Old 11-24-2007, 08:34 PM   #1
Chicago Railfan
Senior Member
 
Chicago Railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chi-Town subarbs
Posts: 224
Send a message via AIM to Chicago Railfan Send a message via Yahoo to Chicago Railfan
Default More rejects, your thoughts?

This one contradicts itself. I see what the over sharpened part is, but blurry? If you can point out the blurriness, please tell me.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=450883&key=0

How is this poor image quality?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=450884&key=0
Chicago Railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2007, 10:06 PM   #2
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

1: lots of power lines with jaggies, which sometimes happens when oversharpening. Also jaggies on the sides of the passenger cars also. The nose seems a bit soft.

2: the side of the 112 looks awful. If that is what it actually looks like, you need to say so in the remarks to the screener.
__________________
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 11-24-2007, 10:54 PM   #3
Chicago Railfan
Senior Member
 
Chicago Railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chi-Town subarbs
Posts: 224
Send a message via AIM to Chicago Railfan Send a message via Yahoo to Chicago Railfan
Default

Ok, thanks JRDMC! I re-did the METRA picture and did a slight softening on the power lines and touched up the METRA cars with a little painting, and appealed with CSX picture saying that that is what the engine looks like.
Chicago Railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2007, 11:04 PM   #4
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago Railfan
Ok, thanks JRDMC! I re-did the METRA picture and did a slight softening on the power lines and touched up the METRA cars with a little painting, and appealed with CSX picture saying that that is what the engine looks like.
Painting????

What did you do?
__________________
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 11-24-2007, 11:07 PM   #5
Mustang11
Senior Member
 
Mustang11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Deep River, CT
Posts: 131
Default

For the first one, note how sharp the "Westomnt" text on the tank is compared to the "Metra". I think your focus may have been set for the tank and not the train so it may be a focus issue not a sharpening issue.

The second one looks like the saturation is a little too high. That could account for the grain on the front of the loco but I think it has a shot if you reduce it slightly.

Brian
__________________
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera" - Lewis Hine

My RailPictures.net Photos -- My fotopic.net Photos
Graphic Design & Photography portfolio site
Mustang11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2007, 11:35 PM   #6
Chicago Railfan
Senior Member
 
Chicago Railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chi-Town subarbs
Posts: 224
Send a message via AIM to Chicago Railfan Send a message via Yahoo to Chicago Railfan
Default

By painting, I used the paintbrush in PSP and did some hand coloring. That took away some of the sharpness affect.

I cleaned up the CSX and re-submitted that. i also sharpened the train, and softened the tower just a schtickle and re-submitted that too.
Chicago Railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 01:26 AM   #7
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago Railfan
By painting, I used the paintbrush in PSP and did some hand coloring. That took away some of the sharpness affect.
This sounds like it might be a form of digital manipulation which is against RP rules. Furthermore, I don't understand what you are trying to do - what are you coloring, what color was it, what color are you making it, etc. Perhaps I don't understand your jargon.
__________________
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 11-25-2007, 01:43 AM   #8
Darryl Rule
Senior Member
 
Darryl Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 260
Default

Well from the looks of the image that got accepted compared to the original rejection posted here, it looks like it was definately digitally manipulated, but it made it in. Are the rules for manipulation being loosened a bit perhaps?
Darryl Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 01:44 AM   #9
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryl Rule
Well from the looks of the image that got accepted compared to the original rejection posted here, it looks like it was definately digitally manipulated, but it made it in. Are the rules for manipulation being loosened a bit perhaps?
The screener only sees the one shot, not old and new side by side.

EDIT: just found the accepted shot. Yikes! The screeners just plain missed it, I think.
__________________
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; 11-25-2007 at 01:47 AM.
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 01:48 AM   #10
Darryl Rule
Senior Member
 
Darryl Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 260
Default

Oh I know they only see the one. I was just kidding. But I would agree that the screeners must have been napping on this one. I think the original was better than the second one if looked at side-by-side.
Darryl Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 02:01 AM   #11
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

If I were you... now that it's been accepted, I would upload the original version in replacement. It just looks digitally manipulated.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 02:01 AM   #12
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,898
Default

Just to note that being rejected for oversharpened and blurry is not contradictory. Oversharpened is normally done in post processing while being blurry is uaully done in the field. And in this case, I suppose CR kept sharpening to compensate for the shot being blurry.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 02:53 AM   #13
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Wow. So that first shot magically became a panning shot?!? Nice try, CR, but I bet the admin will be sending you an e-mail shortly.

