Old 02-09-2021, 04:18 AM   #1
ATSF666
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 153
Default Rejection

I wonder what kind of digital camera I was shooting in 2002?
https://www.railpictures.net/viewrej...54&key=2818299

I am working through my large film (slides) collection that I have shot since 1970 and wondered how long it would take to get a rejection with film submissions. 4 submissions and 1 rejection this week. I won't waste my time submitting film at that percentage. I'm too old to waste my time submitting slide scans. Too bad. It makes my current film project go much faster by not looking for stuff to submit here. Facebook it is.

The locomotive looks pretty sharp to me.
__________________

Last edited by ATSF666; 02-09-2021 at 07:34 AM.
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2021, 09:51 AM   #2
18 316
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
I wonder what kind of digital camera I was shooting in 2002?
Canned rejection messages strike again

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
The locomotive looks pretty sharp to me.
The lead unit is and it's beautiful, but everything else is unsharp. I would submit it again after using a sharpening filter (if you have the tools, you could select free-hand everything but the lead unit so that the latter is not over-sharpened), and/or resize it to a smaller size. Also, reducing highlights might improve it (if the original scan has any dynamic range left on the wagons and the track ballast).
18 316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2021, 12:34 PM   #3
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,158
Default

Remember, the screeners select from a menu of rejection messages, so yes, they are absolutely canned. Since most of the photos submitted to RP are digital, and digital images do tend to be a bit soft coming out of the camera, this message was worded as such. It was just the closest the screener could come to summarizing the concern.

In this case, I'm just guessing that the image was shot with a wide aperture, so the locomotive is in decent focus, but everything further back is soft. It could also be that you shot it at a slower shutter speed, but did a good job of panning it. I'm a bit surprised it was rejected. Usually, with a film shot like this, as long as something is in sharp focus, they let it go. I've seen other film shots here that were far tougher on the eyes. Just my $.02.
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Albums from Steam Railroads all over the US.

Last edited by KevinM; 02-09-2021 at 12:36 PM.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2021, 02:22 PM   #4
Joe the Photog
A dude with a camera
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,960
Default

I am a litttle surprised they rejected it, too. But if I read this right, it was one reject olut of five submissions. If that s true, that's an amazing acceptance rate.
__________________
Joseph C. Hinson Photography
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2021, 02:59 PM   #5
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 932
Default

Well the rejection is undersharpened, so a little more sharpening may work or just lead to a blurry rejection. Not sure if more sharpening would make much of visual difference for the viewer but that is the case in many redo's.

Not too keen on it from an exposure/color as it moves more to the red than the darker shade(maroon?). Roster type shots I think you want to be accurate.

As far as slides I am a big proponent of leniency when it comes to slides but more so from the 70's, early 80's than the the 2000's. Auto focus, lens quality, storage time reduced, film processing, film quality if you moved to Provia all made things easier.

Bob
RobJor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2021, 12:48 AM   #6
Decapod401
Senior Member
 
Decapod401's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
I wonder what kind of digital camera I was shooting in 2002?
Every digital image comes from a digital camera. Even though it is an entirely different device, your slide scanner uses the same type of CCD array as your DSLR to interpret light as a digital image.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
I am working through my large film (slides) collection that I have shot since 1970 and wondered how long it would take to get a rejection with film submissions. 4 submissions and 1 rejection this week. I won't waste my time submitting film at that percentage. I'm too old to waste my time submitting slide scans. Too bad. It makes my current film project go much faster by not looking for stuff to submit here. Facebook it is.

The locomotive looks pretty sharp to me.
I don't know what kind of scanner you are using, but my Plustek Opticfilm produces results that need quite a bit more sharpening as my D750 DSLR. I have to sharpen my scans to the limits that Lightroom allows, export a tiff file, reimport, and sharpen a little more. I have submitted images where I forgot yo perform the second sharpening, and they have received rejections for undersharpening.
__________________
Doug Lilly

My RP Pics are HERE.

I've now got a Flickr. account, too.
Decapod401 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2021, 02:23 AM   #7
ATSF666
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 153
Default

Technical details: Nikon 90S, AF 50 1.4D, Fuji Velvia, 50 iso, so most likely shot at 1/500 and whatever f stop that would support that shutter speed. Since I shot this train at multiple locations, hand held. Scanner - Nikon Super Cool Scan 4000.

Joe, this was a rejection out of 4 submittals, thus a rejection rate of 25 percent. These days, my rejection rate might be 5% at the most and that is only when I am pushing their composition rules, so I expect the rejection.

18 316 and Rob, I do see what you are seeing re-sharpness of the second locomotive on back. Doesn't bother me in the least as the subject is sharp. I suppose it violates some unwritten railfan roster rule.

Doug, after I did the post processing last night, it looked sharp, so I didn't see an issue with submitting it. If I do submit any additional slide scans, I will look even more critically, however I don't like crispy scans. My post processing work flow seems to work for digital these days as I don't get the soft rejections like I used to.

