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)
-   -   Nothing Changes....... (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17078)

John West 05-10-2014 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 178520)
It's like walking away from a Ferrari with a scratch down the length of the body and trading it in for a Camaro because admin has no interest in ever fixing the scratch.

As a former Camaro owner I resemble that remark.

Mgoldman 05-10-2014 06:27 PM

1 Attachment(s)
As a current Camaro owner, I wish I had the wherewithal to get a Ferrari.

: O -maybe not, lol!

Attachment 8589

/Mitch

CSX1702 05-10-2014 07:21 PM

I think it needs to be taken on a pic by pic basis. Some of the bad cropping rejects are perfectly legit, others are iffy. I guess if its a wedgie, hold it to wedgie rules and if its something else like a really great picture that got a bad cropping reject, give it some leeway. The same goes for the other rejection reasons. But I do think that all technical rejections that can be fixed should be applied to all photos.

My guess is that if great photographers are leaving RP because they're frustrated, they're probably too stuck up. And I don't know any of the photogs who have left so I won't make that assumption for sure.

Mgoldman 05-10-2014 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 178534)
My guess is that if great photographers are leaving RP because they're frustrated, they're probably too stuck up. And I don't know any of the photogs who have left so I won't make that assumption for sure.

You only started submitting pics in late 2011.

You can go the home page and do a simple search "most commented" and pull the entire database up. Among those in the top 100 or so, you'll find many great photographers that no longer post on RP. And sure, a few that got simply started shooting birds, instead. That list by no means is complete. Now, I say "most commented" vs "most favorited" as favoriting was not an option early on and most popular are often wrecks, Darwins and linked images.

What you won't find, unfortunately, are those who have removed all their pictures - perhaps they are the "stuck up" ones. Unfortunately, at one time, they accounted for a noticeable number of broken link icons within my favorites list.

/Mitch

CSX1702 05-10-2014 09:05 PM

I've been around for a few years longer. Though that doesn't really matter. I shouldn't say they were stuck up....maybe stubborn. I just don't see much of a reason to letting RP frustrate you. The way I see it, the admins do their best and have provided a great website for is. They're humans as much as we are and practice the same hobby. They deserve some room for mistakes too.

And I'm not just saying that so they'll give me an unlimited upload limit. :lol:

Mgoldman 05-10-2014 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 178541)
I just don't see much of a reason to letting RP frustrate you.

OK - an analogy and I'm done with the thread.

You and your friends spend months searching for a house. You find one but it's in a bad neighborhood. You find another but it's next to a smelly refinery. Finally, you find a house you really like but it's a condo with a few rules. You are told - "no pets". And there are a few more guidelines you have to accept - no holiday lights, no flags, and window shades must be an Earth tone (white, off-white, or beige). Still - it's the best place you've found by far and you abide by those rules and settle in. You tell your friends it's great if they don't mind a few "rules". They move in - which is great, now you don't have to drive far to meet them.

But... then someone moves in with a pet and while he can keep it, you were told, "no pets". OK... fluke. Later, you put up beige blinds in one room. A few months later you purchase another pair of blinds but are told they are tan, not beige. They are the same color as the ones you already had approved and installed a month ago. You take 'em down but then your neighbor puts up the same blinds with approval a week later. You put a call in to management but they never return your call. You notice your neighbors leaving and sending you invitations to their new place(s). The condo owner doesn't seem to care - new people keep moving in (and back out). Hmmm... this was such a great place, you say as you check the classifieds looking again for another place - though, the place you are at hasn't changed - it still has everything you liked when you moved in - except, the rules often change for the worse - though, sometimes revert back or just back for some sometimes. Meanwhile, the owner is off in Saint Martin.

OR... Many of the good to great photographers do not have to deal with a lot of rejections - maybe 5 or 10%. Consequently, after a span of months, or years - many of those same photographers have the bulk of their railroad photography collection here on site. That 5 to 10% rejected for non-technical reasons is akin to a publisher editing out portions of your autobiography.

It's totally acceptable.... but frustrating.

/Mitch

CSX1702 05-10-2014 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 178546)

That 5 to 10% rejected for non-technical reasons is akin to a publisher editing out portions of your autobiography.

It's totally acceptable.... but frustrating.

