Old 06-20-2008, 09:44 PM   #1
kooi2017
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 62
Send a message via AIM to kooi2017
Default Bridge Issues

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1084163660

I thought this shot had enough good things going for it that the slight truck obstruction wouldn't be a big deal. After all, there are bridge shots in the DB with this same issue, not to mention the ones with "obstructing" trusses. Of course, maybe the screening is a bit stricter now than it used to be. Appeal pending, but I guess the main question is at what point does a good bridge shot go bad? Since this is not a fixable problem, should I just assume that there are historic bridges that people will never get to see on this site since they don't allow for a "perfect" photo? I'm a fan of bridge shots personally, so I'm sure I'll run into this issue in the future at some point. I'm just trying to get a better idea of what is acceptable now so I don't waste my time and the screeners time uploading pictures that don't meet the requirements. Thanks.
kooi2017 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2008, 09:59 PM   #2
willie6622
Senior Member
 
willie6622's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The sprawling metropolis of Powhatan Point, Ohio
Posts: 158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kooi2017
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1084163660

I thought this shot had enough good things going for it that the slight truck obstruction wouldn't be a big deal. After all, there are bridge shots in the DB with this same issue, not to mention the ones with "obstructing" trusses. Of course, maybe the screening is a bit stricter now than it used to be. Appeal pending, but I guess the main question is at what point does a good bridge shot go bad? Since this is not a fixable problem, should I just assume that there are historic bridges that people will never get to see on this site since they don't allow for a "perfect" photo? I'm a fan of bridge shots personally, so I'm sure I'll run into this issue in the future at some point. I'm just trying to get a better idea of what is acceptable now so I don't waste my time and the screeners time uploading pictures that don't meet the requirements. Thanks.
I don't know, but I'm guessing that maybe the trucks being obstructed or the power lines overhead? I found this shot accepted very recently that is a bridge shot with some foreground clutter, but the trucks are not obstructed(just one set). This is why I'm guessing the truck issue.
Image © Brad Price
PhotoID: 239836
Photograph © Brad Price
__________________
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!

Last edited by willie6622; 06-21-2008 at 12:58 AM.
willie6622 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2008, 10:00 PM   #3
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

Appeal it, It fine photo and take there own standers to high at times.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2008, 10:44 PM   #4
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by milwman
Appeal it, It fine photo and take there own standers to high at times.
It's really a nice photo, but I'm not sure that it'll make it. Bridge shots that tend to get accepted with obstructing guardrails seem to be ones like this...

Image © Scott Carney
PhotoID: 237420
Photograph © Scott Carney


... where you can actually see through the guardrails. The rejected shot could possibly be re-attempted with the lead locomotive partly off of the bridge, therefore showing some of the trucks on the locomotive.

~Carl Becker
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2008, 11:15 PM   #5
gbrozny
Senior Member
 
gbrozny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 169
Send a message via ICQ to gbrozny
Default

I have a couple accepted with obstructed trucks, I think they get accepted when you can see under the bridge as to what is on the other side, as to yours, I do not think the obstruction takes anything away from the shot, unless they do not like the power lines in the foreground. Here are both of mine:

After standing here for about 20 min looking silly:
Image © Geoff Brozny
PhotoID: 234269
Photograph © Geoff Brozny


Image © Geoff Brozny
PhotoID: 224367
Photograph © Geoff Brozny
gbrozny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2008, 11:18 PM   #6
Save The Wave
trainchaser.us
 
Save The Wave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Evansville IN
Posts: 357
Send a message via MSN to Save The Wave
Default

I will never understand how part of a rail bridge could be considered foreground clutter. Makes no sense at all.
One issue though, the photo needs to be leveled.
__________________
You give me a golf cart, a 12 pack and a lake, I'll show you how to have fun all day - Comedian Greg Hahn

