Old 06-25-2009, 01:57 PM   #1
wongm
Senior Member
 
wongm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 110
Default Pair of PEQs

I just uploaded a pair of photos, both of them got rejected for ''Poor Esthetic Quality'.



http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=700820&key=0



http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=318452601

Did I just run into a screener who isn't into wanky shots, or are they really too 'out there' for this site? Is it worth an appeal?
wongm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 02:14 PM   #2
wongm
Senior Member
 
wongm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 110
Default

I might as add this one to the mix as well, rejected for being underexposed:



http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=846078160

I have a few different exposures from the same spot, would I be better off mergeing them together to make the loco side brighter, while preventing the background from getting overexposed?
wongm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 02:34 PM   #3
CP990
Senior Member
 
CP990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 149
Default

It's worth the effort ............. I really like this one! Good Luck!

Dave.
__________________
My Railroad Website: www.davesphotopages.com
CP990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2009, 04:34 AM   #4
CUDA7185
Senior Member
 
CUDA7185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: CT
Posts: 94
Send a message via AIM to CUDA7185
Default

I really like the first two, but unfortunately there isn't much you can do about the PEQ rejection other than appeal. The shot of the EMU might have a chance, I'd say go for an appeal on that one.

As far as the Pacific National shot goes you might be able to get it in if you can fix the exposure on the close side. If you can make an HDR from a few exposures, give it a shot and see what you come up with.
__________________
Matt

My Photos on Railpictures.Net
My Railroad & HO Scale Model Photos at Fotopic.Net
CUDA7185 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2009, 04:56 AM   #5
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

First one, I like. RP might have been more receptive to it had you panned on the nose rather than mid-train and caught that between the bridge legs. But MU, so the nose is not a distinct unit, I don't know. I like this one, but can see why it wouldn't work on RP. It is nice, so you may want to appeal.

Also, there are lots of dark areas without detail. the train doesn't leap out the way it does in many pans. Even the lit parts of the train are not very bright. I see where you are going with this, or I see where I have gone with looking at it , and it may just not be RP material.

Second one, don't care for it. It is a night-time roster shot, of a non-engine, and off-center with nothing on the right to balance it out. If the lit rail/ballast is the intention there, it isn't enough.

Also, as the shot is, the focus is on a mess of light of various sorts, with the machine being greatly de-emphasized. That works against it also.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots

Last edited by JRMDC; 06-27-2009 at 06:10 AM.
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2009, 06:00 AM   #6
Christopher Muller
Senior Member
 
Christopher Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 787
Default

I normally don't publically discuss a disagreement with the screeners, but I will say I disagree with the night shot:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=318452601

I like the shot, other than a little noise issues it is very well balanced and interesting.
Christopher Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 02:54 PM   #7
wongm
Senior Member
 
wongm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 110
Default

Thanks for the advice all, I am waiting to hear back on the results of my appeals.



I have just had this shot rejected for composition / balance:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1247609029



I frames the shot with the loco heading into the tangle of pointwork, should I just let it go, or try cropping it another way?
wongm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 03:15 PM   #8
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Crop the top - the sky is doing the shot no favors. And then crop off the right for balance.

But what is more important to me is that you go back and take the same shot in a crouch, or step off your unit if you are a crewperson and you are allowed, so you don't cut off the nearest signals at their top. Those signals are really interesting!

(If you are shooting out the back window of a passenger train, well, bummer.)

Also, the shot isn't sharp, maybe you can correct that in processing.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2009, 01:49 PM   #9
wongm
Senior Member
 
wongm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 110
Default

Thanks for that JRMDC, I will have to wait until summer to reshoot for the light to be right, too many high building around casting shadows at the moment. Unfortunately I can't get much lower down to get the signals in.



Back to the first two pictures I posted and appealed, they were rejected with no comments added.




Still on the rejection files, this one was rejected and no reason was given:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=702977&key=0



What gives?
wongm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2009, 04:12 PM   #10
John Fladung
JohnFladung.net
 
John Fladung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wongm View Post
What gives?
You might be well on your way to having your amount of available uploads per day cut way down or cutoff completely.
John Fladung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2009, 04:56 PM   #11
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wongm View Post
Still on the rejection files, this one was rejected and no reason was given:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=702977&key=0

I like that set up. Somehow I don't seem to recall many overseas industrial settings on RP. So the set up and the composition is nice, but the image quality is poor. They would ding it for that and I'm not sure what the problem is, whether it's a camera issue or a post processing issue.

Be careful on the appeal process. It's there for when an appeal is worthy of being considered, not for every rejection you get. Remember that the only ones who screen appeals are Chris Starnes and Chris Kilroy. I'm not saying don't appeal anything. Just don't abuse the process. In my opinion, neither of those shots were apppeal worthy.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2009, 05:01 PM   #12
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wongm View Post
Did I just run into a screener who isn't into wanky shots, or are they really too 'out there' for this site? Is it worth an appeal?
Neither of those shots are "too out there" for RP. They're not out there out all reallly. They're just not pulled off very well. The pan shot would look really nice, as J said, if you panned the front of the train. The second shot does not work at all because it doesn't subscribe to the Rule of Thirds, the light is over blown, the image quality is sub part, the shot is under exposed, the shot is grainy and leaning to the left.

