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)
-   -   Umm, you got to be kidding me on this one. (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=9197)

kml928 02-26-2009 01:36 AM

Umm, you got to be kidding me on this one.
 
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=522424448

Of course its backlit, its shot into the sunset, and you can still even see a decent amount of the engine from the lights behind me, how can this be rejected when they accept tons of other sunset shots that are backlit on purpose?!?

kml928 02-26-2009 01:43 AM

Sorry, I dont want to bring up other photos and compare, especially when mine arent the greatest, but I really do not understand the double standards on this site.

I will post examples as I find them, all good photos, I am in no way knocking ANY of these in any way, just stating that if these were accepted, I do not see any reason why the one above wasnt.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=272367&nseq=3

kml928 02-26-2009 01:44 AM

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=271831&nseq=6

kml928 02-26-2009 01:45 AM

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=271475&nseq=9

JRMDC 02-26-2009 01:45 AM

It is poorly lit and has no redeeming qualities apart from the sunset. No silhouette, no glint, no interesting contrasts. The engine blends into the background, it is cut off in an uninteresting way, there is a pole growing out of it.

kml928 02-26-2009 01:46 AM

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...271145&nseq=14

JRMDC 02-26-2009 01:47 AM

First comparison shot is a glint, yours is not, second and third and fourth comparison shots are silhouettes, yours is not.

You might have been able to do something with it had it been darker, or if you reduced exposure, but the composition is problematic for the reasons I gave before.

kml928 02-26-2009 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC (Post 83773)
It is poorly lit and has no redeeming qualities apart from the sunset. No silhouette, no glint, no interesting contrasts. The engine blends into the background, it is cut off in an uninteresting way, there is a pole growing out of it.

Ok, and this is a more appealing shot?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=271475&nseq=9

Sorry I guess we share different views buddy.

kml928 02-26-2009 01:53 AM

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...261559&nseq=92

And this one?

JRMDC 02-26-2009 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kml928 (Post 83776)
Ok, and this is a more appealing shot?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=271475&nseq=9

Sorry I guess we share different views buddy.

Don't get irritable, I am trying to help. A silhouette is a well-respected technique that often generates interesting images. That one is not one of my favorites but it is pertty good and has the basic concept - you show an interesting outline (clearly identifiable engines) against an interesting sky, especially sky color. You are showing part of an engine in weak light. Your shot is just all around dark with a bit of sunset. It falls in the gap between silhouette and well-lit, and it does so in a way that to my eye (and perhaps the screener) is uninteresting.

bigbassloyd 02-26-2009 01:57 AM

Your sunset colors looks a bit off, the pole is horrible, and the cutoff of the locomotive could be better.

Like J mentioned, the shots you're linking are completely different from what you have.

Loyd L.

JRMDC 02-26-2009 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kml928 (Post 83777)

Interesting color, ok composition, not contrasty enough for my tastes, not enough darks, but tastes differ and it is ok to me, not great. Your shot just has a touch of color and a lot of variations of gray, and the engine is not well-captured, for the reasons I gave previously. So to my eye yours is not close to the ok level, it has flaws strong enough that I agree with the rejection. One person's opinion, of course.

kml928 02-26-2009 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd (Post 83779)
Your sunset colors looks a bit off, the pole is horrible, and the cutoff of the locomotive could be better.

Like J mentioned, the shots you're linking are completely different from what you have.

Loyd L.

The pole can easily be cloned out as can the wires, or will that just get hit with an "overprocessed" or other manipulation rejection? I know how to clone good, so you couldnt even tell that the pole was there, but I dont want to go to the trouble if its just gonna get nailed again.

DWHonan 02-26-2009 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kml928 (Post 83769)
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=522424448

Of course its backlit, its shot into the sunset, and you can still even see a decent amount of the engine from the lights behind me, how can this be rejected when they accept tons of other sunset shots that are backlit on purpose?!?

Sure, the general concept is welcomed, even if sometimes the execution -- where's the train? coughcough -- is up for discussion. In your case, with what you appear to have been going for, there is no interesting subject that's being framed against the brightly-lit sky.

Let's take a look at some of the photos you linked to that in any way resemble your composition; I'm going to ignore the glint and haze shots, they're completely different.

Here, the signal is prominently featured against the sky, and the photog used the rails in front of the train to repeat the headlight elements:
[photoid=271831]

As J pointed out, these next two shots are pure silhouettes; the photogs exposed solely for the sky and let the rest of the image fade (mostly) to black:
[photoid=271475]
[photoid=271145]

Now, take a critical look at your image: It isn't a silhouette because foreground detail is still plainly visible. The arch bridge blocks half of the engine's nose from being silhouetted against the sky, and the angle at which you composed the photo doesn't permit the bridge to stand out against the sky. Is there a place you could have stood so the sunlit clouds were visible <U>through</U> the open arches? That would add some drama to the shot! As an example, which of these two photos of CSX's Sciotoville Bridge do you find more appealing?
(1) http://www.davehonan.com/spring04/sc...04-05-04-l.jpg
(2) http://www.davehonan.com/may02/sciot...05-03-02-l.jpg

If you want to boil things down to the absolute basics: The only thing we photographers do is capture light on film (whether analog or digital makes no difference), so manipulate what's available in nature or from man-made objects to the greatest extent possible to produce a dramatic and dynamic image.

kml928 02-26-2009 02:18 AM

Theres no way to get the sun under the arches, the sky cant be seen that low while keeping the rail line in the shot.