The good, the bad and the ugly. My railpics
Save The Wave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2008, 01:13 AM   #7
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Save The Wave
I will never understand how part of a rail bridge could be considered foreground clutter. Makes no sense at all.
One issue though, the photo needs to be leveled.
Agreed and agreed.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2008, 01:28 AM   #8
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Save The Wave
I will never understand how part of a rail bridge could be considered foreground clutter. Makes no sense at all.
Because it's blocking a portion of the train perhaps...?
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2008, 01:30 AM   #9
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
Because it's blocking a portion of the train perhaps...?
Well then why do the ones blocking a portion of the train getting accepted here? Are some bridges just never meant to be photographed then?
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2008, 01:36 AM   #10
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
Well then why do the ones blocking a portion of the train getting accepted here? Are some bridges just never meant to be photographed then?
I don't know, I'm not a screener. I also find the reasoning behind what bridge shots get accepted and what doesn't somewhat puzzling. I personally avoid shots like this one simply because I like to see the trucks of the locomotive(s). If it's a 'truss-style' bridge I try to not block the engine number and as much of the writing on the locomotive as possible.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2008, 01:41 AM   #11
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
I don't know, I'm not a screener. I also find the reasoning behind what bridge shots get accepted and what doesn't somewhat puzzling. I personally avoid shots like this one simply because I like to see the trucks of the locomotive(s). If it's a 'truss-style' bridge I try to not block the engine number and as much of the writing on the locomotive as possible.
I agree, there seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. One minute a bridge shot with trucks obstructed is getting in, the next it's not. Perhaps it comes down to how interesting the rest of the scene is, which I suppose is purely subjective with the screeners. In that regard, I think the problem with Matt's photo is that he's too close to the bridge. If he was able to get a shot of the train spanning the entire bridge, the interest of the shot would be more appealing, thus making the truck obstruction much less of a factor. I don't like bridges that obstruct the trucks either, but if the entire bridge was in the scene, I'd be less picky about that.

Looking at his picture, it only makes me want to see MORE of the bridge.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2008, 01:56 AM   #12
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
I agree, there seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. One minute a bridge shot with trucks obstructed is getting in, the next it's not. Perhaps it comes down to how interesting the rest of the scene is, which I suppose is purely subjective with the screeners. In that regard, I think the problem with Matt's photo is that he's too close to the bridge. If he was able to get a shot of the train spanning the entire bridge, the interest of the shot would be more appealing, thus making the truck obstruction much less of a factor. I don't like bridges that obstruct the trucks either, but if the entire bridge was in the scene, I'd be less picky about that.

Looking at his picture, it only makes me want to see MORE of the bridge.

I think that's the only way they can do it. Unfortunately, photography is completely subjective to what the individual thinks. This isn't math so there are no absolutes outside of the technical side of things, only what the masses agree to be appealing. It tends to make things more difficult, but it also makes the hobby more personal for the photographer.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2008, 02:10 AM   #13
a231pacific
Senior Member
 
a231pacific's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 822
Default

I like the shot. I like the falls below and it's well lit. I don't mind the fact that I can't see the full trucks. Level it and try again. Maybe a different screener will be on duty and accept it.

Michael Allen
a231pacific is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2008, 07:13 AM   #14
kooi2017
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 62
Send a message via AIM to kooi2017
Default

Actually, my first instinct when I arrived at the spot was to have much more of the bridge in the shot, however some tall weeds and bushes growing on the bridge left this area the only spot where I could get a southbound shot without that type of foreground clutter in front of the locos. A northbound would have been much more ideal, but you just have to take what the rr gives you.
kooi2017 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2008, 08:37 AM   #15
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

I like the photo a lot myself. It is unlevel, I dont know how much my opinion is worth but, im thinking whoever was screening didnt like the tree blocking the well car? I have never shot a bridge before so im no expert we have had a couple of coal spills off of bridges on to highways though.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2008, 01:50 PM   #16
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Senior Member
 
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marlboro, NJ
Posts: 1,956
Send a message via AIM to Andrew Blaszczyk (2) Send a message via Yahoo to Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Default

This is just one of many areas where the screeners differ in taste. I know a few of us understand that some bridges have that little extra but if its shot well, as is the case here, it should be a no brainer. I didn't even notice the wires the first time I looked at the photo in question. I'd appeal or give it a week and resubmit.
__________________
-Andrew Blaszczyk a.k.a. AB(2)
Proud fan of the Sabres, Islanders, Rockies, and Lions.