And you appealed it?
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2009, 10:51 PM   #13
wongm
Senior Member
 
wongm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fladung View Post
You might be well on your way to having your amount of available uploads per day cut way down or cutoff completely.
Ouch - it only started off at two. For my first few shots I was getting roughly 1 out of 3 uploads accepted, over the past week it has blown out to 1 out of 10 or worse.

As for my current rejected shot, any suggestions on what is wrong with it?
wongm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 01:29 AM   #14
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fladung View Post
You might be well on your way to having your amount of available uploads per day cut way down or cutoff completely.
Well, the statement "what gives" was with respect to a rejection with no reason given. That happens sometimes, don't know why. But I don't find his question objectionable, it's reasonable given the circumstance.

I am not sure but I think there are two possibilities - appeal, and say that no reason was given for the rejection, or resubmit, and say that it is uncorrected because there was no reason given the first time.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 05:01 AM   #15
John Fladung
JohnFladung.net
 
John Fladung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wongm View Post
Ouch - it only started off at two. For my first few shots I was getting roughly 1 out of 3 uploads accepted, over the past week it has blown out to 1 out of 10 or worse.

As for my current rejected shot, any suggestions on what is wrong with it?
Technically speaking I think the last image you uploaded might have a chance to get in. However, there are some things I would adjust on it that might help the chances of it becoming accepted.

- Adjust the contrast (needs more).
- Adjust saturation slightly (color looks a bit flat to me).
- Can you re-crop it at all so that the fence to the right of the frame is out of view?
John Fladung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 11:31 AM   #16
wongm
Senior Member
 
wongm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fladung View Post
Technically speaking I think the last image you uploaded might have a chance to get in. However, there are some things I would adjust on it that might help the chances of it becoming accepted.
I have done those tweaks, how does it look now? The grey and blue on the lead and second units is rather faded, it made things a bit difficult.

(image s-D890_9067-3.jpg)

I have also attached three other images I have been trying to get accepted - are they up to scratch? Each has been mangled down to 150 kB in size, I have been uploading uncompressed jpegs at 900 kB or so.

s-D584_8494_mod-2 = tail end of a EMD bulldog
s-D549_4906 = loco hauled EMU
s-D715_1512 = pair of DMUs
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	s-D549_4906.jpg
Views:	66
Size:	150.8 KB
ID:	4305   Click image for larger version

Name:	s-D584_8494_mod-2.jpg
Views:	63
Size:	158.4 KB
ID:	4306   Click image for larger version

Name:	s-D715_1512.jpg
Views:	66
Size:	240.9 KB
ID:	4307   Click image for larger version

Name:	s-D890_9067-3.jpg
Views:	69
Size:	196.2 KB
ID:	4308  
wongm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 12:46 PM   #17
CP990
Senior Member
 
CP990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 149
Default

I like 1, 3 & 4 ............ but they seem soft to me.

Dave.
__________________
My Railroad Website: www.davesphotopages.com
CP990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 05:10 PM   #18
John Fladung
JohnFladung.net
 
John Fladung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wongm View Post
I have done those tweaks, how does it look now? The grey and blue on the lead and second units is rather faded, it made things a bit difficult.

(image s-D890_9067-3.jpg)

I have also attached three other images I have been trying to get accepted - are they up to scratch? Each has been mangled down to 150 kB in size, I have been uploading uncompressed jpegs at 900 kB or so.

s-D584_8494_mod-2 = tail end of a EMD bulldog
s-D549_4906 = loco hauled EMU
s-D715_1512 = pair of DMUs
#4 seems to have the best chance IMO...
John Fladung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 05:51 PM   #19
cblaz
Senior Member
 
cblaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Marlboro, New Jersey
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CP990 View Post
I like 1, 3 & 4 ............ but they seem soft to me.
Agree 80%. The only suggestions I have is that the top of the tree in #3 is cut off. If you have the whole tree in your original, keep it in. Also, #4 looks the most soft to me, but I like the editing done to it. Good luck.

- Chris
__________________
- Christopher Blaszczyk
My shots on RP: http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=284
cblaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009, 11:05 PM   #20
wongm
Senior Member
 
wongm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cblaz View Post
The only suggestions I have is that the top of the tree in #3 is cut off. If you have the whole tree in your original, keep it in. Also, #4 looks the most soft to me, but I like the editing done to it. Good luck.
I uploaded #2 and #3 last night, and woke up this morning and they were accepted.

Image © Marcus Wong
PhotoID: 289218
Photograph © Marcus Wong


Image © Marcus Wong
PhotoID: 289217
Photograph © Marcus Wong


I will have another look at #4, I seem to err on the side of undersharpening.
wongm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.