Old 10-29-2009, 01:25 AM   #1
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default Help with a few of these please?

Question about a few of these rejects. I have not posted or shot any photos in months, and am a little rusty.

Cloudy? It has to be sunny to get a picture accepted?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=541705508
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=532660524

Bad cropping? What part
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=919657402

Not sure what they mean by composition/balance in this regard
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=745465&key=0

Soft? How?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=783618120

Backlit? This is at 5pm, sun is straight on, and I got one accepted that I shot 5 minutes later at the same location, same shot basicly
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=824115903

Blurry? The sun was straight on and LORAM looks kind of blurry, but it is a slight reflection of the sun I think, or I am not looking in the right places
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=745439&key=0

The infamous high sun, any way this could be fixed?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=304915112

Thanks in advance. The last 2 days have been almost a complete wash for me because of weather
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 01:56 AM   #2
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
For this? Yes, the composition doesn't really warrant an outstanding photo in cloudy weather. Just another wide cab and a shot on a curve. (BTW, is the tracks you are standing on active? And I hardly believe that CSX unit is a widecab )

It's REALLY tight around that lead. Especially on the top.

Quote:
Not sure what they mean by composition/balance in this regard
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=745465&key=0
I like squarish crops, but this isn't working. Especially with low, cloudy light.

Edges ARE soft. Doesn't really pop at all. Soft all around.

Quote:
Backlit? This is at 5pm, sun is straight on, and I got one accepted that I shot 5 minutes later at the same location, same shot basicly
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=824115903
The side is mostly backlit. But more importantly, why would you want to submit a shot that is basically the same? This isn't RRPA. I admit, I WAS guilty of it as a beginner, but it got boring and almost quit the hobby for it until I figured out that I need to broaden what I shoot and only submit the best.

Quote:
Blurry? The sun was straight on and LORAM looks kind of blurry, but it is a slight reflection of the sun I think, or I am not looking in the right places
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=745439&key=0
I think some sharpening could help this, but if it still looks blurry to you after you sharpen it, then forget about it. That's really how I judge blurry, if it gets hit for blurry, go back and sharpen it up some, if it still looks blurry then it's a no go. There's no real technical reasoning behind it or any "answer" as to why this works, but it works for me.

Quote:
The infamous high sun, any way this could be fixed?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=304915112
Again, the sides look backlit. It does have a high sun appearance.
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 02:30 AM   #3
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80 View Post
For this? Yes, the composition doesn't really warrant an outstanding photo in cloudy weather. Just another wide cab and a shot on a curve. (BTW, is the tracks you are standing on active? And I hardly believe that CSX unit is a widecab )
gotcha, those are active tracks but that is taken with a zoom


Quote:
It's REALLY tight around that lead. Especially on the top.
Ok, I find it hard to figure out sometimes what they mean by this because I have had things rejected for too much space at the top or bottom



Quote:
I like squarish crops, but this isn't working. Especially with low, cloudy light.
I think its a pretty nice dramatic shot. The lighting sucks, but it is a location where for the most part, the sun never shines very much. I think I can re-crop this to add more space around the top of the unit.



Quote:
Edges ARE soft. Doesn't really pop at all. Soft all around.
Soft where, I pixel peeped at 100% on the psd and the unit is in focus, outside of the focal point, its not in focus, but that happens at f/5. You cant have the whole shot in focus.



Quote:
The side is mostly backlit.
The side ok?



Quote:
I think some sharpening could help this, but if it still looks blurry to you after you sharpen it, then forget about it. That's really how I judge blurry, if it gets hit for blurry, go back and sharpen it up some, if it still looks blurry then it's a no go. There's no real technical reasoning behind it or any "answer" as to why this works, but it works for me.
I can do a little more on this one



Quote:
Again, the sides look backlit. It does have a high sun appearance.
I think this is one of those locations where the sun never shines "just right"
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 04:29 AM   #4
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,895
Default

I agree with Ben pretty much all around. The cloudy/common rejects are tough, but the rejections are dead on. They're still good shots, just not RP material. The shots with the lighting issues are all poor lighting using RP's terms. Call them back lit, side lit, unlit, poorly lit, what ever, but it's got to be especially dramatic for a shot where the side of the engine facing the camera is in even the most minute shadow to get it.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 05:49 AM   #5
cblaz
Senior Member
 
cblaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Marlboro, New Jersey
Posts: 1,007
Default

