Rejected - but wanted to share regardless

wds · 09-13-2010, 10:05 PM

These shots were rejected and I'm not arguing with that, but I wanted to show them in hopes of someone else getting off their duffs and getting some better shots on the database. Since I've moved up to Huntsville I don't get many opportunities to get to areas where there's more of a chance of catching one anymore. For those who don't know, two of the ex-UP CN C40-8s were painted in this special scheme to celebrate CN's end of government control in 1995. These units are numbered 2113 and 2115. Ironically, it's standard "web" painted 2114 that seems to be getting all the limelight.

Bad angle;
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1205090410

PEQ;
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=874592663

Like I said, both rejections were expected and I'm not looking for help in getting these particular ones on, but I figured I'd try anyways cuz (at least to my knowledge) there aren't any shots of either of these on here as of yet.

Wayne

bigbassloyd · 09-13-2010, 10:10 PM

Wayne, I would imagine the 2nd one could get on with a different crop to showcase the logo, and get rid of that horrid distortion-ed bottom of the frame.

Loyd L.

wds · 09-13-2010, 11:33 PM

Thanks Loyd, but I don't think there's any point trying with this one. PEQ is pretty much the kiss of death here. I did see the distortion and tried to correct it with the distortion filter but didn't like what happened to the top part of the image - just doesn't look right. Also don't know how else to crop - looser crop looks awkward (and since it was a trailing unit going out even further to include the whole thing is pointless) and tighter crop loses the sky and rails which I believe are necessary to give it the required perspective. I have seen shots of these units on other sites so I know people are out there shooting them, just not to RP standards. I'm going to try to head south sometime this week and if Lady Luck smiles I might catch one again (leading would be great!) but it's a long shot at best.

troy12n · 09-13-2010, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wds

PEQ is pretty much the kiss of death here.

Unless you are trying to get a streak shot on, then after about 20 attempts they may let it on.

sd9 · 09-14-2010, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wds

Thanks Loyd, but I don't think there's any point trying with this one. PEQ is pretty much the kiss of death here. .

Hmmm I agree with Loyd, the second one with a little work can get it, not to long ago there was a BNSF side shot with CN painted over it, same type of shot..BTW my last PEQ I appealed, and it ended up getting a People's Choice, so I'm not to sure what your talking about,

sd9 · 09-14-2010, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sd9

, not to long ago there was a BNSF side shot with CN painted over it, same type of shot..

Found it... try something like this

PhotoID: 332214
Photograph © Craig Walker

wds · 09-14-2010, 01:32 AM

Okay, so with encouragement from the likes of Loyd, Bill, Jim Dorst and oddly enough even Troy (although I'm not gonna go for 20!) I've decided to give #2 another whack. This final rework does look better to my eye even with the bottom cropped off so I'll give it another go. We shall see...

conductor79 · 09-14-2010, 01:49 AM

Looks like your not quite centered on the logo from where you took the shot, if you would've stepped to the left a little it would've been better, just my 2 cents

crazytiger · 09-14-2010, 02:22 AM

Yeah, wds, that does look better. It might get on. :crosses fingers:

wds · 09-14-2010, 05:34 PM

So after reworking the pic as suggested it got hit with undersharpened;
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=282169164

Okay, I can see that so I sharpened it up a bit.
Didn't want to go too overboard and it looked fine to my weary eyes, rejected for undersharpened again;
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1034921832

Left it for the night and came back to it this morning, sharpened it as much as I figured it could take and (wait for it) PEQ again!
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=560261984

Since it is apparently a type of picture they wish to accept - witness that of Craig's shown above and this similar -albeit far superior in content - shot by Jeff Faherty (which I love) I guess it must be the scheme or the language which offends them - or both!

Thanks again to those who tried to help.

Wayne

PhotoID: 214099
Photograph © Jeff Faherty

crazytiger · 09-14-2010, 05:41 PM

I think it is one screener that keeps getting you, but I don't know what else there is for you to do.

sd9 · 09-14-2010, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazytiger

I think it is one screener that keeps getting you, but I don't know what else there is for you to do.

Appeal, and if it gets rejected, Then you can say there's nothing else I can do

wds · 09-14-2010, 11:17 PM

I guess so... Hopefully they don't get annoyed and cut my upload limit...

wds · 09-15-2010, 05:09 AM

Well whaddya know? Guess they didn't get overly annoyed after all.

sd9 · 09-15-2010, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wds

Well whaddya know? Guess they didn't get overly annoyed after all.

Way to go..

wds · 09-15-2010, 01:39 PM

Thanks again, Bill. If not for your encouragement and that of Loyd, Peter and Jim Dorst, I would have been content to let it slide after the first PEQ. Ultimaterly the ensuing effort did produce a better image, although looking through the images with fresh eyes on this HDMI monitor I'm on today I still think the second "undersharpened" rejection was plenty sharp enough. On my own monitor though I had my doubts, that's why I added more sharpening.

JRMDC · 09-15-2010, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wds

Thanks again, Bill. If not for your encouragement and that of Loyd, Peter and Jim Dorst, I would have been content to let it slide after the first PEQ. Ultimaterly the ensuing effort did produce a better image, although looking through the images with fresh eyes on this HDMI monitor I'm on today I still think the second "undersharpened" rejection was plenty sharp enough. On my own monitor though I had my doubts, that's why I added more sharpening.

Funny you say that, although I don't see the overall shot as excessively sharp, there is a distinct sharpening halo on the top of the unit and around the horns.

wds · 09-15-2010, 01:57 PM

Yeah, that's jumping out at me too. Maybe when I get some time I'll redo it (again - sigh) and deselect from just below the roof-line on up before the final sharpening. Maybe being the operative word here. The novelty of working on this shot wore off about 36 hours ago.

crazytiger · 09-15-2010, 02:13 PM

Nicely done, W.D.!

sd9 · 09-16-2010, 04:04 AM

Congratulations! One of the top 2 of Past 24 Hours: