Old 05-04-2014, 06:46 AM   #1
ACR_Ted
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 80
Default 2 dark side photos - 1 accepted. 1 rejected!

Wonder why one photo taken from the dark side was rejected and the other accepted??

Reject: http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...67&key=3852385

Accepted: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...480129&nseq=20

I actually had expected both to be rejected....

Oh well....so be it. I've only appealed once and got nowhere, so I don't bother anymore.

Ted
ACR_Ted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 06:50 AM   #2
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACR_Ted View Post
Wonder why one photo taken from the dark side was rejected and the other accepted??

Oh well....so be it. I've only appealed once and got nowhere, so I don't bother anymore.

Ted
Sigh.

Where can I see the other 50% of your portfolio?

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 07:18 AM   #3
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,225
Default

Accepted shot is more dramatic (or maybe the flags won them over).
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 08:02 AM   #4
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb

The rejected one is not that interesting.

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 05-05-2014 at 03:25 PM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 08:05 AM   #5
ACR_Ted
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
Sigh.

Where can I see the other 50% of your portfolio?

/Mitch
I do have my own website here: http://algomacentral.railfan.net/

or the newest shots of the Copper Basin are here:

http://algomacentral.railfan.net/copper_basin.htm

I did clean up (enhance, doctor) the reject photo by removing the house and telephone/power lines...

I had thought about setting up a Flickr page, but their white text on a black background gives me a near instant headache .

Ted

Last edited by ACR_Ted; 05-04-2014 at 08:10 AM.
ACR_Ted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 02:55 PM   #6
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

If you want my real opinion, I dont think they should have accepted either one of them...
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2014, 07:04 PM   #7
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

Not a problem with the accepted one, the other one would not even warrant ever having anything more than dumped from the cf card had I taken it.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 05:02 AM   #8
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,899
Default

I would have rejected the reject and rejected the accepted for Bad Cropping. It needs a little more room but should not have been rejected for lighting in my opinion.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 06:48 AM   #9
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Whether or not one image is somehow more dramatic, both suck, or the cropping is off - both are identically lit. That one was accepted and the other rejected for bad light is why you find so many frustrated and ex-RP patrons.

Fix?

Better consistency between screeners (or screener).
More tolerance in appeals when similar (and I suppose, recent) images are noted.
More accuracy in rejection reasons (the rejected is seemingly "poor crop" centered.
Better use of note from screener.

The accepted image could be considered "better" lit or "more" appealing in that it was
captured head on vs 3/4 and the engine color being a light grey seemed better lit. Or the rejected image was cropped in such a way that "good enough" lighting didn't cover it - though, poor crop would seem the legitimate rejection.

Ted- glad you noted the cloning and editing. Hopefully, you will always do so and accept the risk when submitting to a site like RP where images are expected to be
"real" and repeatable without extensive editing.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 10:59 AM   #10
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

Identically lit but one in on the inside of a curve which puts it in another category.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 06:57 PM   #11
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumForce View Post
Identically lit but one in on the inside of a curve which puts it in another category.
Both lit the same - the nose, the trucks, the sides and both on a curve.

The only think I can see, other then a lighter color paint scheme and more of an head on capture is... and just noticed this - the lower elevation /perspective of the accepted one omits the shadow.

Maybe that's how to escape backlit /poor lighting on RP - hide shadows and it's no longer backlit. Each photo, however seems well suited or at least more suitable for inclusion within the database then many others that are routinely accepted with far worse lighting.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2014, 09:20 PM   #12
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumForce View Post
Not a problem with the accepted one, the other one would not even warrant ever having anything more than dumped from the cf card had I taken it.
That's my opinion as well. The accepted one was quite nice. The other one wasn't good. Not hard to figure this one out.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2014, 04:08 AM   #13
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
That's my opinion as well. The accepted one was quite nice. The other one wasn't good. Not hard to figure this one out.
Ron! I think your RP account has been hijacked! Look what someone pretending to be you said -^

It's lit THE SAME - other then a possible "poor crop", if the accepted one got in, the rejected one was equally merited.

Jeeze, Ron - you sound like a "screener". "The other one wasn't good". There are a TON of images on RP I consider "not good" but fit RP's rules of inclusion. Imagine if the rules were such that "personal appeal" trumped all else. We haven't yet seen that here though it has been suggested more then once that admin add "I simply don't like it" to the rejection list. Like you said, it's not as if each accepted shot is being forwarded to TRAINS Magazine. If the first is acceptable, so should the second image. Besides, if a wreck shot can make RP, why not add an ICE sighting in AZ to the database that is RP?

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2014, 05:22 AM   #14
ACR_Ted
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 80
Default

Thanks Mitch...I do appreciate your comments! It does seem that most RP'ers like the usual sunny side wedgie photo. Now that I am free from the ball and chain of using film I am trying to shoot photos that are somewhat different. I got quite a few storm shots during last summer's Arizona monsoon season that I doubt would make the RP database, but I certainly enjoyed the results, and so did others at one of my digital slide shows. Same with some twilight/blue hour photos - all rejected by RP. But I feel that I am learning new things and I am enjoying my RR photography more than I have for some time....

Ted
ACR_Ted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2014, 06:43 AM   #15
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

Mitch, the photos are totally different, until you said the rejected one was in a curve I never even saw it.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2014, 09:18 AM   #16
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,899
Default

Even if it is lit the same, what does that have to do with one being rejected and one being accepted? They're still different shots. The rejected one is not pleasing to the eye in my opinion while. I know they only rejected the one for lighting, but it has issues not related to the lighting. And we know that for good or bad, sometimes RP will offer only the most obvious to them rejection the first time around.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2014, 06:26 PM   #17
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
Even if it is lit the same, what does that have to do with one being rejected and one being accepted?
I'll let you answer that, Joe:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
...they only rejected one for lighting
/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2014, 08:53 PM   #18
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

I might have loosened up the cropping but I would be proud of the accepted shot. the rejected one just has many issues beyond the lighting which doesn't work at all for what it is.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2014, 03:01 AM   #19
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumForce View Post
Mitch, the photos are totally different, until you said the rejected one was in a curve I never even saw it.
And now that you see it, the photos are no longer totally different!

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumForce View Post
I might have loosened up the cropping but I would be proud of the accepted shot. the rejected one just has many issues beyond the lighting which doesn't work at all for what it is.
And there lies the issue. The bad light is NOT a valid rejection which I believe was the point of Ted's thread from the very start.

Beyond that, yes, the second photo does not work as well as the first.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2014, 02:45 PM   #20
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post

...Jeeze, Ron - you sound like a "screener". "The other one wasn't good". There are a TON of images on RP I consider "not good" but fit RP's rules of inclusion. ...
A poor choice of words on my part. I liked the tele shot, no questions asked, but I wasn't as thrilled with the second one, which was more conventional. If those had been my shots, I would have been pissed had the tele not been accepted. I don't think I would have uploaded the other one. I've taken thousands of shots very similar to these, so this is not to be disrespectful of a fellow photog.

Just sayin'......
Ron Flanary 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 01:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.