Ben pretty much nailed the reasoning for every rejection. Just wanted to add a couple points to your follow up statements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80 View Post
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=745465&key=0
I like squarish crops, but this isn't working. Especially with low, cloudy light.
Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I think its a pretty nice dramatic shot.
Why is this a dramatic shot? It's a dark, nose-on shot of an NS widecab, with a signal bridge in the background, most of it hidden by the train. Maybe if the signal bridge wasn't blocked by the train and was worked into the scene better, you'd have an argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80 View Post
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=783618120
Edges ARE soft. Doesn't really pop at all. Soft all around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
Soft where, I pixel peeped at 100% on the psd and the unit is in focus, outside of the focal point, its not in focus, but that happens at f/5. You cant have the whole shot in focus.
Maybe that's why the rule is "f/8 and be there" and much shooters don't go below f/6.3 or f/5.6.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80 View Post
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=919657402
It's REALLY tight around that lead. Especially on the top.
Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
Ok, I find it hard to figure out sometimes what they mean by this because I have had things rejected for too much space at the top or bottom
Again, this shot goes back to a point Ben made earlier about submitting a shot that is basically the same you got on:

Image © troy12n
PhotoID: 301840
Photograph © troy12n


As for the accepted shot, how the screener looked passed the poor cropping I'll never know. Add that shot 100 times, and 98 times it gets rejected for bad cropping. Leave a bit more room around the train to breathe and don't cut off the edges of the curves.

- Chris
__________________
- Christopher Blaszczyk
My shots on RP: http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=284
cblaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 06:33 AM   #6
AntD.
Senior Member
 
AntD.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 372
Default

I wonder what that Screener was smokin'? Wish I would've sent in one of my shots at that time for an automatic acception! Just KIDDING!
AntD. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 07:01 AM   #7
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,895
Default

Pet peeve time. Troy, why do you not know what the Norfolk Southern reporting marks are? I'll give you a hint. They're the capital letters of Norfolk Southern. As for the CSX reporting marks, just do a little research. The screeners should have canned all those shots because Troy was too lazy to put in the reporting marks.

__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 09:30 AM   #8
dejv
Senior Member
 
dejv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Central Europe
Posts: 160
Default

Quote:
Soft where, I pixel peeped at 100% on the psd and the unit is in focus, outside of the focal point, its not in focus, but that happens at f/5. You cant have the whole shot in focus.
If you like such shots, focus manually or use AF-lock feature to make sure that your object is in focus. When it is more than slightly out-of-focus, the photo is lost.
__________________
-- David Jaša

Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
dejv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 10:17 AM   #9
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cblaz View Post
Maybe that's why the rule is "f/8 and be there" and much shooters don't go below f/6.3 or f/5.6.
I try to shoot wide open or close to it to keep the shutter speeds up. I find at f/8 or near that, shutter speeds are slow to the point of causing motion blur, at least at ISO 100. I primarily shoot at ISO 100 for quality issues. I think I may need to re-think this. I guess the trade-off for getting some noise versus a deeper field of view and higher shutter speeds would ofset this.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 03:40 PM   #10
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,895
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I try to shoot wide open or close to it to keep the shutter speeds up. I find at f/8 or near that, shutter speeds are slow to the point of causing motion blur, at least at ISO 100.
If you're still using a Canon 40D, I don't think you should be having these issues on the type of days you're showing us that you shoot in. F8 is my home base position on the Canon 400D XTi and I rarely have this problem shooting in cloudy days such as the first two rejects. On times, I will go down to f6.3 if I absolutely must.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 07:26 PM   #11
Chase55671
RailPictures.Net Crew
 
Chase55671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nitro, WV
Posts: 2,194
Send a message via AIM to Chase55671 Send a message via MSN to Chase55671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cblaz View Post
Ben pretty much nailed the reasoning for every rejection. Just wanted to add a couple points to your follow up statements.



Why is this a dramatic shot? It's a dark, nose-on shot of an NS widecab, with a signal bridge in the background, most of it hidden by the train. Maybe if the signal bridge wasn't blocked by the train and was worked into the scene better, you'd have an argument.



Maybe that's why the rule is "f/8 and be there" and much shooters don't go below f/6.3 or f/5.6.