The only thing maybe possible would be to lay on the ground to get a lower angle to the shot and maybe see some light between the wheels/under the engine.

I'll do a quick clone and get the pole out and drop the brightness down a little, the RAW image was alot darker on the engine, I think when I brought some highlights out in the sky it bumped the brightness up on the engine as well.

jnohallman 02-26-2009 02:28 AM

If you clone the pole out of the image to resubmit it, you might get nailed for digital manipulation because the screeners will have already seen the original image with the pole in it. Other people have been nailed for less . . . Besides, it would make no sense to clone out the pole without cloning out all the wires that go along with it, and no matter how good you are at cloning, that's going to screw up your sky somehow. And even if you do all that, the engine will still be backlit.

Jon

kml928 02-26-2009 02:31 AM

Ok, well at least I'll show you guys the quick clone and see if it looks better to you at least.

DWHonan 02-26-2009 02:33 AM

<I>Edit: Looks like Jon and I were scribbling at the same time. Nevertheless...</I>

Quote:

Originally Posted by kml928 (Post 83783)
I'll do a quick clone and get the pole out and drop the brightness down a little, the RAW image was alot darker on the engine, I think when I brought some highlights out in the sky it bumped the brightness up on the engine as well.

...blah blah blah <A HREF="http://www.railpictures.net/addphotos/guidelines.php">DPSG</A> blah blah blah:
Quote:

The purpose of our website is to display genuine, authentic photographs of trains and railroad related scenes. Bearing this in mind, digital manipulation of photographs ... is not permitted
There is nothing more authentic to ex-Pennsy mainlines east of HBG than the old catenary support structures! (And I mean "support" in the more liberal sense.)

Anyway, assuming you're still going to go ahead and clone out the pole, I hope you do a real good job getting rid of the wires, too, because otherwise somebody's going to notice that seven parabolas are ending at arbitrary points in the sky.

Really, the point of what the respondents to your posts are trying to get you to accomplish is to create better compositions in the field, not rely on post-processing to remove detracting elements.

KevinM 02-26-2009 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kml928 (Post 83781)
The pole can easily be cloned out as can the wires, or will that just get hit with an "overprocessed" or other manipulation rejection? I know how to clone good, so you couldnt even tell that the pole was there, but I dont want to go to the trouble if its just gonna get nailed again.

I don't think any of the regulars here would recommend doing these things. The submission policy on RP pretty much forbids making those types of changes. Even if you were leaning in that direction, the Screeners already have a copy of your shot that includes those features, so any attempt to clone them out will be obvious to them, no matter how much better the final product looks. Probably best to just re-shoot it. I know that on my first sunset shot, I went out several nights in a row before getting something that would fly here.

Mike Walsh 02-26-2009 02:36 AM

Ok... KML, you chose my photo for comparison as your #1 target.

I can see an OBVIOUS difference in the two photos.

Your rejected photo features a "backlit" shot -- actually a sunset shot.

My photo features a GLINT shot, showing a specific subject: the signal bridge.

My photo does not have any distracting objects in the photo, such as power lines, et cetera.


I decided to take a photo, and take a shot at submitting it to RP.net. Many others have glint shots on rp.net, and I don't see any complaints about them. When you have other issues that conflict with your photo, though (a glint/backlit shot, combined with dirty lens, power lines), I would imagine your chances for approval would reduce significantly.

Respectfully,

Mike Walsh

kml928 02-26-2009 02:52 AM

Dirty lens?

kml928 02-26-2009 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWHonan (Post 83787)
<I>Edit: Looks like Jon and I were scribbling at the same time. Nevertheless...</I>



...blah blah blah <A HREF="http://www.railpictures.net/addphotos/guidelines.php">DPSG</A> blah blah blah:


There is nothing more authentic to ex-Pennsy mainlines east of HBG than the old catenary support structures! (And I mean "support" in the more liberal sense.)

Anyway, assuming you're still going to go ahead and clone out the pole, I hope you do a real good job getting rid of the wires, too, because otherwise somebody's going to notice that seven parabolas are ending at arbitrary points in the sky.

Really, the point of what the respondents to your posts are trying to get you to accomplish is to create better compositions in the field, not rely on post-processing to remove detracting elements.

So how do some of those extremly post processed Knapp shots make it on here?

DWHonan 02-26-2009 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kml928 (Post 83798)
So how do some of those extremly post processed Knapp shots make it on here?

I'm not a screener, don't ask me! :grin:

jnohallman 02-26-2009 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kml928 (Post 83798)
So how do some of those extremly post processed Knapp shots make it on here?

There are a number of posts in this forum that have asked the very same question!

Jon

Chris Starnes 02-26-2009 03:00 AM

Keith:

As the others have stated, your idea for a sunset shot may have been a good one but the overall composition and lighting just do not work well. I'm not sure cloning out a power pole on a photo that was rejected for being backlit is a productive use of anybody's time.

If you really want to improve I would suggest taking a constructive look at some of the other glint, sunset, silhouette, etc. shots in the database and try to figure out what they did "right" rather than try to compare them to your shot being rejected.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:02 AM.

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