"My camera is an artistic medium, not a tool of terrorism."

www.ab2photography.com Coming soon!
My photos on RailPictures:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=960
Andrew Blaszczyk (2) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2008, 08:51 PM   #17
Slopes09
Senior Member
 
Slopes09's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here.
Posts: 837
Send a message via AIM to Slopes09
Default

Curse you Matt Kooi! You beat me to the other side of the bridge!

I've been meaning to shoot that side of the bridge since I shot I shot the other side of the bridge back in May.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
I agree, there seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. One minute a bridge shot with trucks obstructed is getting in, the next it's not. Perhaps it comes down to how interesting the rest of the scene is, which I suppose is purely subjective with the screeners. In that regard, I think the problem with Matt's photo is that he's too close to the bridge. If he was able to get a shot of the train spanning the entire bridge, the interest of the shot would be more appealing, thus making the truck obstruction much less of a factor. I don't like bridges that obstruct the trucks either, but if the entire bridge was in the scene, I'd be less picky about that.

Looking at his picture, it only makes me want to see MORE of the bridge.
That's what I did, but it was actually just because I liked the arches and what I figured would be a really nice reflection. I guess that worked in my favor.
Image © Mike W.
PhotoID: 236332
Photograph © Mike W.
__________________
-Mike W.
Railroad Civil Engineer

Pretty much the only Pentax Shooter.

Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
Slopes09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2008, 09:07 PM   #18
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slopes09
That's what I did, but it was actually just because I liked the arches and what I figured would be a really nice reflection. I guess that worked in my favor.
Image © Mike W.
PhotoID: 236332
Photograph © Mike W.
Now THAT is what I wanted to see! Very cool looking bridge.

Hey, Mike, I was just at the station in Hinsdale a week ago Saturday. Got a shot of a coal train with a metra train pacing along side it from the wooden bridge there (looking west instead of east, like so many of the shots on RP).
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2008, 12:28 AM   #19
ssw9662
Senior Member
 
ssw9662's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 839
Default

Actually, the power line is a far bigger distraction to me than the obscured trucks.
__________________
Austin
Canon EOS 7D
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon 50mm f/1.8
My Railpictures.net Photos
flickr
ssw9662 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2008, 12:46 AM   #20
JBCagle7073
Alpha Phi Psi
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kannapolis, NC
Posts: 264
Send a message via AIM to JBCagle7073
Default

I do not see a big problem with the picture. The obstruction is not that big of a deal at that distance. The power lines are a tad distracting, but there aren't that many places that do not have them today.More of the train would have been nice, but what you have works.
__________________
Duty is the most sublime word in our language. Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less.- Robert E. Lee
JBCagle7073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2008, 01:22 AM   #21
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,887
Default

I've looked at this shot and this thread three times without commenting. One reason is that there's something about this shot that I'm not a fan of. It's more than being unlevel and not being able to see the trucks. I'd like to see a level version, though, to judge again. But it strikes me that we're seeing a small portion of the bridge. Maybe it's just me, but I like wide shots of bridges. Show the scene, not a close up of the power and one or two cars. Backing off the train would make the obstructed trucks a tad less distracting too.

Consider --

Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


Rejected for "Foreground clutter." Appealed on basis of "That's not foreground clutter; that's a railroad bridge." And accepted.

If you can't pull back and show more of the bridge, consider the possibility that the location isn't RP-doable.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2008, 04:17 AM   #22
kooi2017
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 62
Send a message via AIM to kooi2017
Default

Well I have to admit Mike's shot from the east side of the bridge has more working for it than my shot. I shot this bridge before a year a two ago (only Amtrak and only the west side, never posted), but a big part of the problem is the drop in the river over the dam. The bridge on the east side is at higher level and provides a better view of the trucks then the lower west side of the bridge. The other huge problem, as I mentioned before, are the weeds and bushes on the bridge. From the west side view, these were the only two arches without obstrucing plants. Concrete from a bridge in front of a loco doesn't bother me, but a bush does; thus the side only composition. A northbound would have allowed a composition like Mike's shot, but with a southbound this is the best available without any obstructing greenery. As for the wires, I'd rather show it like it is than clone them out. I'm sure everyone has a different opinion of which shot is better, the east side with the reflection or the west side with the falls. Either way, I was just trying to show everyone a view of a seldom photographed bridge. Thanks for all the feedback everyone.
kooi2017 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2008, 05:06 AM   #23
J Douglas Moore
Senior Member
 