That's where I think it should be on a pic to pic basis. Assuming that it is true that 5 to 10% of.....let's say Mike Danneman's shots are rejected for non technical reasons. Mike is arguably the best on the site. If he has a few photos rejected for bad cropping, bad comp, PEQ......I think you would need to look at those individual photos and see if maybe he wasn't paying attention in photoshop and cropped too close to a building, or maybe he cut a car off on the side of the pic. But because Mike may be the best on the site right now, does that mean we give him carte blanche just to make sure he doesn't leave? And PEQ is a tough one because that's the screener saying "WE don't want your shot." I think there should be some kind of public vote on the forums for that kind of thing. (BTW, Mike, if you're reading this, I just pulled your name out of thin air since your pics are the best.)

I agree with you Mitch that there are definitely parts of this site and parts of the screening process that can be frustrating at times. But I don't see that as reason to up and leave RP. And I'm not totally disagreeing with you, or trying to argue with you either.

And I could be totally missing your point. I'm bad for that sometimes. Lol.

troy12n 05-11-2014 12:50 AM

Speaking of Camaros...

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1v3CzvQ9e_w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Mgoldman 05-11-2014 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Flanary (Post 178391)
It's (TO's) mostly railfan b.s. rather than a substantive discussion of the industry and what's going on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n (Post 178395)
...I agree, it's a great site (TO's) if you want to know where 4014 is, or how many times it farted today

And on the flip side, the Forums on RP is a great site for... :lol:

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n (Post 178555)
Speaking of Camaros...

/Mitch

hoydie17 05-11-2014 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 178556)
And on the flip side, the Forums on RP is a great site for... :lol:



/Mitch

If they believe those comments they posted; they clearly haven't spent any time on TO or participated in the discussions.

Mgoldman 05-11-2014 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoydie17 (Post 178565)
If they believe those comments they posted; they clearly haven't spent any time on TO or participated in the discussions.

GR8 retort! ; )

/Mitch

MagnumForce 05-11-2014 07:31 PM

Seriously Mitch, your rants are entirely too entertaining. Has this place given you an ulcer yet?

blair kooistra 05-11-2014 11:17 PM

[quote=Chris Kilroy;178449]

"A certain PNW photographer with a non-gender-specific name who left us several months ago comes to mind. This person, over the years, had a 99.6% acceptance ratio, which would probably have been about 90% had we not overlooked some minor softness/contrast issues that plagued his images at times (as Mr. Flanary so often suggests, we really do try to give the benefit of the doubt where established, "high value contributors" are concerned). He uploaded a really neat shot of some BN F units which was about 3 degrees unlevel. It was rejected. He demanded his shots and account be removed immediately.

Given those two examples where we've lost a couple of "high value contributors," I pose the question to you guys: what could/should we have done differently? Should we just say F It and accept heavily flawed shots from HVCs to keep them happy? How do we prevent someone with great material, a huge ego, and a 99.5% acceptance ratio from flipping out and storming off over one very justified rejection?"

-----------------

Despite being dubbed an "HVC" (sorta like being a "high value target" to those drone controllers at Nellis), this is my first contribution to an RP.net forum, so forgive me if I haven't figured out how to post as smoothly as you regulars, but at the risk of defending my own "non-gender-specific-name", I'll respond to Mr. Kilroy's discussion of my reasons for leaving RP.net.

Kilroy may not be as well-versed in my reasons for leaving as Chris Starnes, since it is Mr.Starnes I'd been communicating with during this time.

Actually, the photo in question was this photo of a Union Pacific freight train in Utah:

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l2...psc966d12c.jpg

It was originally rejected for "poor composition and/or cropping." I appealed this rejection on the contention that while the composition may not have been a "traditional" one, it was not poor. The rails serve as a leading line to the train, which is in the "traditional" rule-of-thirds position in the frame. Rather, I contended that the juxtaposition between light and storm shadow gave the photograph drama. My appeal was rejected, but this time (apparently by another screener) for "too much and/or little" color. It's tough to hit a wiggly snake on the head with a hammer!

At the same time, I'd submitted another photo in which an element of the photograph was clearly crooked (a street sign). The train was straight, but the sign was crooked. Rejected: crooked horizon.

Then I looked at the dozens of cookie-cutter but technically competent 3/4 wedge views of trains under clear blue skies. I guess that's the formula RP.net is encouraging. But that isn't me.

