Old 05-25-2007, 12:47 PM   #1
Bob Pickering
Senior Member
 
Bob Pickering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 357
Smile A question on a rejected shot...

Good Morning.

First Railpictures.net has really helped my photography skills and I have learned alot about shooting trains and how to improve my work.

My question on this shot below I got dinged for backlighting, the nose is dark, I was trying to capture the side of the train and the scenery. Does anyone have any ideas, comments etc? Should I appeal? I usually do not unless I think there is a valid reason to.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=873562943

Now there is a simular photo published at the same angle with the D&RGW heritage unit (1989). Maybe that was accepted because it was a special scheme?

Anyway I am just wanting to continue to improve my skills. Thank You

Smiles

BP
Bob Pickering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2007, 02:31 PM   #2
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Personally I like it better in black and white. I attached a sample-quality edit of this, but, first of all, there's pretty high compression on the locomotive even in your rejected version (edges are pixelated). Second, what is the dotted line that seems to be right in front of the locomotive? It's sort of distracting (seen in the second attachment).
Attached Images
File Type: jpg UP_05_18a_07_jpg_88352.jpg (451.4 KB, 114 views)
File Type: jpg Copy of UP_05_18a_07_jpg_88352.jpg (90.8 KB, 89 views)
__________________
- My photos at RailPictures.net
- My videos at Rail-Videos.net
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2007, 02:45 PM   #3
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

While there indeed is no light on the nose, that may not be the issue. Remember that the categories and the attached descriptions are generic and not necessarily applicable to a specific shot except in general terms.

Here, I see poor lighting, but it's not the nose at issue for me. Overall, there are lots of extremely bright and extremely dark areas. I would have chosen the alternative "high sun" reason for rejection. I suspect that, to the screener, the sun was not quite high enough to warrant that reason, but the lighting is harsh, unattractive, just the sort of mid-day light that makes for a poorer picture than one would like and that causes all the photo books to say do not shoot between 10 and 2.

BTW, I like the shot in general in terms of composition and scenery. Can you return there at a different time of day? Or go there in a rainstorm or fog and get a cool moody shot.
__________________
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 05-25-2007, 06:19 PM   #4
Bob Pickering
Senior Member
 
Bob Pickering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 357
Default Thank you and a question

Thank You everyone..

No it will be some time before I can get back there...it is in Colorado and I am in Florida.

I am using Microsoft Digital Image for my editing, when I resize to a 1024 X what ever is there a better program to use that does not pixilate as bad?

Thanks

BP
Bob Pickering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2007, 06:32 PM   #5
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

I have heard/read that Google's free program Picasa is a pretty good photo editor.

I just wrote this in another thread!

I myself use Photoshop Elements 3.
__________________
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 05-25-2007, 06:58 PM   #6
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
is there a better program to use that does not pixilate as bad?
Yes, pretty much anything else!

In digital photography, post-processing is almost as important as capturing the image itself.

I think you're really limiting/hamstringing the capabilities of your Digital Rebel, Bob, with the software you're using (assuming you're only using the Microsoft one for your processing). Your Digital Rebel should have come with bundled software (ArcSoft Photo Studio and/or Digital Photo Professional) which is far better than what the Microsoft program offers.

If you don't have those, I'd go to Best Buy and get PS Elements or something equivalent stat! Otherwise processing your photos with Microsoft image software is like buying a Corvette with an automatic transmission, putting touring tires on it (probably with white walls), installing a car seat, and using 85 Octane gas...you have the necessary hardware, but you're limiting it's effectiveness...
__________________

Last edited by Ween; 05-25-2007 at 07:11 PM.
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2007, 07:11 PM   #7
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
Otherwise processing your photos with Microsoft image software is like buying a Corvette with an automatic transmission, putting touring tires on it (probably with white walls)
What's wrong with a Corvette with white walls?
http://www.seriouswheels.com/1950-19...hite-WW-RA.htm


Seriously, Chris is correct.
__________________
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 05-25-2007, 07:23 PM   #8
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

This post falls under the mantra of this statement:

Quote:
Anyway I am just wanting to continue to improve my skills.
This is to illustrate the differences in post-processing. The first shot is straight out of the database, only resized to 800x602. The second shot is editted using the PhotoStudio software that came with my Canon, which took less than a minute to achieve.

While my editted one loses some of the shadow detail in the tunnel, you gain detail in the cliff bathed in sun. There are tradeoffs, sure, and better results can be gained with more effort than a minute's work, but this is more to demonstrate what can be accomplished with different software.

Thoughts?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg UP_05_19d_07_smalloriginal2.jpg (210.8 KB, 78 views)
File Type: jpg UP_05_19d_07_smallpp2.jpg (213.4 KB, 79 views)
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2007, 08:48 PM   #9
Bob Pickering
Senior Member
 
Bob Pickering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 357
Default

OK Thank you folks I really appreciate it!
Bob Pickering 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 06:15 AM.


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