J Douglas Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: "It's a dry heat" Arizona
Posts: 716
Default

Quote:
It's more than being unlevel and not being able to see the trucks. I'd like to see a level version, though, to judge again. But it strikes me that we're seeing a small portion of the bridge.
The lighting is good, but I see too many things working agaist each other. The power lines, the bridge in the background and the unlevel shot .... I think pull it back to a wider view and it will work better.
J Douglas Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2008, 04:54 PM   #24
Slopes09
Senior Member
 
Slopes09's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here.
Posts: 837
Send a message via AIM to Slopes09
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
Now THAT is what I wanted to see! Very cool looking bridge.

Hey, Mike, I was just at the station in Hinsdale a week ago Saturday. Got a shot of a coal train with a metra train pacing along side it from the wooden bridge there (looking west instead of east, like so many of the shots on RP).
Thanks! Jim, you should of let me know. I might have made the effort to head home. What brought you to the wonderful land of Chicagoland?

I think my only shot from there is facing east, but then I've only been there once, and that was in the afternoon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kooi2017
Well I have to admit Mike's shot from the east side of the bridge has more working for it than my shot. I shot this bridge before a year a two ago (only Amtrak and only the west side, never posted), but a big part of the problem is the drop in the river over the dam. The bridge on the east side is at higher level and provides a better view of the trucks then the lower west side of the bridge. The other huge problem, as I mentioned before, are the weeds and bushes on the bridge. From the west side view, these were the only two arches without obstrucing plants. Concrete from a bridge in front of a loco doesn't bother me, but a bush does; thus the side only composition. A northbound would have allowed a composition like Mike's shot, but with a southbound this is the best available without any obstructing greenery. As for the wires, I'd rather show it like it is than clone them out. I'm sure everyone has a different opinion of which shot is better, the east side with the reflection or the west side with the falls. Either way, I was just trying to show everyone a view of a seldom photographed bridge. Thanks for all the feedback everyone.
I'll have to remember that whenever I go back to shoot that side of the bridge. And it is a seldom photographed bridge, though I can't for the life of me figure out why. Your shot turned out very well, though, regardless. I wouldn't worry too much about the wires, can't do very much about them. Next time, I wouldn't worry about the plants. My shot has obstructing telephone poles, but they didn't seem to worry the screeners too much. If the shot's cool enough, they'd probably overlook it.
__________________
-Mike W.
Railroad Civil Engineer

Pretty much the only Pentax Shooter.

Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
Slopes09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2008, 05:18 PM   #25
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kooi2017
Actually, my first instinct when I arrived at the spot was to have much more of the bridge in the shot, however some tall weeds and bushes growing on the bridge left this area the only spot where I could get a southbound shot without that type of foreground clutter in front of the locos.
I'm a little confused with this description. Looking at Mike's shot on the opposite side, it shows that the bridge is pretty clear from one side to the other. Where would there be vegetation growing? Actually on the bridge deck?

Image © Mike W.
PhotoID: 236332
Photograph © Mike W.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Slopes09
Thanks! Jim, you should of let me know. I might have made the effort to head home. What brought you to the wonderful land of Chicagoland?

I think my only shot from there is facing east, but then I've only been there once, and that was in the afternoon.
A buddy of mine and I headed down there Friday night (13th) and hung out at the Clark Rd. crossing (Pine) in Gary. We stayed in Lansing and then headed to Joliet the first thing Saturday morning. From there we hit some random spots...Lemont, Willow Springs, Hinsdale, Clearing, Cicero and eventually Chicago before heading back to Michigan Saturday night. Kind of planned, kind of spontaneous...we just tried to find where the action was. Turned out to be a very slow day.
JimThias 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 08:53 AM.


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