Rejection for noise - need help understanding

[mersenne6]

Message deleted by author

[mersenne6]

Well, so much for that. I thought the correct way to reference a photo was [photoid=xxxxxx] but I guess not.

[Mberry]

Don't think it works for rejections.

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by mersenne6

Well, so much for that. I thought the correct way to reference a photo was [photoid=xxxxxx] but I guess not.

That only works for accepted photos. For rejections, you need to copy the URL and paste into the post.

[mersenne6]

Ok, thanks.

Let's try this again.

The first picture was rejected as being too dark

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...80&key=1151892

So I attempted to lighten it a bit

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...03&key=2431970

and it was rejected as too noisy. My problem is that I can't figure out what the screener is looking at with respect to noise. I'm just trying to "see" better to avoid submitting sub-par pictures in the future.

[jac_murphy]

It's certainly no less grainy than a particular shot sitting at the TO24 right now. There is a bit present in the sky, however.

You might have some compositional issues, though. There's a fair amount of space on the right, as well as some top and bottom, that could be trimmed.

As for the exposure, I'd selectively brighten everything except the yellow nose of the locomotive to avoid turning the headlights into oversized blobs.

Fix these, and they might overlook the grain.

-Jacques

[magicman_841]

I assume you got an undersharpened rejection (600 mm and 1/160s ) and you sharpened it to 11, causing the grain issue.

Still, it's not very sharp and has a lot of dead space on the right. Either get closer to the signals or wait for the train to get closer. Show us that water tower?

[RobJor]

My exif shows 200-400mm lens at 600 on D800 which would not be correct? so not sure of data but ISO if correct at 200 could have been bumped.

I think it has a lot of good elements so maybe if you go back and reprocess it, crop a little could work even tho once I get those pair of rejections pretty hard to overcome.
Might be better to wait a bit, I have a bunch that got accepted after a wait and rework.

As an aside, for me preferred to this:

PhotoID: 639286 Photograph © Matt Landry

I keep looking at it and don't "get it".

Bob

[mersenne6]

The focal length and exposure time are correct. I didn't get a rejection for under sharpening. He was moving dead slow so the raw image is good.

The distance between the grade crossing and the signal is such that if you want that perspective you have to have a long lens. I appreciate everyone's response. I decided to try to implement some of them and we'll see what we'll see. Thanks again.

[mersenne6]

Well...so much for Cascada. No go. Again thanks for all of your suggestions/observations.

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by RobJor

I keep looking at it and don't "get it".

Bob

If that's the best IQ I could muster at 600mm, I'd quit.

Loyd L.

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by RobJor

I keep looking at it and don't "get it".

Bob

Roller-coaster trackage is cool! Fave.

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by mersenne6

Well...so much for Cascada. No go. Again thanks for all of your suggestions/observations.

Here is the cure for too dark.

PhotoID: 639851 Photograph © Kevin Burkholder

But going back to your rejections, I think it has been shown that the rejection given is not always the sole cause for rejection. I think there would be a general agreement that 1/165th is too slow for 600mm unless you were on a tripod and the train was stopped. Also like I mentioned, I found once a cycle of rejections starts there is no escape with the best hope is to try again later.
Too dark, lighten it up, too noisy, correct noise, too dark.......

Bob

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

Roller-coaster trackage is cool! Fave.

I like them too, quality, with good light and a pleasant, realistic use of compression like:

PhotoID: 527901 Photograph © Craig Williams

Over 8000 views short but a winner not a we.......

Bob

[mersenne6]

RobJor - I agree-I'll let it go. As for the setup - tripod, train barely moving faster than a person could walk - also cable release. Again thanks for taking the time to respond.

[JimThias]

f8, 1/160, ISO 200. The only way you should be seeing that much noise is if this was underexposed and a LOT and you tried to lighten it up too much. I'm curious to see the pre-processed image.