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)
-   -   Guideline changes in effect? (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17015)

Mgoldman 04-02-2014 01:27 PM

Guideline changes in effect?
 
Is there an RP mailing list that I am not subscribed to that announced a change in policy regarding the acceptance of images with foreground obstructions?

[photoid=476099]
or... http://www.railpictures.net/photo/476099

When I first saw this photo thumb, I was impressed. Surreal - you bet! Abandoned in the woods, unknown to most and captured in a way that brings just that point to fruition. Upon opening to full resolution, I admit, I am not a huge fan of the placement of the single tree jutting out in front of the engine but I catch Chase's intention. My intent was exactly the same with the abandoned narrow gauge box car in the woods in Mt Union, PA at the EBT. Personally - I prefer a near 100 year old abandoned box car (since scrapped) obscured in the woods to an engine obscured by one tree.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/87195227@N05/12164451046/

OK - I'm done. Let's get back to unlevel, backlit noses and poor crop.

/Mitch

PS - If in fact changes are afoot at RP, please advise!

EMTRailfan 04-02-2014 01:45 PM

Chase's doesn't bother me so much as you said about the abandoned mood of the photo, but there was another one the other day that was the typical wedge with a big obstruction accepted that made me scratch my head and wonder why some of the bridge shots that I've had rejected were.

EMTRailfan 04-02-2014 02:03 PM

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...75989&nseq=163
[photoid=475989]
RE: My previous post. Why the open car door?

BobE 04-02-2014 04:14 PM

Sorry to be contrary, but Chase's composition doesn't work for me. Foreground and background elements each distract from the other, and everything is clustered in the middle, leaving a lot of empty space. Better photo would be to the right and maybe a higher angle. Foreground foliage doesn't bother me, but the position of the little tree is a little annoying. Shifting the pov to the right would move the tree to the left by parallax.

Holloran Grade 04-02-2014 05:38 PM

Is this what you're looking for?
 
"Our Favorite Rail Pictures on the Net" and "Some of Mine."

bigbassloyd 04-02-2014 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holloran Grade (Post 177251)
"Our Favorite Rail Pictures on the Net" and "Some of Mine."

Love it!

Loyd L.

CSX1702 04-02-2014 08:22 PM

You guys are strange. "I don't really care what RP does and I don't care if I get any pics on or not but I do care."

In other words, for people who claim not to care: you sure care a lot.

troy12n 04-02-2014 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EMTRailfan (Post 177244)
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...75989&nseq=163
[photoid=475989]
RE: My previous post. Why the open car door?

Boring roster shot with a 57 chevy with door haphazardly left open, score!

RE: Chase's shot, I am guessing he was trying to capture the whole "abandoned" mood of the scene, and left the obstructions (weeds/brush) in front of the unit. Maybe tried a different angle. I am sure he took other angles, and liked this one better. Who knows.

Personally I think it would have looked better if some of that crap was knocked down. But I get what he was trying to do here, I think. Whether or not it should have gotten on RP or not, I quit guessing.

Holloran Grade 04-03-2014 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 177256)
You guys are strange. "I don't really care what RP does and I don't care if I get any pics on or not.

And yet you exist.

Fascinating.

The Troy will want to hear about this rip in the space time continuum.

CSX1702 04-03-2014 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holloran Grade (Post 177258)
And yet you exist.

Fascinating.

The Troy will want to hear about this rip in the space time continuum.

Did you take what I said out of context or are you just being HG? Because I can't tell anymore. :twisted:


And you didn't capitalize the TROY. We must give him all due respect.

Ron Flanary 04-03-2014 03:19 AM

I was there nearly 20 years ago:

[photoid=461609]

I thought Chase's shot at Dismal was good. The foreground clutter rule wouldn't matter in this case.

Good photography is never about rules and screening guidelines. You guys tend to go batshit crazy about interpretations of rules---particularly if someone else lands a shot, and you didn't. Frankly, I would never, ever in a million years care at all what other shot got accepted here. The more, the merrier, I say. Sure, some major crap gets through the cracks, but who am I to say? That doesn't mean, however, that it's inappropriate to criticize an image. Once it's on this site...it's fair game.

And following up on that theme...I don't get the Chevy with the open car door....at all. Sorry. Am I concerned it got accepted? Of course not...but that doesn't mean I like it (the shot, that is). I'm not sure I even understand the motive of the shot (although the color and lighting is nice).

Mgoldman 04-03-2014 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Flanary (Post 177260)
Frankly, I would never, ever in a million years care at all what other shot got accepted here. The more, the merrier, I say.

The intent of the thread was never about what DOES get accepted here, rather, and again, the inconsistency of what is excluded.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words - think of this as the appeal to my appeal. The smoking gun in a court case lost long ago due to lack of proper evidence.

Alas, I can just imagine what those in power must be thinking:
"What difference, at this point, does it make?"