Again, this shot goes back to a point Ben made earlier about submitting a shot that is basically the same you got on:

Image © troy12n
PhotoID: 301840
Photograph © troy12n


As for the accepted shot, how the screener looked passed the poor cropping I'll never know. Add that shot 100 times, and 98 times it gets rejected for bad cropping. Leave a bit more room around the train to breathe and don't cut off the edges of the curves.

- Chris
Bingo. Ben did a great job of pointing out the rejection reasons in depth.

Good point Chris on the cropping. Way too tight on the left. It's rather distracting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
Pet peeve time. Troy, why do you not know what the Norfolk Southern reporting marks are? I'll give you a hint. They're the capital letters of Norfolk Southern. As for the CSX reporting marks, just do a little research. The screeners should have canned all those shots because Troy was too lazy to put in the reporting marks.

I agree, Joe. It's rather annoying, especially when trying to search for a photo of a specific locomotive roadnumber.

Chase
__________________
Chase Gunnoe
Railpictures.Net Crew
Rail-Videos.Net Crew
Click here to view my photos at Railpictures.Net
SLR Night Photography Tutorial | Railpictures.Net Beginners Guide
Chase55671 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2009, 09:08 PM   #12
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I try to shoot wide open or close to it to keep the shutter speeds up. I find at f/8 or near that, shutter speeds are slow to the point of causing motion blur, at least at ISO 100. I primarily shoot at ISO 100 for quality issues. I think I may need to re-think this. I guess the trade-off for getting some noise versus a deeper field of view and higher shutter speeds would ofset this.
I used to think the same way... ISO100 all the time. Not sure of your history, but my thinking was a direct result of shooting Kodachrome 64 slides for about 12 years. Now I've been (sorta) converted in that I'll shoot ISO200 with little worry, and if I'm really adventurous, ISO250 or even, gasp, 320! It is always a compromise between shutter speed, ISO and aperture, and in poor light, you have to give priority to shutter speed if you want to freeze the action, so you will have to sacrifice something, and so you must play with the ISO and aperture to find a happy median.

This one was taken with a Nikon D300 using a 50mm lens at ISO250, F5.6 @ 1/400, IIRC. To me, you can see the shallow DofF, but it doesn't kill the shot (BTW, it's not grainy, thats rain falling):

Image © Mike Lockwood
PhotoID: 301063
Photograph © Mike Lockwood
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here

Last edited by lock4244; 10-30-2009 at 04:09 AM.
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 01:34 AM   #13
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase55671 View Post
I agree, Joe. It's rather annoying, especially when trying to search for a photo of a specific locomotive roadnumber
I think I can handle that, I kind of always assumed that if the locomotive owned by the RR in the RR field, you didnt have to put in reporting marks, not a problem, I think you can edit those
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 03:30 AM   #14
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

What is soft about this?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=730363592

About the only thing I can think of is the number boards, but I dont think its soft, I think its more of a washed out or reflection thing

And this one, bad color, thats a new one for me
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=746090&key=0
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 03:31 AM   #15
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

I also re-did the LORAM rail grinder one too, but I guess its hopeless
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=503266703
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 04:33 AM   #16
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
What is soft about this?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=730363592

About the only thing I can think of is the number boards, but I dont think its soft, I think its more of a washed out or reflection thing

And this one, bad color, thats a new one for me
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=746090&key=0
You hit it right one with the numberboards. They do really look soft, as does the whole image. Do these look sharp to you as you are processing? I mean, if you have the slightest bit of doubt in the image sharpness as you are processing, give it some more. Not a whole lot, just a smidget.

And it's back lit, not bad color Pretty badly backlit too, to be honest.


Quote:
I also re-did the LORAM rail grinder one too, but I guess its hopeless
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=503266703
Why is it hopeless? ALl it needs is a saturation boost. That's all.


I'm not so sure about the composition in this one either. You said it yourself in it's remarks that the photo doesn't do justice, in this case, to the sparks the grinder was creating. I see a small amount of sparks, yet you built it up. This isn't a harp on you, but just a thought. Instead of a head on shot that you like to take, why not think outside the box to show just how many sparks the grinder IS creating. To me it's just a head on shot with a bunch of ties in your face.

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 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 11:23 AM.


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