further in, it was considered an obstruction, and now that it is next to the edge it is considered a fine way to cut-off the trailing end of the train?

If so, I'm glad to know that at least they didn't think the pilot was actually obscured!

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

If so, I'm glad to know that at least they didn't think the pilot was actually obscured!

Well, in his accepted photo it's not.

[Freericks]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

...I'm glad to know that at least they didn't think the pilot was actually obscured!

Well, not anymore it's not.

[PLEzero]

Originally Posted by Freericks

Or both...

But because it's a 3/4 roster(y) shot of an engine in the data base quite a few times already, I'm going with the five pixels.

I'm okay with those poles because they are part of the scene. The photo in question is a wedge of a train with not much else to look at besides that awkwardly placed pole.

[Joe the Photog]

Well, even though he got his shot in the database, most of us spent a lot of time telling Ted why that bush and or pole was foreground clutter

PhotoID: 413654 Photograph © Chase Gunnoe

But after seeing this shot, I must respectfully give up my argument on anything ever being foreground clutter again.

[DWHonan]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

But after seeing this shot, I must respectfully give up my argument on anything ever being foreground clutter again.

The shot also isn't level. Note that the horizon was rotated to set the track level, yet the caption states this train is downgrade and the angle of incidence appears to be a few degrees off from perpendicular; really, the water line should be horizontal, with the primary and reflected tracks converging toward a vanishing point on an projection of that horizontal line off to the right.

[jnohallman]

Originally Posted by DWHonan

The shot also isn't level. Note that the horizon was rotated to set the track level, yet the caption states this train is downgrade and the angle of incidence appears to be a few degrees off from perpendicular; really, the water line should be horizontal, with the primary and reflected tracks converging toward a vanishing point on an projection of that horizontal line off to the right.

All of that may be true, but Chase shot it.

Jon



PS- That's a joke, Chase.

[JRMDC]

Good eye, Dave

[Missabefan]

You want foreground clutter? I give you foreground clutter.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...21&key=2018497

I thought after reading some of the posts here lately that is was "anything goes" week at RP. Guess not.

[magicman_841]

Don't get caught, bring a lawnmower!

[DWHonan]

Originally Posted by Missabefan

You want foreground clutter? I give you foreground clutter.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...21&key=2018497

I thought after reading some of the posts here lately that is was "anything goes" week at RP. Guess not.

That's depressing -- the vegetation obscuring the trucks and pilot is the whole point of that photo! Maybe that's the argument you should use to appeal it: This isn't intended to be a roster shot of an operating set of power, but rather a documentary photo depicting a set of famous locomotives that have been all but abandoned to the elements and are quickly being absorbed by nature.

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by Missabefan

You want foreground clutter? I give you foreground clutter.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...21&key=2018497

I thought after reading some of the posts here lately that is was "anything goes" week at RP. Guess not.

Wow, that is about as ridiculous a foreground clutter rejection as I have ever seen.

Also oversharpened, as in the thread you just started.

[Ron Flanary]

Originally Posted by DWHonan

The shot also isn't level. Note that the horizon was rotated to set the track level, yet the caption states this train is downgrade and the angle of incidence appears to be a few degrees off from perpendicular; really, the water line should be horizontal, with the primary and reflected tracks converging toward a vanishing point on an projection of that horizontal line off to the right.

Very astutely noted, all around. Excessive and unnecessary image manipulation will be the eventual ruin of society as we know it.

Digital photography ain't all that, and a bag of chips...

[Holloran Grade]

Originally Posted by Missabefan

You want foreground clutter? I give you foreground clutter.

Me too!