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 a couple of rejects.... (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12663)

KevinM 08-17-2010 05:18 AM

Thoughts on a couple of rejects....
 
Here are a couple of shots that I thought might be interesting to the RP audience...and were (predictably) rejected by the evening screener.

These are of a 2-foot gauge railcar that was recently built for the Wiscasset, Waterville & Farmington Railway Museum. The crew was still working the bugs out and doing training when I took these shots. I had prayed for clear, perfectly sunlit conditions, but got only dim sun filtered by altocumulus. I took my best shot with the postprocessing, but still ended up wasting an evening trying to get them on RP.

Busted for bad cropping and contrast:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=327181634

Probably a bit heavy on the contrast, but I don't understand the crop issue. I put the car in the lower right third and balanced it with a water tank and an interesting 3-way switch. Any other ideas?

Busted for too dark:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...5&key=66636109

Histogram looked decent and the image looked brighter in PSE than it did after I uploaded it. I could raise the mid-tone brightness a swag, but do you think I could get it bright enough to pass muster without looking overprocessed?

Mgoldman 08-17-2010 09:24 AM

Again - worthy images as is that simply could be better.

Remember "School House Rocks"? Add "ly" to make a verb an adverb.

Well, add "Good shot, though we think it could be even better" to the reject.
I guess by now some of of seasoned patrons keep that in mind rather then sulk and run.

Anyway -
First shot - there are two types of valid crops.
Those that follow the rules of thirds and those that include all the extraneous details at risk of the rule of thirds. Your first shot looks - as we know RP does not like - centered. Maybe the other two thirds do not carry the weight. A tighter crop might be more pleasing - loose a bit of the top and left.

Second shot - I like it. When RP says it's too dark, you can appeal and say that's just the way it was OR, simply brighten it. In this case, maybe find the darker areas and selectively brighten them without loosing your blacks. You could even brighten just one of the colors if say it was the trees, but I'd go with a selective brightening of the darker scenes. Or on the simple side, a bit of selective dodging.

Both are really cool shots - hope they make it in.

/Mitch

troy12n 08-17-2010 11:38 AM

First one has a really blown out sky too, lighting was not on your side in any of these shots

KevinM 08-17-2010 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 119578)
Again - worthy images as is that simply could be better.

Remember "School House Rocks"? Add "ly" to make a verb an adverb.

Well, add "Good shot, though we think it could be even better" to the reject.
I guess by now some of of seasoned patrons keep that in mind rather then sulk and run.

Anyway -
First shot - there are two types of valid crops.
Those that follow the rules of thirds and those that include all the extraneous details at risk of the rule of thirds. Your first shot looks - as we know RP does not like - centered. Maybe the other two thirds do not carry the weight. A tighter crop might be more pleasing - loose a bit of the top and left.

Second shot - I like it. When RP says it's too dark, you can appeal and say that's just the way it was OR, simply brighten it. In this case, maybe find the darker areas and selectively brighten them without loosing your blacks. You could even brighten just one of the colors if say it was the trees, but I'd go with a selective brightening of the darker scenes. Or on the simple side, a bit of selective dodging.

Both are really cool shots - hope they make it in.

/Mitch

Hi Mitch,

Thanks. On the first one, you said "too centered", but your text that followed made me think you meant heavy on the right...which was my impression when I was done. I actually did try a tighter crop, but ended up cutting off too many elements of what I think is an aesthetically pleasing yard. I will consider going tighter though.

WRT the second shot, I'll play with some selective brightening and see what that does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n (Post 119580)
First one has a really blown out sky too, lighting was not on your side in any of these shots

Hi Troy,

Actually, believe it or not, the shot with sky issues is the second one. In the first one, there was no clipping at all on the right side of the histogram, either out-of-camera, or after postprocessing. The second one required selective editing of the sky to temper the highlights just a bit.

I realized that the lighting wasn't stellar when I took the shots. It's just that they can't be repeated easily. The light was what it was. I didn't try to post them because they were my best work....I have a lot of better stuff from that very day. I tried to post them because I thought the scenes were interesting and unfortunately, they weren't available when the sun was brighter. I also tried to post them because the museum deserves some good publicity and people do look at this site. The folks up there are an incredibly talented, ambitious and interesting group of people. They've essentially recreated a historic railroad on the original ROW from scratch. When other operations are taking one step forward and two steps back, these folks are taking dreams and making them happen, one step at a time. The energy up there is something to behold. :smile:

troy12n 08-17-2010 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinM (Post 119585)
Hi Troy,

Actually, believe it or not, the shot with sky issues is the second one. In the first one, there was no clipping at all on the right side of the histogram, either out-of-camera, or after postprocessing. The second one required selective editing of the sky to temper the highlights just a bit.

I understand that the exposure might have been OK, but even so, the clouds really lack detail, and they really don't like cloudy skies here.

Quote:

I realized that the lighting wasn't stellar when I took the shots. It's just that they can't be repeated easily. The light was what it was...I tried to post them because I thought the scenes were interesting and unfortunately, they weren't available when the sun was brighter. I also tried to post them because the museum deserves some good publicity and people do look at this site.
I understand that, but a lot of times, situations like that dont hold much weight to the screeners. We have all been hit by clouds on unique situations.

Kevin W-S 08-19-2010 03:36 PM

In my part of the world (Africa) the sky is often totally washed out from early in the morning.

I still take plenty of shots - some really good ones too - but I do not boither trying to submit them anymore. That's life!

I now accept that if there is not a nice sky or a front lit shot it is not going make the grade.

However, one constant source of irritation to me is the fact that often I get very red colouring at dusk or dawn from the high dust levels. They always get rejected for the colours, which is a hsame as some are quite dramatic ...... and the colour is the colour there!


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.