At that point, I'd decided that I'd spent enough time submitting photographs to RP.net. I had better things to do with my time than to submit photographs to screeners who, in some cases, clearly have a very rudimentary but non-evolving opinion as to what makes an "acceptable" photograph.

In my request to Mr. Starnes to remove my work from RP.net, I included several examples of photographs uploaded that day by others that, if I were a screener, I would've rejected. Included in these were a high-lit (shadow on trucks) roster shot of an old steam engine tender in the weeds and a cloudy-day, telephotoed, foreground-cluttered roster shot of an old boxcar in a field.

In no case was a "really neat shot" of BN F-units that were"3 degrees unlevel" involved in my decision to leave RP.net and ask my photographs be removed. I will give RP.net screeners this: in taking their rejections for non-esthetic reasons to heart, over the years they've caused me to be more aware of micro-crookedness of horizon lines, and for that, I thank them.

I cannot speak to the statistic Mr. Kilroy cites about 99.6% of my work being accepted. Nor can I cite that what percentage of my work had been rejected for either technical or esthetic reasons. I do know that when I'd uploaded several photographs of the Seattle Space Needle monorail operation and had those rejected, and I'd lost on appeal because of "PEQ" (the monorail was not apparently the sort of photographs RP.net were interested in, even though other monorail operations world-wide had been uploaded), Mr. Starnes went so far as to suggest that I stick to uploading my older photographs because viewers like those more than newer photos. So if screeners, as Mr. Kilroy would suggest on this thread, were giving me a pass for color, grain, or processing of my scans of old Kodachromes, I wasn't aware that my photographs were being allowed in despite technical shortcomings simply because they were "old photographs."

Did I storm off? That's an arbitrary way to put it. I was frustrated by the seeming arbitrary nature of the screening process: there doesn't seem to be much consistency in the process. . .which can be expected, I guess, when you have a handful of screeners whose interests and ability as photographers themselves differ. But after so many years and so many complaints about this, you'd think the home of the Best Rail Photography on the interet would've figured it out by now.

I will say this: if nothing else, RP.net should tighten up their explanations as to why photos were rejected. More OR Less Contrast; More OR Less Color. These reasons leave me MORE confused than less as to what the screener wants.

As a photographer with a non-gender-specific name and a "huge ego," I will say that no one likes to take time to edit, process, write and research captions and upload material to RP.net only to be rejected for reasons that the screeners can't consistently clarify. So, if I have 40 years of experience trackside in photography, pararllel with 20 years of professional experience in non-railroad subjects, and I am consistently rejected by screeners who can't tell me what I'm doing wrong in a clear manner--well, yeah, say I have a big ego.

But I don't have such a big ego that I will alter my photographic style in order to see my photos on a website that I willingly give my work to which helps fund a good living for the website's owner. And then, I'm foolish enough to pay a whole $3 a month so I can look at rail photos without being bombarded by advertising.

I never requested nor suggesting that RP.net "Accept heavily flawed shots" of mine or others to keep us happy. Constructive criticism? Sure, I'll take that. But arbitrary or morphing reasons? Ain't worth my time.

Thanks for letting me air my side of this. I don't think my experiences have been any different than those other "HVC's with Large Egos."

--blair kooistra

troy12n 05-11-2014 11:59 PM

So am I a "LVC"? With or without a large ego? At least one person on here seems to think I have a large ego.

miningcamper1 05-12-2014 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)



I cannot speak to the statistic Mr. Kilroy cites about 99.6% of my work being accepted. Nor can I cite that what percentage of my work had been rejected for either technical or esthetic reasons. I do know that when I'd uploaded several photographs of the Seattle Space Needle monorail operation and had those rejected, and I'd lost on appeal because of "PEQ" (the monorail was not apparently the sort of photographs RP.net were interested in, even though other monorail operations world-wide had been uploaded), Mr. Starnes went so far as to suggest that I stick to uploading my older photographs because viewers like those more than newer photos. So if screeners, as Mr. Kilroy would suggest on this thread, were giving me a pass for color, grain, or processing of my scans of old Kodachromes, I wasn't aware that my photographs were being allowed in despite technical shortcomings simply because they were "old photographs."



