Old 11-18-2010, 12:32 AM   #1
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default Anybody like this PEQ?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=877148&key=0
Tried to show the new Missabe with the old torn up mainline.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 12:36 AM   #2
stlgevo51
Senior Member
 
stlgevo51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 759
Default

I would think that you got that reject because the screeners thought that you were trespassing. Did you leave them any comment in the "comments to screeners" box explaining why you were not trespassing?

Does anyone else think that the PEQ reject should not be used to reject trespassing shots? I think that they should create a "trespassing" reject. It would make thinks much clearer.
__________________
Jake
Railpictures Shots RP stuff.
Flickr Shots All the RP stuff plus some failed experiments, wedgies, and junk.
Youtube Videos
stlgevo51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 12:42 AM   #3
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=877148&key=0
Tried to show the new Missabe with the old torn up mainline.
Might help if the mainline actually looked torn up; the gap in the rail is barely evident. So the shot looks like one where you chose to make the central point be a blank dirt/taconite space and put a train above that in the frame. The foreground is too dull and so too big.
__________________
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 11-18-2010, 01:04 AM   #4
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

I mentioned I wasnt. I see Januz, i have some other angles.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 02:04 AM   #5
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

Were you on the tracks?
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 02:06 AM   #6
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

There are no tracks there, hence the caption.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 02:09 AM   #7
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Let's put this "technical" crap aside, whether you technically were or weren't between the gauge and/or on the tracks, this shot gives the illusion you are standing between the gauge. Hence the PEQ.

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 02:10 AM   #8
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80 View Post
Let's put this "technical" crap aside, whether you technically were or weren't between the gauge and/or on the tracks, this shot gives the illusion you are standing between the gauge. Hence the PEQ.
I dunno, I think it got the PEQ because it's uninteresting foreground. It highlights some dirt. The only reason you would know it is abandoned is becuase of the description, the picture barely shows this (unconnected rail).

I dont know what it is about you people up in that part of the world that think taconite pellots are so interesting.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 02:12 AM   #9
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
There are no tracks there, hence the caption.
All right then smarty pants, were on the road bed? Were you on private property?
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 02:17 AM   #10
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
All right then smarty pants, were on the road bed? Were you on private property?
Isnt this the same guy who called me out for trespassing last week when I clearly wasnt?

How ironic...
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 02:52 AM   #11
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Not ironic, because I wasn't trespassing, and not a smarty pants, simply reading the caption and thread would have told you I wasn't, and had told the screeners that.

Troy, You have never been here, so you have never experienced a loaded taconite train.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:07 AM   #12
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Can you circle the taconite pellets along the old mainline so we know what to look for? All I see is ballast.
__________________
.
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 11-18-2010, 03:11 AM   #13
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 coborn35 View Post
Troy, You have never been here, so you have never experienced a loaded taconite train.
I have a bag full of taconite pellets in my glovebox, them trains are cool!
__________________
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 11-18-2010, 03:14 AM   #14
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Jim, you may need some new glasses!
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:19 AM   #15
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Like I said, doesn't matter if you weren't trespassing, doesn't matter if you tell us that, doesn't matter if you tell the screeners that. The image looks like you are in the gauge and they don't want that portrayed on the site.

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:25 AM   #16
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Thats not true at all Ben, come on now. If you don't like the image, thats fine, i'm big boy, I can take criticism, but don't make up lame excuses.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG

Last edited by coborn35; 11-18-2010 at 03:28 AM.
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:32 AM   #17
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

Then why do you think they gave it PEQ?
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:32 AM   #18
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Can you circle the taconite pellets along the old mainline so we know what to look for? All I see is ballast.
Jim, below the thin shadow spanning the old mainline there are two distinct zones. The top zone looks to be mostly dirt but if you look closely you will see a scattering of small round balls, about the same color as the dirt. Them are them.

In the lower zone I mostly see stones/pebbles (that is what they used for ballast back then?) but amongst the ballast, especially in the center, right down on the lower edge, smaller reddish balls can be seen. Them are them.
__________________
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 11-18-2010, 03:34 AM   #19
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

I'm not a screener, but I'm guessing, that if the issue had been the awkwardly large foreground, the rejection would have been composition/balance, or maybe bad cropping. So I suspect trespassing. Hard to PEQ a wedgie otherwise.
__________________
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 11-18-2010, 03:34 AM   #20
Soo 6060
EMD > GE
 
Soo 6060's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80 View Post
Like I said, doesn't matter if you weren't trespassing, doesn't matter if you tell us that, doesn't matter if you tell the screeners that. The image looks like you are in the gauge and they don't want that portrayed on the site.
Ben
He is saying that no matter what you tell us, it doesn't matter. Sure, you may have not been on the private right of way, but the angle the picture was shot at makes it appear as if you were. Because of this, RP does not want the shot on the database.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
but don't make up lame excuses.
Soo 6060 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:35 AM   #21
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Joe H= They must not have liked it. Simple as that. To say it was rejected because it may convey being in the gauge is a joke, there are more than plenty of those on here. Travis's BNSF shot comes to mind immediately. Not a shot at him at all, great picture, but it pretty much shoots the argument down.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:36 AM   #22
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soo 6060 View Post
He is saying that no matter what you tell us, it doesn't matter. Sure, you may have not been on the private right of way, but the angle the picture was shot at makes it appear as if you were. Because of this, RP does not want the shot on the database.
I am not stupid Daniel, I understand what he is trying to say.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:37 AM   #23
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb Ya, that is the rule we learned last week.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stlgevo51 View Post
I would think that you got that reject because the screeners thought that you were trespassing. ...[omitted]....
I think the shot is fine and if you put something in the caption that people can read that you were there by permission or something then they should let it in.

Fullerton has a track like this that tends to confuse people.

Railfan'in in Style
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:41 AM   #24
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

This is a broader view:
Attached Images
File Type: jpg eh.JPG (719.4 KB, 147 views)
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 03:41 AM   #25
Soo 6060
EMD > GE
 
Soo 6060's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
Thats not true at all Ben, come on now. If you don't like the image, thats fine, i'm big boy, I can take criticism, but don't make up lame excuses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
I am not stupid Daniel, I understand what he is trying to say.
Apparently not, but, fine. Fair enough.
Soo 6060 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 04:58 AM.


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