/Mitch

Mgoldman 04-03-2014 05:31 AM

On the other hand... if things HAVE changed and I missed the memo, please advise.

/Mitch

Ron Flanary 04-03-2014 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 177261)
The intent of the thread was never about what DOES get accepted here, rather, and again, the inconsistency of what is excluded.


/Mitch


...OK. I'm a little slow on the uptake at times. However, inconsistency in the screening of images will always be a problem as long as human beings are making those decisions. I'm not suggesting that high functioning chimpanzees could do better, because contributors would still be pissed off. If there's a better way to be more objective about a process that's largely subjective, I'm at a loss to know what it is.

Pass me a banana...

Mgoldman 04-03-2014 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Flanary (Post 177263)
...OK. I'm a little slow on the uptake at times. However, inconsistency in the screening of images will always be a problem as long as human beings are making those decisions. I'm not suggesting that high functioning chimpanzees could do better, because contributors would still be pissed off. If there's a better way to be more objective about a process that's largely subjective, I'm at a loss to know what it is.

I agree - there will always be *some* inconsistencies, but you would think that all five screeners could at least get together once - even if by e-mail and accept a few constants between them for the benefit of the site. For instance - foreground obstructions. I see little difference between the compositions of my shot and Chase's (though I do prefer abandoned in the woods vs abandoned behind a wood). Other broken rules are display engines behind fences, trains behind platform fences and trains obstructed by girders. And if you are going to reject for bad nose light or cloudy day images, it's in admin's best interest to better state the rejections to allay fears of prejudice - I dunno, add "in an unappealing way" to properly excuse those that DO get in to RP.net. A similar to previous is not less similar a day later, a month later, nor a year later, either. Do they want the "best" on the net, or the first?

/Mitch

bigbassloyd 04-03-2014 01:26 PM

I have the solution!

Just accept everything Mitch submits. :D



Thanks!

Loyd L.

Mgoldman 04-03-2014 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd (Post 177265)
I have the solution!

Just accept everything Mitch submits. :D



Thanks!

Loyd L.

Good one, Loyd!

But, I digress... don't change a thing. Everything is just perfect. In fact, I'm in the process of deleting all my off site bookmarks to past RP patrons as I see they've all recently returned.

/Mitch

bigbassloyd 04-03-2014 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 177269)
Good one, Loyd!

But, I digress... don't change a thing. Everything is just perfect. In fact, I'm in the process of deleting all my off site bookmarks to past RP patrons as I see they've all recently returned.

/Mitch

If I left, would you miss me? :D

Loyd L.

Holloran Grade 04-03-2014 06:02 PM

Wondering if My Work here is Done?
 
Seems the acceptance of abandonment shots might be over.

These have both been rejected as "the photo[s are] of low esthetic qualities, or is simply not the type of material we are wishing to publish."

<iframe src="https://www.flickr.com/photos/36722129@N06/13596179813/player/" width="500" height="359" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe>

and

<iframe src="https://www.flickr.com/photos/36722129@N06/13430753265/player/" width="500" height="357" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe>

Ron Flanary 04-03-2014 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbassloyd (Post 177265)
I have the solution!

Just accept everything Mitch submits. :D



Thanks!

Loyd L.

Better solution...they can send Mitch's shots to me for a decision. You know I'll be partial to dogs as foreground clutter...

troy12n 04-03-2014 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holloran Grade (Post 177271)
Seems the acceptance of abandonment shots might be over.

These have both been rejected as "the photo[s are] of low esthetic qualities, or is simply not the type of material we are wishing to publish."

<iframe src="https://www.flickr.com/photos/36722129@N06/13596179813/player/" width="500" height="359" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe>

Well, with all honesty, the first one really is nothing but "railroad tracks in the desert". At that focal length, it shows nothing to indicate it's abandoned. And while it's not a bad photo, it's something they wouldnt typically accept. Except by a select few.

Second one does, dont have any issue with that one.

CSX1702 04-04-2014 02:36 AM

Well, you have been uploading abandoned trackage shots ad nauseam. I like em', but maybe the screener gods are tired of them?

JimThias 04-05-2014 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n (Post 177276)
Second one does, dont have any issue with that one.

I do. What are we supposed to be looking at? What is the structure to the left that was cut off and not included? Why is it there?

MassArt Images 04-05-2014 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Flanary (Post 177275)
Better solution...they can send Mitch's shots to me for a decision. You know I'll be partial to dogs as foreground clutter...

Oh Boy... Wait until Mitch sees this shot

[photoid=476449]
or
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...476449&nseq=24

Mgoldman 04-05-2014 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MassArt Images (Post 177303)
Oh Boy... Wait until Mitch sees this shot

[photoid=476449]
or
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...476449&nseq=24

Lol - you noticed that too? That's what I get for uploading on a Tuesday!

I can take some solace in noting at least there was not a dog on that train.

/Mitch


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:21 PM.

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