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)
-   -   Gallery: RP shots with RP flaws (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=15088)

JRMDC 03-02-2012 07:51 PM

Gallery: RP shots with RP flaws
 
In another thread Mathieu mentioned that he has an accepted shot with foreground clutter. I though of a shot I have with considerable shadows, shown below. Show us your RP shots that violate all of the (quite reasonable!!!!! ha ha) RP standards but somehow or another managed to sneak through the gate and get on. (Nothing, please, that got on solely because it was years ago when standards were looser.)

[photoid=176685]

Hmm, perhaps that one is too old, have I violated my own guideline? At the time it did seem to be an issue, but I don't remember the context or even if it was rejected initially. How about this one, bad light:

[photoid=378836]

Mgoldman 03-02-2012 08:37 PM

Oversharpened. Poor contrast.

[photoid=151170]

Train too far away. Foreground /background obstructions. Going away shot if you count the horses ass.

[photoid=225726]



/Mitch

jnohallman 03-02-2012 09:02 PM

Bad lighting, going away:

[photoid=298848]

Jon

Chase55671 03-02-2012 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 152371)
Train too far away. Foreground /background obstructions. Going away shot if you count the horses ass.

[photoid=225726]

/Mitch

:lol::lol:

Chase

IHapsias 03-02-2012 09:12 PM

Poor Lighting, Foreground Obstructions

[photoid=371710]

Foreground Obstruction, Bad Cropping too?

[photoid=366785]

Foreground Obstruction, Poor Lighting, Lil' jagged too.

[photoid=337479]

JRMDC 03-02-2012 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IHapsias (Post 152377)
Poor Lighting, Foreground Obstructions

[photoid=371710]

Yup, poor lighting, but I don't see the obstruction. Cool shot, wish you had had good light.

crazytiger 03-02-2012 09:37 PM

This is the only one I think would most likely get rejected for technical issues if I resubmitted.

Undersharpened/Soft and potentially Cloudy/Common and Bad Color.

[photoid=328052]

magicman_841 03-02-2012 09:42 PM

The shot I was talking about in that other thread is this one:
[photoid=377723]

Other examples in my photostream include:

Foreground clutter :
[photoid=384283]

Poor lighting :
[photoid=383240]

PEQ :
[photoid=377855]

WMHeilman 03-02-2012 10:01 PM

Oh my, where to begin?

Half-nose lit.

[photoid=390891]

[photoid=390526]

[photoid=388985]

Poor lighting, cloudy.

[photoid=390794]

[photoid=388687]

[photoid=385470]

Foreground clutter.

[photoid=372768]

[photoid=361204]

[photoid=359085]

I could go on and on. ;)

rathman11 03-02-2012 10:10 PM

Poor lighting and foreground obstruction:

[photoid=383086]

Poor lighting (shadowed nose):

[photoid=310933]

PEQ and/or PIQ:

[photoid=273673]

JimThias 03-03-2012 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC (Post 152370)
Show us your RP shots that violate all of the (quite reasonable!!!!! ha ha)

Do they HAVE to be our own shots? :twisted:

chasejsmith 03-03-2012 01:57 AM

Train too far away. Foreground /background obstructions. Going away shot if you count the horses ass.

[photoid=225726]



/Mitch[/quote]


:-D Classic Goldman!

asis80 03-03-2012 03:39 AM

[photoid=303215]
Poor lighting

[photoid=358636]
Train too far away

[photoid=368602]
Unlevel

[photoid=346062]
Bad color

[photoid=290932]
Grainy

[photoid=335564]
PEQ

[photoid=389456]
Digitally Manipulated (to some). There was a somewhat reputable, to you guys, photographer on here that sent me a hate mail saying I shopped the Mance PO in this shot. He was quite colorful in language with the email, and made threats to bring it to the attention to the admins. :roll: Either chris and/or chris are too busy to read emails or he was bluffing, still up obviously. I've got the raw to prove it.

Ben

JRMDC 03-03-2012 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asis80 (Post 152411)
[photoid=389456]
Digitally Manipulated (to some). There was a somewhat reputable, to you guys, photographer on here that sent me a hate mail saying I shopped the Mance PO in this shot. He was quite colorful in language with the email, and made threats to bring it to the attention to the admins. :roll: Either chris and/or chris are too busy to read emails or he was bluffing, still up obviously. I've got the raw to prove it.

Ben, I don't recall hearing the story or knowing of it, and looking now, I don't see why someone would think the structure was shopped in. Admittedly, I probably haven't been to the spot in a decade, but it looks completely as I remember it. Other than the excessive HDR/shadow, it looks completely fine. Just what is it that was considered to be odd?

Mgoldman 03-03-2012 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asis80 (Post 152411)
[photoid=303215]
Poor lighting
Ben

I'm looking at lots of shots that in no way have "RP flaws". Might as well simply call this "Gallery: misc photos".


/Mitch

Freericks 03-03-2012 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 152371)
Going away shot if you count the horses ass.

[photoid=225726]


Besides the photographer, there was also an equine on the scene.

Freericks 03-03-2012 04:31 AM

Feel like I'm "ratting" myself out.

Similar to previous

[photoid=194027]
[photoid=194026]

High sun

[photoid=193397]

Cloudy - poor composition

[photoid=196152]

Obstructing object

[photoid=259819]

Actually that was my dad's pic and I was the obstructing object.

Charles Freericks

JRMDC 03-03-2012 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks (Post 152416)
Cloudy - poor composition

[photoid=196152]

Wow! A ditch shot! Subject: ditch! I feel that, on principle, I cannot click on this thumbnail, I cannot give this shot a view. :) :)

Not even to see if there is something tiny but interesting at the bottom of it. :)

Mgoldman 03-03-2012 09:36 AM

This has a dog in it but it was accepted anyway:

[photoid=314508]

/Mitch

asis80 03-03-2012 11:27 AM

The guy basically doesn't know what he's talking about Mitch. Wish I still had the email to show. He said the image was fake. That's it. But then went on a rampage how lately my shots are sub par, blah blah blah, I'm going to cry to the admins, blah blah blah. Whatever. Back to trains. :-D

Ben

Joe the Photog 03-03-2012 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asis80 (Post 152411)
[photoid=389456]
Digitally Manipulated (to some). There was a somewhat reputable, to you guys, photographer on here that sent me a hate mail saying I shopped the Mance PO in this shot. He was quite colorful in language with the email, and made threats to bring it to the attention to the admins. :roll: Either chris and/or chris are too busy to read emails or he was bluffing, still up obviously. I've got the raw to prove it.

Ben

I'd love to know who sent that. I need an even better laugh.

bigbassloyd 03-03-2012 12:49 PM

Cloudy / Common (but it is an SD60..)
[photoid=390004]

Loyd L.

jnohallman 03-03-2012 12:57 PM

And here's the photo from the thread that led Mathieu to make the post that led to this thread. It's finally in, foreground clutter and all!

[photoid=391125]

Jon

JimThias 03-03-2012 01:00 PM

High sun:

[photoid=213754]

[photoid=190948]

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17.../headbang2.gif

Ron Flanary 03-03-2012 01:32 PM

Here are two of mine (of hundreds of duds...):

Foreground Clutter:
[photoid=359057]

Boring, common power, been there, done that...change the picture, for God sakes!
[photoid=683]


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.