All, thank you for your thoughtful and considered comments. I will think about if I want to jump through the slide scanning hoops or not in the future as some of you thought the scan looked good enough.
__________________

Last edited by ATSF666; 02-12-2021 at 06:11 AM.
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2021, 11:21 PM   #8
Flowing
Senior Member
 
Flowing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 195
Default

I know slide scanning is an involved process but I appreciate anyone taking the time to do it; we all benefit from seeing what's hiding in people's slide boxes. If you're not on Flickr I would suggest posting your images there. There's a large railfan community on Flickr and no screening so you can post whatever you want. Yes, you lose the nifty searchable database that RP has, and your view counts will probably be lower, but the freedom to post without being subject to screening is worth it in my opinion. My portfolio on Flickr is much more closely aligned with the material I desire to share than what makes it on here.

Last edited by Flowing; 02-12-2021 at 11:24 PM.
Flowing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2021, 10:45 AM   #9
miningcamper3
Member
 
miningcamper3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 45
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowing View Post
"...nifty searchable database that RP has..."
Well, sometimes nifty. Other times the search function is incredibly fussy about what it will search.

Example: I wanted to get back to a photo taken at "The Dalles" OR. Would it search on "The Dalles"? No. Would it search for just "Dalles"? Nope. There are definitely photos taken at The Dalles here!

I could fill this page with other examples of "No Results Found".
miningcamper3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2021, 11:54 PM   #10
ATSF666
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miningcamper3 View Post
Well, sometimes nifty. Other times the search function is incredibly fussy about what it will search.

Example: I wanted to get back to a photo taken at "The Dalles" OR. Would it search on "The Dalles"? No. Would it search for just "Dalles"? Nope. There are definitely photos taken at The Dalles here!

I could fill this page with other examples of "No Results Found".
I have taken more than a few at The Dalles having worked in that town from 2003-2019.
__________________
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2021, 02:41 PM   #11
18 316
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miningcamper3 View Post
Well, sometimes nifty. Other times the search function is incredibly fussy about what it will search.

Example: I wanted to get back to a photo taken at "The Dalles" OR. Would it search on "The Dalles"? No. Would it search for just "Dalles"? Nope. There are definitely photos taken at The Dalles here!

I could fill this page with other examples of "No Results Found".
"Dalles" works for me, 289 hits.
18 316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2021, 04:02 PM   #12
miningcamper3
Member
 
miningcamper3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 45
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18 316 View Post
"Dalles" works for me, 289 hits.
Yeah, but the search engine apparently just wasn't in the mood on the 14th. I tried one word, two words, caps, no caps. Firefox found the photo for me.

Other search engines even tolerate misspelling, but not RP's.

Last edited by miningcamper3; 02-16-2021 at 04:04 PM.
miningcamper3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2021, 05:27 PM   #13
Joseph Cermak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Cleveland, Rochester, Erie
Posts: 453
Default

While all the databasing and indexing is nice, the RP search is bizarre. Half the time I can't even get it to pull up photos of a certain unit...
Joseph Cermak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2021, 05:57 PM   #14
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 932
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Cermak View Post
While all the databasing and indexing is nice, the RP search is bizarre. Half the time I can't even get it to pull up photos of a certain unit...
If I want to look up a unit number to determine correct model I usually do a search in google. Google will give me other sites but often a RP's link also.
Obviously google is a very advanced search. As we know some sites use google for their own search.

google search for CITX 3077 yielded 4 railpics entries including my own(in this case RP search works also:
https://www.railpictures.net/showpho...er=CITX%203077

I also assume others are able to find things as my view count can increase by 1 every other day which means 500 + views that I assume people looked up at least some


Bob

Last edited by RobJor; 02-16-2021 at 06:00 PM.
RobJor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2021, 07:16 PM   #15
xBNSFer
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowing View Post
I know slide scanning is an involved process but I appreciate anyone taking the time to do it; we all benefit from seeing what's hiding in people's slide boxes. If you're not on Flickr I would suggest posting your images there. There's a large railfan community on Flickr and no screening so you can post whatever you want. Yes, you lose the nifty searchable database that RP has, and your view counts will probably be lower, but the freedom to post without being subject to screening is worth it in my opinion. My portfolio on Flickr is much more closely aligned with the material I desire to share than what makes it on here.
I actually found I got better results using a DSLR and macro lens + film scanning attachments as opposed to the scanner, which is fussy in terms of software issues and autofocus and tends to exhibit "bloom" on contrasty slides. It is also MUCH faster. I've digitized my entire slide and negative collection, and can then pick out the ones I want to display from there viewing them full size, rather than making judgments looking at the slides or (worse) negatives.

I can't stand the narrow-minded view of this site's "screeners," so I just don't bother.

You can see my photos here:

https://richardbischoff.smugmug.com/
xBNSFer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:48 PM.


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