RailPictures.Net Forums

RailPictures.Net Forums (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/index.php)
-   Railroad Photography Forum (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   too loose (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17676)

baggydave 03-17-2016 10:41 PM

too loose
 
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...75&key=1578839
I am afraid I don't understand too loose. Can anyone help me please?
Is this worth an appeal? Dreaded backlighting I'm afraid
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...37&key=8142386

Thanks everyone
Dave

bigbassloyd 03-17-2016 11:15 PM

The crop is too generous for the amount of interest within it. Tighten up on the train and remove a lot of the 'scenery' around it. I would also suggest that you reprocess it to lessen the halos around everything (and especially the nose of the locomotive).

Loyd L.

KevinM 03-17-2016 11:51 PM

Dave,

Grab the right side of the frame and bring it in until the lower right "thirds mark" is right over The Scotsman. This picture should be a cinch to get in.

miningcamper1 03-17-2016 11:55 PM

#1
Hmmm. This site has accepted photos with the train much, much farther away. (I won't ruffle feathers by posting recent examples.) The halos do need to be addressed.

#2
I like it, but is it composed off-center for any other reason than the site's "rule-of-thirds preference" (or rule-of-thirds obsession :evil:) ?

baggydave 03-18-2016 12:09 AM

I've recropped Number 1 and resubmitted cropping off some of the tree on the left which I used to balance the tree on the right, so we will see what happens. With regard to the second one I liked the effect of the branches on the right so I left them in, happens to be rule of thirds but that didn't come into consideration. The trouble with the Tanfield Railway is that it runs south to north and everything is always backlit. Locos all face north so there is no chance to get "light on the nose". Thanks for advice.

JimThias 03-18-2016 02:03 AM

The second one would be much more effective if the highlights in the plume weren't blown out. It's kind of defeating the purpose of the texture in a plume that backlighting normally showcases.

KevinM 03-18-2016 02:29 AM

I'm in agreement with Jim on the highlights issue. Lots of photographers have problems getting the highlights right in backlit steam plumes. These are way too bright, but I have also seen a ton of examples in which folks killed the highlights to the point that the shot looks like an oil painting.

That second shot definitely needs some work on the highlights.

Noct Foamer 03-18-2016 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 187744)
The second one would be much more effective if the highlights in the plume weren't blown out. It's kind of defeating the purpose of the texture in a plume that backlighting normally showcases.

Yeah, but might be recoverable. Or, create new ones even with some cloning. I like both shots, but what do I know.


Kent in SD

nikos1 03-18-2016 03:19 AM

Would be alot of cropping to get it to what RP wants, not sure if its feasible. But I agree here, there is not much of interest on the top and right edges, the tree doesnt do much for me.

baggydave 03-18-2016 11:25 AM

Well everyone, many thanks for your input. I went back to the drawing board and revamped both and they have both been accepted.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...69895&nseq=106
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...69896&nseq=107
How about that!!

Dennis A. Livesey 03-19-2016 02:10 PM

I am too late for this party but I will shoot off my mouth anyway. :-)

I liked the first crop of the Scotsman as it was. I liked the context; nothing says Scotsman to me more than rough hills such as those depicted. I was flummoxed as to it's non-acceptance.

Regarding the use of ROT or Rule of Thirds, I am now exploring compositional ideas beyond it. You all may find this article of interest.

http://petapixel.com/2016/01/30/10-m...ule-of-thirds/

The haloing to me looked more to be steam vapor around the cylinders and a tad too much brighting of the ground (As in an effort to brighten the locomotive, your brush took an errant course.)

The Tanfield shot as first presented, screamed clipped highlights and was painful to see. Now looks lovely as it should.

So therefore David I shall ask in the forthright style of Jim Thias, how could an exceptional photographer such as yourself not see that? :confused:

baggydave 03-19-2016 03:57 PM

I am always flummoxed by screener decisions and I also prefer my original crop. I do like trains in landscape and not just a train. With regard to your forthright question the straight answer is "not enough light on the nose" It is the obsession in RP with backlit submissions. I had already submitted this picture four times and each time had been knocked back with this rejection. I therefore kept overcompensating . After this little discussion on the forum I just went back to the beginning and started again. The nose, if you can call it that, is just as dark as the original submission yet it was passed by the screener. Does anything make sense anymore in this world we live in?

John West 03-19-2016 04:03 PM

Screeners or critics?
 
What I find troubling about the process is the originally submitted and rejected image looked just fine to me. It should have been accepted. It clearly was far better than many pix that do get accepted. The accepted version might or might not be an improvement, but if it is an improvement it is a minor improvement. Now if the screeners had a better track record for thoughtful artistic insights, I would say that is all and good. But the fact is their track record is arbitrary, full of inconsistencies, and often just nit picking. Which is not so much a criticism as a recognition of the nature of the beast given the volume of crap they have to wade through. They would better serve this site if they focused on accepting images meeting minimum standards (which the original version clearly did), and not try to occasionally and unpredictably serve as art critics or teachers. If for whatever reason they want to offer helpful advice, that can always be done with a note to the submitter with a suggestion to change and resubmit if they feel like it.

JRMDC 03-19-2016 04:49 PM

I am flummoxed to see the word "flummoxed" appear twice in an RP thread!

I was fine with the original crop, it had a "landscape" feel to it. The tighter crop has a "RP landscape" feel to it. Yes, I can and do type "empty space" with the best of them, but that shot struck me as being about the scene, and the RP crop puts greater emphasis on the train. The original balance was fine in my view.

Moffat Road 03-19-2016 05:00 PM

I also like the original crop of your first rejection. Perhaps it gives a better feel for English countryside—or maybe the tree on the right frames the photo well and including all the exhaust works nicely in the image too. The composition is good to the eyes. Nice (original crop) photo, Dave!

Mike Danneman

miningcamper1 03-20-2016 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey (Post 187764)

Regarding the use of ROT or Rule of Thirds, I am now exploring compositional ideas beyond it. You all may find this article of interest.

http://petapixel.com/2016/01/30/10-m...ule-of-thirds/

A good blog post, although not everyone agreed. I liked this comment from "Emergency Message":

" I believe you are either born with a good eye or you aren't. You can't teach natural ability to compose, its something that should happen at the camera."

The rules or standards I prefer:

Pleasing / not pleasing
Interesting / uninteresting, boring, mediocre
Like / don't like

tbelton 03-20-2016 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey (Post 187764)

Regarding the use of ROT or Rule of Thirds, I am now exploring compositional ideas beyond it. You all may find this article of interest.

http://petapixel.com/2016/01/30/10-m...ule-of-thirds/

Thank you for posting this link. Very interesting read.


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.