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)
-   -   Thoughts on Poor Quality requested. (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=18431)

Andrew Crosby 05-19-2021 06:15 PM

Thoughts on Poor Quality requested.
 
Hi, all,

This shot was recently rejected for Poor Image Quality. I'm not arguing the call, but here's my question:

While this is hardly a compelling composition, is the quality really so bad that it's beyond all hope? I'm aware the answer may be yes; just hoping for some specifics to help my understanding.

Appreciate your thoughts - thanks.


https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...84&key=4426909

bigbassloyd 05-19-2021 07:11 PM

1. The cut off and prominent transmission tower is visually annoying
2. The shot appears underexposed.
3. The weeds and sign obstruct the purported main interest.
4. Appears to be a hastily taken "OMG TRAIN" photo rather than a consciously planned composition.
5. The sky is rather grainy

Loyd L.

Joseph Cermak 05-19-2021 07:23 PM

As Loyd mentioned, there seem to be a number of issues here that would prevent this being accepted, but fwiw I don't see image quality as the big one. I assume they only picked that because it's the only rejection with the wording "should not be resubmitted" in the rejection.

Andrew Crosby 05-19-2021 07:27 PM

Thanks for the feedback - makes sense to me. And this was indeed a spot I stumbled upon.

KevinM 05-19-2021 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd (Post 197697)
1. The cut off and prominent transmission tower is visually annoying
2. The shot appears underexposed.
3. The weeds and sign obstruct the purported main interest.
4. Appears to be a hastily taken "OMG TRAIN" photo rather than a consciously planned composition.
5. The sky is rather grainy

Loyd L.

I agree with most of the points Loyd makes. I can't see any grain in the sky at the moment, but I am not on the display I usually use for editing. Any exposure issue should be easily fixable, if the original file was raw.

I think the primary issue with this image is Loyd's Point #4. It looks like a hasty snapshot as opposed to a planned railroad image. The transmission tower is an imposing, foreground element, yet it is so heavily cut off, almost as if to say: "Pretend this isn't here." The rejection reason is probably misleading, because the problem here is not really the quality of the image file. The problem is the composition. It may well be that this rejection reason was selected because it concludes with the admonishment not to submit it again.....meaning don't do it, unless you'd like to get banned.

I'd forget it and move on. The acid test for a good photo spot is whether or not you'd ask a friend, whose railroad photos you really admire, to take the time to come out and photograph that spot. My guess is that with that test, you'd probably pass on it too. :)

Andrew Crosby 05-19-2021 08:01 PM

Kevin - thanks much for the additional thoughts, and rest assured I've no intention of trying to save this shot. It's a stinker of a grab shot, and I mainly wanted to be clearer on why that particular rejection was used. You've all addressed that very nicely.

And just so you guys don't think I'm a total dope, here's another recent rejection that I accept, but - unlike the original shot here - its a shot I'm actually proud of:

https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...53&key=1660316

ATSF666 05-20-2021 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Crosby (Post 197702)
Kevin - thanks much for the additional thoughts, and rest assured I've no intention of trying to save this shot. It's a stinker of a grab shot, and I mainly wanted to be clearer on why that particular rejection was used. You've all addressed that very nicely.

And just so you guys don't think I'm a total dope, here's another recent rejection that I accept, but - unlike the original shot here - its a shot I'm actually proud of:

https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...53&key=1660316

It looks to me that your camera focused on the signals in the foreground, thus leaving the train slightly out of focus.

Andrew Crosby 05-20-2021 02:09 PM

ATSF666 - Yes, I focused on the signals in the foreground deliberately. That's the subject in this shot.

KevinM 05-20-2021 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Crosby (Post 197706)
ATSF666 - Yes, I focused on the signals in the foreground deliberately. That's the subject in this shot.

Hi Andrew,

I think the issue with the signal shot is that the train ends up being just as dominant in the shot (size-wise) as the signal post and therefore comes off looking like the subject more than the signal does. So, the screener looked at the train, didn't see sharp focus and hit the reject button.

With RP, you probably get a couple of seconds at most for the shot to make an impact, before they move on. It is certainly possible to make a set of signals your primary subject, but you'd need a composition where the signal clearly dominates. This is one kind of shot where studying the work of other folks on RP really does help. It would be easier if "signals" was an RP category you could search on, but it can be done. It would just take some time. Over the years, I have seen a ton of signal shots here, and some really nice ones at that.

Andrew Crosby 05-20-2021 03:42 PM

Thanks, Kevin. That's helpful. Though actually I was unclear when I said the signal wasTHE subject in the shot. My aim was to blend the old and the new by showing the long-out-of-service signal and tracks along with the commuter train on the very active NE Corroidor.

Again, that was my aim. I'm not claiming to have hit the target. ; )


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:00 PM.

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