--blair kooistra

OK, Blair, is it right for me to spend hours in an ultimately fruitless effort to remove grain (that was nearly invisible to begin with), while your shots with very obvious grain get accepted? Same goes for "bad color".

MagnumForce 05-12-2014 01:33 AM

While I respect the hell out of Blair and consider him one of the driving forces of my advent as a teenage photographer back in the 90s. That crop really does need loosening up a fuzz.

JRMDC 05-12-2014 03:05 AM

I suspect Blair attached the wrong shot as, among other things, there are no "rails serve as a leading line to the train". Or maybe I don't understand what was written.

I am not a fan of this particular shot, Blair, but your points are well taken.

blair kooistra 05-12-2014 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miningcamper1 (Post 178579)
OK, Blair, is it right for me to spend hours in an ultimately fruitless effort to remove grain (that was nearly invisible to begin with), while your shots with very obvious grain get accepted? Same goes for "bad color".

What point does it become "fruitless?" I guess I learned from Mr. Kilroy that some folks got a pass for grain sometimes. I know I've had my share of grain rejections,too. And same for bad color. You either appeal and reprocess, appeal and leave it, or just move on with it.

blair kooistra 05-12-2014 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagnumForce (Post 178583)
While I respect the hell out of Blair and consider him one of the driving forces of my advent as a teenage photographer back in the 90s. That crop really does need loosening up a fuzz.

Brent, this is where the ambiguity of the screener's rejection comes into play:you think it is too tight, and I can see your point; but without the screener elaborating beyond just composition/crop, I had to guess the screener thought it was imbalanced with too much dead space on the left.

The train ahead of this one was shot thusly (screwed by the clouds). This is a more traditional balanced composition:

<a href="http://s99.photobucket.com/user/blairkooistra/media/1ccc41e1-9bb7-47e6-af11-b3c3d639e56f_zps73bed25f.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l282/blairkooistra/1ccc41e1-9bb7-47e6-af11-b3c3d639e56f_zps73bed25f.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo 1ccc41e1-9bb7-47e6-af11-b3c3d639e56f_zps73bed25f.jpg"/></a>

miningcamper1 05-12-2014 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178587)
What point does it become "fruitless?" I guess I learned from Mr. Kilroy that some folks got a pass for grain sometimes. I know I've had my share of grain rejections,too. And same for bad color. You either appeal and reprocess, appeal and leave it, or just move on with it.

"Fruitless" is when the photographer realizes that further efforts to get the shot accepted are a waste of time (or the kiss of death PEQ pops up). Never mind that it's rare, a fallen flag, or unrepeatable and would get 1000-5000 views if accepted.
I was hoping for a response on another thread regarding the seeming ability of some screeners/viewers to see light amounts of noise/grain without magnification. Anyone who tries to use 1024 0r 1200 wide shots as wallpaper on a 22" monitor will see the problem with magnification- it ain't pretty!
In no way am I saying your shots should not get on- people want to see them. Just give us a level playing field, RP.

hoydie17 05-12-2014 02:20 PM

Every last one of us has an ego, if we didn't, we'd never upload a single picture to the internet (much less RP.net) because we wouldn't care if people saw them or not. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a fool, a liar or both.

If you've ever uploaded a photo, had it rejected and then worked against that rejection on a subsequent submission, YOU have an ego, and you are trying to protect it. There is nothing wrong with having an ego, it's a very human condition. The underhanded inferrence that people with "large egos" are somehow inferior or otherwise undeserving of mention borders on being among the dumbest things I've ever heard.

That inferrence is someone trying to protect their own ego.

bigbassloyd 05-12-2014 02:45 PM

There's a difference between having an ego, and everyone knowing you have one. Off the record.. I think I'm a damn good photographer, and I feel it has been validated over the last few years. On the record, I'd never bring that out in a conversation for any reason, because that's not my style.

And now that I've typed it, feel free to say I have an ego :D

Loyd L.

hoydie17 05-12-2014 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd (Post 178601)
There's a difference between having an ego, and everyone knowing you have one. Off the record.. I think I'm a damn good photographer, and I feel it has been validated over the last few years. On the record, I'd never bring that out in a conversation for any reason, because that's not my style.

And now that I've typed it, feel free to say I have an ego :D

Loyd L.

You have an EGO

CSX1702 05-12-2014 05:13 PM

I'm too awesome to have an ego.

