Old 05-06-2008, 02:34 AM   #1
Bill
Senior Member
 
Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 234
Default Rejected for being Soft

Hey guys,
I thought I'd check with you guys to get your opinion on this one. More than anything, I liked this light, I'm a big fan on late afternoon light on brick.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=453511482

What do you think? Appeal, sharpen a bit more & resubmit? Scrap it?

Thanks,
Bill
Bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 02:43 AM   #2
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

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill
Hey guys,

What do you think? thats a great shot
Appeal, No
sharpen a bit more & resubmit? Yes need a bit more
Scrap it? NO!!! it a good shot

Thanks,
Bill
IT is a great shot light is good , the heat waves may have fooled them, but it needs a bit more Un Sharp Mask
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 02:44 AM   #3
captadam
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 56
Default

Perhaps a bit more sharpening, but, geez--picky, picky! It's quite a lovely shot, in my view.
captadam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 02:52 AM   #4
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

The ballast, a favorite indicator of mine, looks poor. The nose looks OK, I have seen sharper. In general RP likes them sharp. Also, just a smidge of CW rotation.

Very nice shot. I haven't taken a PoR shot that I've been happy with since I went digital, mainly because I never have the chance to set up there properly. I'll keep that composition in mind for the future.

Janusz
__________________
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 05-06-2008, 02:56 AM   #5
Christopher Muller
Senior Member
 
Christopher Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 787
Default

With a little more processing I can see this photo being accepted. I don't think this is worthy of an appeal at current though. As mentioned above, rotate CW about .5, also if possible use a sharpening tool to sharpen the engine. It almost looks as though the camera focused in on the leaves on the right. Those seem to be the sharpest part of the photo and are focused the best. I've done this several times and have lost the shot. The engine and the leaves are close to the same depth so you should be able to salvage this shot.
Christopher Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 02:58 AM   #6
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

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
The ballast, a favorite indicator of mine, looks poor.
Janusz
I think it was the time of day and was open up a lot, so the field of focus was short. Looks sharp at the hand rails
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 03:12 AM   #7
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

It does need some sharpening, POR is such a nice station. See you next weekend!
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 03:18 AM   #8
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by milwman
I think it was the time of day and was open up a lot, so the field of focus was short. Looks sharp at the hand rails
The EXIF is corrupted, so I don't know what Bill was using. If it was a Canon crop-sensor body and a 200mm at f/4, focused at 200 feet, the depth of field is 47 feet. If it is a 300mm, f/4, and 500 feet, depth of field is 160 feet. At telephoto, field of focus just isn't that short.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

It's decently sharp, it fits my personal range of sharpness, especially given the composition with the heat waves and the sunset mood, but I don't think it meets RP's criteria.

Here's tele sharp, 300mm or maybe 400, just up the line at Weverton:
Image © Daniel Putz
PhotoID: 177864
Photograph © Daniel Putz
__________________
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; 05-06-2008 at 03:22 AM.
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 03:49 AM   #9
Bill
Senior Member
 
Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 234
Default

Thanks guys, I appreciate the opinions, suggestions & comments. I won't appeal, but I may do some selective sharpening & a slight rotation & resubmit...or I may just elect to keep it off RailPics (I don't want people to know I shoot trains other than the WMSR).

Exif was f9 - 1/800 - ISO 200 at a 400 mm focal length.

Yep Walter, see you next week...looking forward to getting down that way again.

Thanks,
Bill
Bill 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 09:25 AM.


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