Backlit?

[Joe the Photog]

I almost want to appeal this one I'm not though, but it seems silly to reject it for backlit on the nose when the nose is barely visible. I mean they are technically correct, but really?

https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...17&key=4466604

[KevinM]

Joe, from a lighting standpoint, I don't see any issues with this photo. In fact, you took it at a time of day when the lighting is pretty nice and much of the subject is well-lit. It's a shot I would probably have taken myself.

Now, one could argue until the cows come home about the presence of the people in front of the locomotive and whether they are distracting foreground obstructions or they provide human interest for the station scene. I'm on the fence with this one. Generally I don't mind having people in the scene, but I like to have them in positions that make it obvious that they are doing something related to the subject.....the crew debriefing the trip, fans/passengers examining the engine up close, etc. In this case, we definitely have the crew huddling, which is great, but we also have folks just kind of randomly passing through the scene. No idea if that played into the screener's decision.

[Joseph Cermak]

I agree with Kevin on his assessment, I think the lighting is good and backlit nose wouldn't be a killer here on a broadside shot. However, I can see what he means with some of people becoming distracting as they are kind of just "there" and walking about in a way that seems aimless.

[Joe the Photog]

I actually kinda expected a "foreground clutter" rejection, so I tried t make the people part of the caption. I thought it neat so many folks were "inspecting" the locomotive.

[MassArt Images]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

I almost want to appeal this one I'm not though, but it seems silly to reject it for backlit on the nose when the nose is barely visible. I mean they are technically correct, but really?

https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...17&key=4466604

Wrong day, wrong screener.

[Joe the Photog]

Originally Posted by MassArt Images

Wrong day, wrong screener.

I hear you.

[John Russell - NZ]

I'd lighten it up with basic editing, not too much as Kevin would say, wait a few weeks or longer and submit it again. An appeal would likely not end well. I did successfully appeal a rejection with this reason as the train was not backlit and it was an unrepeatable photo. Pissing against the wind in other circumstances.

[RobJor]

Since there have been a few ideas, I'd think of a crop, above the first foreground track and to left of shadows on the passenger car ofr even up to the tender. Try to get rid of the "extras" in the photo. I don't think the signals poking above help but will not make a suggestion there.

Bob

[xBNSFer]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

I almost want to appeal this one I'm not though, but it seems silly to reject it for backlit on the nose when the nose is barely visible. I mean they are technically correct, but really?

https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...17&key=4466604

There's nothing "correct" about rejecting backlit photos to begin with, and they don't do so consistently - there's backlit photos a plenty on this site. Nothing wrong with the shot.

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by xBNSFer

There's nothing "correct" about rejecting backlit photos to begin with, and they don't do so consistently - there's backlit photos a plenty on this site. Nothing wrong with the shot.

The backlit rejection is clearly a subjective thing. As noted, there are tons of backlit shots on RP.net. Sometimes, backlit MAKES the shot. It is all a matter of how it strikes the viewer, if that viewer happens to be a screener and the call is his. The current PoTW is backlit. I like the scene, but I would probably have edited it a little differently.

Here's a nice one from my friend Mitch that I saw just this AM:

PhotoID: 770989 Photograph © Mitch Goldman

That's big-time backlit, but the shot would not have the impact that it does if the sun was behind the photographer.

I think the lighting in Joe's shot is fine. As noted previously, I think that shot has other issues that may have tipped the balance in the screener's mind, and the backlit rejection was handy.

[Joe the Photog]

That's a good shot from Mitch who has been posting great shot after great shot here lately. I think (thought?) mine deserved to get in, but obviously that decision is not mine. Thanks for all the feedback, folks

[Joe the Photog]

Not saying this shot should not be in the database, not angry about it and understand backlit is subjective and just because one backlit shot gets in does not mean another one shoud get in, too, but, uhmm.....

PhotoID: 770408 Photograph © Anthony DAmato

[Joseph Cermak]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

Not saying this shot should not be in the database, not angry about it and understand backlit is subjective and just because one backlit shot gets in does not mean another one shoud get in, too, but, uhmm.....

Things that make you go hmmmm....

[Mberry]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

Not saying this shot should not be in the database, not angry about it and understand backlit is subjective and just because one backlit shot gets in does not mean another one shoud get in, too, but, uhmm.....

Photo of the week, no less.

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by Mberry

Photo of the week, no less.

Ok, I was sitting on fence whether to comment fearing to sound like sour grapes but since the cat is out of the bag?

When I saw it I thought oh Wow! Think I have something like that as in almost same scene from another perspective.

PhotoID: 554980 Photograph © Robert Jordan

Even tho mine can't compare to some of Mike's, I have a little background in the area having been to Arches, Canyon Lands, Zion, Bryce and others. When the high sun is against you the scene is usually not that great, colors wash out, except I guess with some heroic PS. Personally I don't think mine is a SC but then... Certainly there are some positive elements but in my opinion the photo represents just the opposite of the description. The relative scale of the background and the train are reversed. Probably need to stop here.

Bob

[Mgoldman]

Joe, I think your shot *could* get in if you were able to adjust two issues. With regards to being backlit - it is, and in a way that does not necessarily improve the image. With that in mind, I have two suggestions.

1) Make it so it's "less" backlit. RP screeners seem to be more willing to accepted "corrected" images. Ie; Too dark - lighten it. Backlit, add more shadow fill. Looks unlevel, tilt it. The linked shot from Anthony is a good example.

