Old 08-21-2005, 04:49 PM   #1
Slopes09
Senior Member
 
Slopes09's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here.
Posts: 837
Send a message via AIM to Slopes09
Default Another Bad Angle

This photo was rejected for bad angle. Of all the rejection reasons, this was the last one I was expecting for this one, I had figured on a "bad motive." Any thoughts or comments?
Thanks.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject.php?id=157334
Slopes09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 04:58 PM   #2
lucky77
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 44
Default

Neat picture! Sometimes it makes me wonder if the pictures Rp.net rejects would make a nicer album than the ones that make it!

I think that "Bad Angle" is not exactly the right reason for rejecting this photo, nonetheless it is kinda fuzzy -- that makes it look neat and artistic and all, but not what RP.net wants in its database.

Just my thoughts!
__________________
-Mark
www.fuzzyworld3.com

Last edited by lucky77; 08-21-2005 at 05:32 PM.
lucky77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 05:20 PM   #3
bnsf sammy
Senior Member
 
bnsf sammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 638
Default

cool shot, but maybe it would have been a better angel if you took the pic from the other side of the railroad crossing facing the loco so the light from the sun lights the loco. No offense, but what I mean is that at first glance, it looked like a big black shadow and then a railroad crossing. Its also a little fuzzy? Cool shot.
__________________
BNSF SAMMY
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
bnsf sammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 08:01 PM   #4
NicTrain35
Senior Member
 
NicTrain35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 758
Default

It is a tad fuzzy. My guess would be it got rejected for Bad angle because it's a going away shot. It's still a nice shot.
__________________
Nick Hart
Joliet, IL

My pictures at RP:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=3955
NicTrain35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 05:04 AM   #5
Slopes09
Senior Member
 
Slopes09's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here.
Posts: 837
Send a message via AIM to Slopes09
Default

It wasn't really a planned shot, its a "wow, I didn't realize that would come out like that" kinda shot. Seriously though, we were heading out of Talkeetna for the night, and just as we crossed the tracks, the gates came down, my dad sighed and pulled over for me. I jumped out of the car, flipped my camera on, and snapped a 3/4 wedgie which came out blurry, and this shot. I didn't even realize the dramatic lighting when I took the shot. I will try and sharpen it up or something. My snanner made the sky come out really speckled, so I used the magic wand to select the sky and then I blurred it together. Thanks for the comments though. I think I'll take one more crack at it and then file it away in my album.
Slopes09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2005, 03:30 AM   #6
lucky77
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 44
Default

Sometimes those "unplanned, this will never make it on Railpictures" shots actually do make it! I've had that be the case more than once. Meanwhile, some of the awesome shots that I think are a sure thing get rejected...
__________________
-Mark
www.fuzzyworld3.com
lucky77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2005, 01:06 PM   #7
Slopes09
Senior Member
 
Slopes09's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here.
Posts: 837
Send a message via AIM to Slopes09
Default

Yeah, my best shots are generally the best shots I take. Makes me wonder why I bother setting up my shots sometimes. Anyways, found a way to select the sky without getting the fuzzy edges. Fixed it up and it was rejected for being undersharpened. Think I should appeal? Or should I throw on another unsharpen mask?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject.php?id=158140
Slopes09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2005, 04:51 PM   #8
Chris Starnes
Administrator
 
Chris Starnes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 927
Default

By looking at the technical quality of the image, there isn't anything you can do to make it acceptable. Sorry.
__________________
Chris Starnes
Co-Editor, RailPictures.net
Chris Starnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2005, 05:51 PM   #9
Slopes09
Senior Member
 
Slopes09's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here.
Posts: 837
Send a message via AIM to Slopes09
Default

Thanks, at least your honest with me. It'll save me some work.
Slopes09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2005, 01:35 AM   #10
busyEMT
Senior Member
 
busyEMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slopes09
Makes me wonder why I bother setting up my shots sometimes.
Well, almost every photographer will tell you to set-up a shot before taking it. Makes sense, but isn't possible every time. But with a familiarity with taking your time setting up shots, your "on-the-fly" shots will be better more often than not. It is similar to the tripod or no tripod debate.

As a photographer returns to a certain spot frequently, their set-up time will decrease. Composing the photo will be less of a problem than adjusting for current lighting conditions.

I liked the idea behind your rejected photo. This particular one illustrates exactly why setting up a shot is beneficial.
__________________
Aaron Florin- Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
Visit Twin Cities Railfan.com
Visit the Twin Cities Railfan forums.

Don't do anything you wouldn't want to explain to the paramedics!
busyEMT 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 11:34 AM.


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