Old 08-22-2012, 06:07 PM   #1
IHapsias
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Question Inconsistency?

Snooping around on the website I'm kinda interested at the inconsistency the website has had lately.

Now I'm not here to complain cry and ask for pitty because a photo was rejected and another was accepted, I'm just curious if this WOULD or WOULDN'T show the inconsistency that happens on here from time to time.

Now, the photo I mention being rejected was this shot:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...46&key=2301107

Poor Lighting (Backlit)

The top photo of week, is also, backlit...is it not? (Not bashing the photographer)

Image © Zach Pumphery
PhotoID: 406794
Photograph © Zach Pumphery


So, if a photo is going to bring in big views on the website, does that over rule what would for any other photo, a rejection?

Not bitching or crying about it....just curious.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 07:07 PM   #2
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default

Oh, you want consistency? Geez. Next you'll want "objective" and "reasonable". It's a slippery slope...

I find it's amusing when I submit a shot on superelevation or an old 70s shot on cruddy track with every car leaning a different direction and get "unlevel" after I've gone to reasonable lengths to square them up against a vertical in the middle of the shot.

Then, you peruse the day's uploads and find shots you have to tilt you head to see'm true.

This one

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...68&key=1506504

got whacked for unlevel. It's got problems I couldn't fix - It's in "blah" light and a bit dark - I underexposed the original slide a bit and couldn't compensate for it all, but it's not "unlevel" and was rare to find any B&M stuff still in maroon in the mid 1970s.

It really would be good if they'd just reject most shots without any reason and only supply a reason if they really want to see an improved version in the queue again. They are wasting everyone's time with the current system.
oltmannd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 07:12 PM   #3
adickson
Senior Member
 
adickson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Central NC
Posts: 236
Default

An engine seizing up or a backlit shot of a highly photographed train? I'll admit the accepted shot is no gem as far as lighting but the scene is rather unique. If you can get a shot of the steamer having a come-a-part I can guarantee they would be less picky about lighting. Until that time this train has become "Common Power". That being said, dodge the front and save it till after they park this train.
__________________
Anthony Dickson
www.vidivides.com
www.flickr.com/photos/adickson87/
adickson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 07:19 PM   #4
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,899
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oltmannd View Post
It really would be good if they'd just reject most shots without any reason and only supply a reason if they really want to see an improved version in the queue again. They are wasting everyone's time with the current system.
Oh, no, no, no!!! Believe me, these forums would go down if that happened with people crying about their pictures beign rejected for no reason.

As to consistency or lack thereof, one could argue that they actually are soewhat consistent. Consistency does not mean one is never wrong. As far as Ian's comparision to the KCS shot, that is a someaht interesting, noteworthy shot in that it is a locomotive on fire. Comparing it to a partially backlit shot of the 765 is not the same thing. While I like Ian's shot, it's just one of many of the same subject beng submitted by a lot of people. The KCS shot was one of one like it.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 08:05 PM   #5
Chris Z
Senior Member
 
Chris Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Libertyville, Il
Posts: 937
Send a message via Skype™ to Chris Z
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IHapsias View Post
Snooping around on the website I'm kinda interested at the inconsistency the website has had lately.
Whatta ya mean? They are consistent with their inconsistency.

Chris Z
Chris Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 09:08 PM   #6
Hatchetman
Part-Time Railfan
 
Hatchetman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,381
Default

the "freak show" shots always get on. they are inconsistent but not in this way.
__________________
Now with Flickr!
Hatchetman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2012, 09:33 PM   #7
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatchetman View Post
the "freak show" shots always get on. they are inconsistent but not in this way.
Yup - C'mon Ian, you need better ammunition to validate that point - though that should not be too hard to find.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2012, 12:19 AM   #8
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
Oh, no, no, no!!! Believe me, these forums would go down if that happened with people crying about their pictures beign rejected for no reason.
Yeah. "It needs to be rotated 0.37 degrees to the left." "You need more of that rock in the foreground." "That mushroom cloud has blown out the sky." "You need to drink more bourbon before you try another pan shot." "That's not a very small 0-4-0. That's a dog. Ugly, too. That's why the PEQ."

You are right. We'd lose all the entertainment.
oltmannd 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 01:00 PM.


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