Try a little more shadow fill with the shadows and highlights filter. If you are shooting with Canon... then afterwards, I'd add some extra noise reduction to the filled area because Canon cameras don't preserve much detail in the shadows. Might even reduce saturation to get rid of those infamous Canon purple and green specs. Now, if you are shooting Nikon or Sony... skip those steps. A final step, if necessary, might be worth altering the color balance of the filled shadow area to re-warm it, if it turns cool.

2) Do you have a shot that is more broadside? Knowing the smokebox would be backlit, I'd have gotten a shot that was completely broadside - though, you might loose the glint.

Hey - and find a different screener, as Carl notes.

With regards to the 3 other shots shared -

Bob - I think the appeal of Anthony's shot is the "ethereal" look it captures. It does not have "God beams" but it shares that look - especially with the contrasting contrast of the mountains. The blue sky sure helped, too. I really like your shot, too. As someone who shoots Amtrak's Northeast Corridor mostly at 520 mm, I can appreciate alternate perspectives of unique locations. These unique perspectives, be it via a wide angle vs telephoto, or standing in a photo line or hiking back two or three hundred feet can really change the look of a location while each remaining authentic.

With regards to my backlit shot - is it? I suppose it is, but in reality, the entire scene other than the glint is dark. So - it's not a dark nose, it's a dark scene with a punch of glint. I think the sky was icing on the cake, one without the icing likely would not have made it into the database. And as noted above - it took a bit of work to bring the nose of the Sprinter back to life with shadow fill, noise reduction and some warming. Y'know, cuz I didn't shoot it with a Nikon or Sony sensor with the added dynamic range that would've allowed me to simply slide some slider up to 10 noise free.

Joe - (and Kevin) thanks for the kind compliment, it's great to hear as lately, based on "likes" and comments, I was starting to think the audience for Amtrak under catenary on RP.net was limited to only 7 or 8 folks.

/Mitch

[MassArt Images]

Originally Posted by RobJor

When I saw it I thought oh Wow! Think I have something like that as in almost same scene from another perspective.





Bob

That looks like it was taken in the Corona Arch parking area. Did you hike to the arch, Bob?

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by MassArt Images

That looks like it was taken in the Corona Arch parking area. Did you hike to the arch, Bob?

Sorry, actually that was on the other side across from Arches entrance.

We did hike up to the Corona Arch but not when, the train ran I was not sure we could get up there before the return trip. Of interest there was a group of 'bunge" jumpers. Shortly after a jumper misjudged and ended up deceased, after that the BLM closed the Arch for jumping.

There was a new plaque at the mine and there are interesting articles about the mine disaster, some victims from Canada.

This is from above the parking lot looking toward the mine.

PhotoID: 575146 Photograph © Robert Jordan

Bob

Added

https://www.deseret.com/2018/8/26/20...ble-conditions

[need2foam]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

Not saying this shot should not be in the database, not angry about it and understand backlit is subjective and just because one backlit shot gets in does not mean another one shoud get in, too, but, uhmm.....

That's a stunning photograph. It does seem that some postprocessing work has been done to bump up the exposure on the train.

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

Not saying this shot should not be in the database, not angry about it and understand backlit is subjective and just because one backlit shot gets in does not mean another one shoud get in, too, but, uhmm.....

Like I said, it's all subjective. Find a screener who appreciates backlit and you'll go from rejection to SC, just like that!

PhotoID: 771132 Photograph © Hunter The Photographer

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by KevinM

Like I said, it's all subjective. Find a screener who appreciates backlit and you'll go from rejection to SC, just like that!

Congrats to Hunter on his first SC. I really believe it is good to spread out awards when possible.

What I like is he took was not that great of scene and made something out of it. I also think it is an honest view. It is one thing to to get a SC in the Rockies, Santa Barbara, Arizona etc and quite another to get one from a siding in Oklahoma. (i might have got rid of wires) tho).

Going back to Joe's, if it were rejected for backlit because it simply was not something the screener liked, that creates confusion and resentment. Maybe there should be another rejection a little less severe than PAQ? rather that use backlit, too much noise, color cast etc leaving people wondering?????


Bob Jordan

[ATSF666]

Originally Posted by RobJor

Congrats to Hunter on his first SC. I really believe it is good to spread out awards when possible.

What I like is he took was not that great of scene and made something out of it. I also think it is an honest view. It is one thing to to get a SC in the Rockies, Santa Barbara, Arizona etc and quite another to get one from a siding in Oklahoma. (i might have got rid of wires) tho).

Going back to Joe's, if it were rejected for backlit because it simply was not something the screener liked, that creates confusion and resentment. Maybe there should be another rejection a little less severe than PAQ? rather that use backlit, too much noise, color cast etc leaving people wondering?????


Bob Jordan

The wires are a major distraction, but I'm not a screener.......... (nor would I ever want to be)

[Joe the Photog]

I appreciate the advice on possible ways to get the shot accepted. I like it as is. The screener didn't. No harm, no foul.

[vcode455]

Originally Posted by KevinM

Like I said, it's all subjective. Find a screener who appreciates backlit and you'll go from rejection to SC, just like that!

Maybe I will get one posthumously.......

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by vcode455

Maybe I will get one posthumously.......

I enter some local "art" shows and am friends with a woman that runs one.

There are many photos that merit an honorable mention and the small money award but basically awards-101 is to spread out the awards among styles and contributors to encourage participation and variety. So basically a bird photo here, and old building, a child, current, historical to appeal to many patrons.

Bob