BTW, how long before this disappears:
Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


The original, non-panning shot is attached for comparison purposes...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CR_nonfake.jpg
Views:	137
Size:	413.3 KB
ID:	2352  
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 05:06 AM   #14
Chicago Railfan
Senior Member
 
Chicago Railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chi-Town subarbs
Posts: 224
Send a message via AIM to Chicago Railfan Send a message via Yahoo to Chicago Railfan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
Wow. So that first shot magically became a panning shot?!? Nice try, CR, but I bet the admin will be sending you an e-mail shortly.

BTW, how long before this disappears:
Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


The original, non-panning shot is attached for comparison purposes...
To be honest, I did not plan for that to happen. I did some stuff, that was the final result, and I like it!
Chicago Railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 05:46 AM   #15
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago Railfan
To be honest, I did not plan for that to happen. I did some stuff, that was the final result, and I like it!
Do you understand what the phrase 'digital manipulation' means?

If I was an admin, I'd ban you from uploading.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 06:19 AM   #16
Cyclonetrain
Senior Member
 
Cyclonetrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Downers Grove, IL
Posts: 359
Send a message via AIM to Cyclonetrain Send a message via Yahoo to Cyclonetrain
Default

Yeah, I remember when that Santiago Whatever guy got caught chopping photos when he used the same sky in several shots, not only did he get banned from uploading, he also got all his shots removed, ect.
Thats a really bad chop right there, and I hope it gets removed immediately.

Last edited by Cyclonetrain; 11-25-2007 at 06:44 PM.
Cyclonetrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 02:17 PM   #17
M.L.Gabert
Senior Member
 
M.L.Gabert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: State of Confusion
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween

BTW, how long before this disappears:
Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©
Interesting, this would make a nice "HO" layout shot. All I can say that it amazes me how the screener did not catch the "completely" obvious alteration, and my shot's get rejected for a little shadow on the nose.
M.L.Gabert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 03:45 PM   #18
NicTrain35
Senior Member
 
NicTrain35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 758
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclonetrain
See the attachment for what you should of done to BS the screeners.
How about not BS them at all?
__________________
Nick Hart
Joliet, IL

My pictures at RP:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=3955
NicTrain35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 04:55 PM   #19
Darryl Rule
Senior Member
 
Darryl Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 260
Default

I agree. If you can't get a shot worthy of being accepted here, move on and try again. Especially with a shot like the one being discussed in this thread. You could go out any day on that line and re-take this exact shot, and if do it as a pan if that is what you really want to do. No need to try to alter an image as much as this to try to get it in.
Darryl Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 05:54 PM   #20
Chris Starnes
Administrator
 
Chris Starnes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 927
Default

Thanks for pointing this issue out, guys. We'll deal with the image and photographer appropriately.
__________________
Chris Starnes
Co-Editor, RailPictures.net
Chris Starnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 07:03 PM   #21
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Damn, I missed the "guilty" photo. CR, do you have it uploaded elsewhere? haha

FWIW, I like the original and don't think it's any more blurry or oversharpened than a lot of shots I see accepted daily. I may have cropped it a bit tighter, though.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:14 PM   #22
Chicago Railfan
Senior Member
 
Chicago Railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chi-Town subarbs
Posts: 224
Send a message via AIM to Chicago Railfan Send a message via Yahoo to Chicago Railfan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
Damn, I missed the "guilty" photo. CR, do you have it uploaded elsewhere? haha

FWIW, I like the original and don't think it's any more blurry or oversharpened than a lot of shots I see accepted daily. I may have cropped it a bit tighter, though.
Yea.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/sho...aspx?id=964103
Chicago Railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 08:19 PM   #23
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

That looks exactly like the reject above. Where's this photoshopped image people were commenting on above?
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 11:00 PM   #24
CNWFreak
Senior Member
 
CNWFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 98
Default

The image CR linked you to is the rejected photo. The photo that was accepted he had manipulated the backround to apear as though the shot was a panning shot.
__________________
Patrick

Railpictures.net


RR Picture Archives
CNWFreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2007, 11:08 PM   #25
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Right. I wanted to see the "fixed" one, not the rejected one that is in the first post.
JimThias 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 09:07 PM.


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