Composition Deficits

Freericks · 05-06-2016, 04:30 AM

Is there an edit I'm not seeing that would make this work or is it hopeless?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...90&key=9533324

RobJor · 05-06-2016, 05:13 AM

I like the idea as the car ties in, but looks like high sun, the locos are obscured behind brush etc and the overall look is very flat which ie a middle of the day photo. Now if it was that person who usually posts all that stuff it would be accepted and get 10,000 views.

Looking for the bleached bone of that foamer car that was abandoned.

Bob

miningcamper1 · 05-06-2016, 07:28 AM

I like it (except for those ugly scenery-killers in the distance ).

Noct Foamer · 05-06-2016, 01:32 PM

I like what you were after, and that is a seriously cool little railroad there. Somehow it just doesn't quite work from that angle. Another thought I had was to shoot it from inside the car, with a wide angle. Would either need careful fill flash or two exposure blend.

Kent in SD

KevinM · 05-06-2016, 02:42 PM

Hi Charles,

Interesting scene. I would have no concerns about the high sun, nor do the wind turbines bother me. As the screener noted, the real issue is composition. IMHO as a definite "non-artiste", this composition isn't terrible. If I were going to try and resubmit, I might try going tighter on the top, bottom and right. I think the problem is that the train is distant enough to make the right side look somewhat empty.

The $64,000 question is whether or not you have other frames from different angles.....specifically, do you have anything shot from just a little further to your left that would allow you to get more train in a tighter frame, without getting any of the dreaded "merges", where elements appear to "touch"?

One of the live-and-learn lessons of photography is that the only shots you ever regret are the ones you don't take. Since pixels are a ton cheaper than film, whenever you come across a scene like this, it behooves you to shoot a bunch of angles. When you get 'em home and put 'em on a computer, you have more time to think and more material to play with. In the end, you can just hit DELETE on anything that just doesn't "work." I don't know how many times I've gotten home and thought: "Damn, if I had just shot it from this angle or that."

Freericks · 05-06-2016, 03:04 PM

Kevin,

What about this angle?

RobJor · 05-06-2016, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks

Kevin,

What about this angle?

Seems to take care of compo. Looks better for me. I would sure try.

Bob

KevinM · 05-06-2016, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks

Kevin,

What about this angle?

I like it!

A couple of suggestions:

Perhaps crop 3:5 to take a little of the featureless foreground out of it. Also, the scene looks bright on this display (everything looks bright on the laptop I am using right this second), but you may want to play with highlights/brightness to ensure good contrast. There are a lot of light-colored elements in the scene.

I'd give it your best shot on the crop and the processing and go for it. The other angle gave more detail on the vehicle, but I think this one addresses the screener's concern.

Freericks · 05-06-2016, 05:58 PM

Thanks so much - will work on it tonight.

miningcamper1 · 05-06-2016, 07:41 PM

I agree with Kevin, but my go-to adjustment would be the gamma slider.

EDIT: Or maybe not. The result screams "high sun", although it made the sky a nice blue.

Freericks · 05-06-2016, 09:19 PM

Gamma slider is the high-sun finder for sure. Highlights tool is much more forgiving.

Noct Foamer · 05-06-2016, 10:43 PM

If you ever get the chance to go back, I would try lowering the hood down on the car. Then, try shooting THROUGH the car and frame the engines.

Kent in SD

JRMDC · 05-07-2016, 01:16 AM

My view is that the first one is much better. Besides the obstructions on the train, I think I'd prefer seeing the entire second engine, plus the cut-off stone on the right margin is distracting. The second one is, to use the appropriate technical term, blah, by comparison. And too much space at the bottom.

Freericks · 05-07-2016, 02:51 AM

I was originally with you, J, but the public spoke and didn't want it. They did want the bland one.

PhotoID: 575620
Photograph © Charles Freericks

Freericks · 05-07-2016, 02:54 AM

Truth is I've seen many pics before with an old abandoned car up front and the train in the back and when I realized I could do it here, I got kind of happy. The hood being up? Yeah, if it weren't so far away I might drive there again and try and get it down. I did look at it at the time and there is nothing to latch the hood to anymore so the springs keep it up. It probably would have required some bailing wire and a lot more time to keep it down.

KevinM · 05-07-2016, 03:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC

My view is that the first one is much better. Besides the obstructions on the train, I think I'd prefer seeing the entire second engine, plus the cut-off stone on the right margin is distracting. The second one is, to use the appropriate technical term, blah, by comparison. And too much space at the bottom.

I liked the first one too, but with the frame he had, the compo wasn't getting it done. The second frame may not have quite the impact, but Charles did a nice job processing it. He just put it up this evening and it is rapidly gathering hits on its own merit, not based on some cheap Facebook campaign. In another hour, it should walk right by both of the shots I put up nearly 24 hrs ago.

Nice job, Charles!

Freericks · 05-07-2016, 03:14 AM

I'm sorry, Kevin. I hope I don't overtake them.

miningcamper1 · 05-07-2016, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks

I was originally with you, J, but the public spoke and didn't want it. They did want the bland one.

PhotoID: 575620
Photograph © Charles Freericks

...and it's doing very well at #3 Top of 24.

BTW, why is it that attempts to revive this line seem to go nowhere?
Is it the jog in and out of Mexico that complicates matters?

ShortlinesUSA · 05-08-2016, 07:51 PM

I would say the biggest issue is miles and miles of difficult infrastructure with no online traffic. That's an issue which has killed many a shortline over the years.

miningcamper1 · 05-08-2016, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShortlinesUSA

I would say the biggest issue is miles and miles of difficult infrastructure with no online traffic. That's an issue which has killed many a shortline over the years.

It would be among the more spectacular tourist train rides IMO.

Ron Flanary · 05-10-2016, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks

Is there an edit I'm not seeing that would make this work or is it hopeless?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...90&key=9533324

Why are you asking here? That's a helluva shot the way it is!! I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in it being rejected here. It's just one person's opinion, that's all. How could you possibly call this shot "hopeless"?

If I had taken it, I would have uploaded it to one of the magazines----and skipped RP (with no disrespect to RP---just my opinion).

JRMDC · 05-20-2016, 04:32 PM

Someone was not happy with Charles' efforts and decided further effort was needed

Freericks · 05-20-2016, 05:08 PM

What's really funny about that Janusz is that I had other photos from that day rejected for "similar to previous" due not to my photos but El Roco's.

ShortlinesUSA · 05-20-2016, 05:55 PM

If history repeats itself, 5 different angles of the shot will be posted over the next couple of weeks, all making it to the Top 24...

miningcamper1 · 05-20-2016, 06:13 PM

It's a good abandoned SUV shot, for sure, but half a GP40 way in the background is enough rail content?