Holloran Grade 05-12-2014 05:16 PM

My thoughts.
 
How are these photos different composition wise?

Sure Jim's has some track in front and the crop is pulled back a bit, but essentially they are the same shot just reversed and a rainbow for a water element.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)

[photoid=308724]


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
the contention that while the composition may not have been a "traditional" one, it was not poor. The rails serve as a leading line to the train, which is in the "traditional" rule-of-thirds position in the frame. Rather, I contended that the juxtaposition between light and storm shadow gave the photograph drama.

Management does not understand the art of juxtaposition of light and dark, placement of elements outside of the "traditional" rule-of-thirds" or the abhorrence of the standard "cookie cutter" formula etc.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
Then I looked at the dozens of cookie-cutter but technically competent 3/4 wedge views of trains under clear blue skies. I guess that's the formula RP.net is encouraging. But that isn't me.

So based on the way the Site treats the non-conformers, you are a trouble making lunatic and your shots are excrement.

Only with you, there is the conundrum - in that they know you are a whale in the genera (a gambling term for a VIP - a HVC in RP parlance) and therefore they feel hesitant to just crap on you directly, the way they do to the up and comers.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
At that point, I'd decided that I'd spent enough time submitting photographs to RP.net. I had better things to do with my time

And strangely to some this makes you "stuck up."

Because god forbid should there be another option than posting work on the best rail picture site on the Internet.


That is the problem with being surrounded with sycophants - they won't warn you that the sky is falling, and the sky will fall.



Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
......than to submit photographs to screeners who, in some cases, clearly have a very rudimentary but non-evolving opinion as to what makes an "acceptable" photograph.

In my opinion and apparently a few others, this is the where the Site is at - 3/4 wedgies 24 hours a day, every day.

This is also the source of Site's greatest limitation moving forward.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
......I will give RP.net screeners this: in taking their rejections for non-esthetic reasons to heart, over the years they've caused me to be more aware of micro-crookedness of horizon lines, and for that, I thank them.

I would agree, I have learned to look at things more critically when out in the field and back in front of the computer - thanks.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
I wasn't aware that my photographs were being allowed in despite technical shortcomings simply because they were "old photographs."


It is too bad they can't accept shots that are obviously scans of old photos.

I am more interested in looking at old snapshots of things long gone, than looking at last weeks Big Boy pictures.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
But after so many years and so many complaints about this, you'd think the home of the Best Rail Photography on the interet would've figured it out by now.

That would involve someone somewhere coming to the conclusion they hey, we were wrong and we are going to do something about it to change it.

As it stands, there is a crass attitude that "your wrong" and you can either take it or leave it and that is why you left.

As I stated in the beginning of this thread, I see nothing has changed.

Sure, there seems to be some rattling of furniture behind the closed door, but from the point of view of the everyday contributor, it is just more of the same.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
I will say this: if nothing else, RP.net should tighten up their explanations as to why photos were rejected. More OR Less Contrast; More OR Less Color. These reasons leave me MORE confused than less as to what the screener wants.

That would be nice and it will cut the work load on both sides of the equation.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
As a photographer with a non-gender-specific name and a "huge ego," I will say that no one likes to take time to edit, process, write and research captions and upload material to RP.net only to be rejected for reasons that the screeners can't consistently clarify.

So, if I have 40 years of experience trackside in photography, pararllel with 20 years of professional experience in non-railroad subjects, and I am consistently rejected by screeners who can't tell me what I'm doing wrong in a clear manner--well, yeah, say I have a big ego.

But I don't have such a big ego that I will alter my photographic style in order to see my photos on a website that I willingly give my work to which helps fund a good living for the website's owner. And then, I'm foolish enough to pay a whole $3 a month so I can look at rail photos without being bombarded by advertising.


Hum.......

Seems like sage advice.


Quote:

Originally Posted by blair kooistra (Post 178576)
I never requested nor suggesting that RP.net "Accept heavily flawed shots" of mine or others to keep us happy. Constructive criticism? Sure, I'll take that. But arbitrary or morphing reasons? Ain't worth my time.

Not wanting to waste time does not make one "stuck up," but on RP if you are not as well recognized (a HVC) it seems to imply you'er a whiner, crazy or a forum troll.


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:50 PM.

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