Old 04-17-2010, 04:06 PM   #1
pderekh
Senior Member
 
pderekh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 433
Default PEQ's a pan and crossing shot

Any opinions on if these still have potential for RP with some work or a different screener? Does a tighter crop of the pan add interest by getting rid of some of the plain sky?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=436477250
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=803682&key=0
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	2328_040910load.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	687.0 KB
ID:	5382  
pderekh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2010, 05:34 PM   #2
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,758
Default

On the pan, the background isn't great for the shot. It may need some contrast, and a bump down in brightness as well.

Loyd L.
__________________
What used to be is no more

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2010, 06:25 PM   #3
stevenmwelch
Senior Member
 
stevenmwelch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minot, ND
Posts: 720
Send a message via AIM to stevenmwelch Send a message via Yahoo to stevenmwelch
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
On the pan, the background isn't great for the shot. It may need some contrast, and a bump down in brightness as well.

Loyd L.
And a little less lighten shadows... I dunno though, I'm just not a huge fan of it.
__________________
Steven M. Welch
Minot, ND
I gots my floaties and I'm ready to go railroadin' in Minot.
My Photos on RP
My RP Rejects and then Some
stevenmwelch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2010, 11:23 PM   #4
Todd Jackson
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 59
Send a message via AIM to Todd Jackson
Default

Allow me to play Devil's Advocate and bring up a bigger point.
Every once in a while, a photographer comes here with a PEQ shot and asks what can be done with it; the majority of the time, he/she is met with similar responses (recrop, adjust lighting, etc.). It seems to me though, that if that were the way to fix the photo, the screener would have rejected it for Bad Cropping or Bad Contrast or whatever else. Perhaps, I'm just stuck on the "not the type of material we are wishing to publish" part of the statement.
Point of evidence is Paul's recent shot of the girl and the BNSF. It started out as a PEQ, but with a recrop (I believe) it was accepted and currently resides as Top of Last Week.
So what I'm asking is, do the screeners use the PEQ as a way of saying, "there's something wrong with this shot, but I just can't put my finger on it"? Or is the natural inconsistency amongst the screeners to account for the differing opinions on a shot?


I don't mean this to be offensive to anyone, this thread just got me thinking.

What are your thoughts,
Todd
Todd Jackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2010, 11:31 PM   #5
cblaz
Senior Member
 
cblaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Marlboro, New Jersey
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd Jackson View Post
So what I'm asking is, do the screeners use the PEQ as a way of saying, "there's something wrong with this shot, but I just can't put my finger on it"? Or is the natural inconsistency amongst the screeners to account for the differing opinions on a shot?
In this case, the PEQ should be the nail in the coffin for these two shots. For the pan, as mentioned, the background and overuse of the highlight tool kill it, as well as the graffiti on the cars. For the second shot, it's just a mass of random elements thrown together in a shot with poor lighting which should prevent it from being accepted.

- Chris
/Now, if Paul photoshops the two photos together, he'll get in on with no problem.
__________________
- Christopher Blaszczyk
My shots on RP: http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=284
cblaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 12:10 AM   #6
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd Jackson View Post
Or is the natural inconsistency amongst the screeners to account for the differing opinions on a shot?
I think you have pretty well nailed it on the head. Using your example, what at least one of the screeners thought was a POS picture and unacceptable to the site (PEQ), got 8726 views in a little over a week after a re-crop and (possibly) being screened by a different screener. So opinions obviously differ.

I could be wrong, but I always thought PEQ's were more or less unfixable
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 12:14 AM   #7
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,803
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I think you have pretty well nailed it on the head. Using your example, what at least one of the screeners thought was a POS picture and unacceptable to the site (PEQ)...
What makes you think the screener who hit it with at PEQ thought it was a POS? Or did YOU think it was a POS and you're trying to pawn your opinion off on the screener?
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 12:32 AM   #8
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

I didnt think it was a POS at all. I just have always assumed PEQ means the screener thought it was a POS. I have certainly had my fair share of PEQ's and given up on them.

Maybe POS was a bit harsh, how about unacceptable.

Last edited by troy12n; 04-18-2010 at 12:36 AM.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 01:09 AM   #9
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 troy12n View Post
I could be wrong, but I always thought PEQ's were more or less unfixable
I wish I could remember the specific shot(s) but there have been one or two PEQ rejections that I've either got in on appeal or fixed in some way that changed the mind of the screener. I don't think there could really be (m)any absolutes in photography which is very subjective in it's very nature.

As for the two shots in this thread, I concur with cblaz's assessment and just add that I tend to think pan shots of couplers on cars have been overdone. But that's just my opinion. The exception might be looking down from a caboose and getting a shot of the couplers with the ground below. One shot I'd like to see on tis would be a train going over a bridge perhaps.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 09:31 PM   #10
pderekh
Senior Member
 
pderekh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 433
Default

made it in!
Image © Paul Hoffmann
PhotoID: 321435
Photograph © Paul Hoffmann
pderekh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2010, 02:32 PM   #11
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,758
Default

pretty steep grade there.

Loyd L.
__________________
What used to be is no more

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd 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 11:53 PM.


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