Old 02-03-2009, 10:47 PM   #1
BNSF6048
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 86
Default How did this get through?

I don't know maybe I'm missing something but how could this make it through?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...270155&nseq=16

Wouldn't this fall under bad cropping?
BNSF6048 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2009, 10:54 PM   #2
Save The Wave
trainchaser.us
 
Save The Wave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Evansville IN
Posts: 357
Send a message via MSN to Save The Wave
Default

An "oops" by the screener perhaps?
__________________
You give me a golf cart, a 12 pack and a lake, I'll show you how to have fun all day - Comedian Greg Hahn

The good, the bad and the ugly. My railpics
Save The Wave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2009, 11:46 PM   #3
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,008
Default

Hmmm.... Here's a thought.....

When folks spot something like this, one alternative that might promote better relations with fellow photogs would be to use the site's e-mail feature to privately e-mail the shooter and gently suggest that he/she might want to reprocess and resubmit the shot. I know if I goofed, I would prefer to find out that way and have a chance to make it right on my own vs getting the shot booted.

The resubmit feature works well. It allows us to reprocess and resubmit shots that we did a while back when our skills weren't so good. When you resubmit a shot, it is rescreened simply to make sure that it is the same picture. If it is, it will replace the file in the data base. No shots are booted as a result of a resubmit.

As long as the loco's nose was not cut off with the frame, the photographer should be able to fix it. Otherwise, it looks like a decent picture.
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Lots of Steam Railroad stuff there from all over the US.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2009, 11:57 PM   #4
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

It's a meet shot and often it is acceptable to cut off power as the point is the meet. In this case Tim might have cropped out more of the SOO unit as it looks "cut off" in this edit, but the screener passed it likely on the grounds of it being a meet.
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 12:00 AM   #5
Christopher Muller
Senior Member
 
Christopher Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 787
Default

I personally see nothing wrong with the shot.
Christopher Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 01:11 AM   #6
Chris Kilroy
Administrator
 
Chris Kilroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 918
Send a message via ICQ to Chris Kilroy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher Muller
I personally see nothing wrong with the shot.
Me neither.
__________________
Chris Kilroy
Editor, RailPictures.Net
- View My Photos at RailPictures.Net!
- View My Photos at JetPhotos.Net!
Chris Kilroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 01:42 AM   #7
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 Chris Kilroy
Me neither.
Not to get a me too going, but its fine to cut off going away power in my book if it puts the coming too you train to far away for the shot to work.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 01:57 AM   #8
John Fladung
JohnFladung.net
 
John Fladung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 785
Default

Something wrong? Why because it's not the average wedgie?
John Fladung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 02:59 AM   #9
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kilroy
Me neither.
I'm not a fan. My eye goes to the near cab and gets distracted by the cut-off nose. It looks odd. If the focal point of the shot is the meet then the left edge should carry less attention, at least in my book, and odd is attention-grabbing.
__________________
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 02-04-2009, 03:01 AM   #10
AuTiger19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fladung
Something wrong? Why because it's not the average wedgie?

Isn't it a wedgie though?
AuTiger19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 03:19 AM   #11
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuTiger19
Isn't it a wedgie though?
Ummmmm... no, a wedgie generally only features one train... not to say there's anything wrong with that...

Image © Jeremiah Rindahl
PhotoID: 270172
Photograph © Jeremiah Rindahl




~Carl Becker
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 03:20 AM   #12
ccaranna
Senior Member
 
ccaranna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I'm not a fan. My eye goes to the near cab and gets distracted by the cut-off nose. It looks odd. If the focal point of the shot is the meet then the left edge should carry less attention, at least in my book, and odd is attention-grabbing.
I'm with J on this one. The first thing I notice is the chopped nose on the left. In the meantime I have to search around trying to find the center of focus in the picture. I would prefer to see the entire engine and have the shot cropped into the next car or engine that isn't pictured.

This one doesn't work for me. Sorry
ccaranna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 03:29 AM   #13
Chris Kilroy
Administrator
 
Chris Kilroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 918
Send a message via ICQ to Chris Kilroy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccaranna
This one doesn't work for me. Sorry
So it doesn't fit your personal preference. Do you think it should have been rejected?
__________________
Chris Kilroy
Editor, RailPictures.Net
- View My Photos at RailPictures.Net!
- View My Photos at JetPhotos.Net!
Chris Kilroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 03:33 AM   #14
ccaranna
Senior Member
 
ccaranna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kilroy
So it doesn't fit your personal preference. Do you think it should have been rejected?
If I was a screener, yes. But that really is moot, I'm not a screener. Just sharing an opinion like others here.
ccaranna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 03:36 AM   #15
Chris Kilroy
Administrator
 
Chris Kilroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 918
Send a message via ICQ to Chris Kilroy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccaranna
If I was a screener, yes. But that really is moot, I'm not a screener. Just sharing an opinion like others here.
I was just asking if you thought the perceived flaw was justification enough to reject the image as a whole. Personally, I would have cropped the image a bit more on the left to show only the SOO part forward of the long hood of the second image, but again, that's personal preference, and I didn't feel that the slightly awkward cropping was enough of a reasont to reject an otherwise very nice photo.
__________________
Chris Kilroy
Editor, RailPictures.Net
- View My Photos at RailPictures.Net!
- View My Photos at JetPhotos.Net!
Chris Kilroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 03:40 AM   #16
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kilroy
So it doesn't fit your personal preference. Do you think it should have been rejected?
Fair question, not asked directly of me but Chuck and I are at the same place. I actually popped the shot into software and looked for an alternative crop that would work better for me. I can't tell what is coupled to the near engine, if anything, but my first inclination would be to go a bit wider and have a foot or two of the first freight car if there is one. But I got distracted and didn't finish messing with it.

I think I would have rejected with bad cropping. The photog could offer a different cropping, or they could appeal and offer a solid reason why this cropping is acceptable, and I (well, someone else would do the appeal) could consider that. I would want to see what else the photog would offer up before committing to an acceptance.

If it had to be a pure yea or nay on this one, I would do nay, but then I would nay a lot of shots on this site, including in retrospect some of my own! Also, the shot isn't that interesting in other respects to overcome what I see as a flaw. My sense of the site is that the site would (and did, of course) say yea.
__________________
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 02-04-2009, 03:45 AM   #17
ccaranna
Senior Member
 
ccaranna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kilroy
I was just asking if you thought the perceived flaw was justification enough to reject the image as a whole. Personally, I would have cropped the image a bit more on the left to show only the SOO part forward of the long hood of the second image, but again, that's personal preference, and I didn't feel that the slightly awkward cropping was enough of a reasont to reject an otherwise very nice photo.
Screening, accepting, and rejecting aside, in retrospect I should have said that I wouldn't have approached the composition in the same manner as the photographer. The 'meet' is a little too far away for me. Again, this is just my preference, and only that.
ccaranna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 04:06 AM   #18
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

Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


^^^NOT A FAN^^^

__________________
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 02-04-2009, 04:11 AM   #19
F40PH271
Senior Member
 
F40PH271's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevenmwelch
Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


^^^NOT A FAN^^^

I'm glad someone said it, Steven.

As for the original photo in question, I'd say the cropping is a bit off, but good enough and better than your standard 34 wedge.
F40PH271 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 04:14 AM   #20
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

Well I don't really think the shot in question should have been rejected, but imo it falls into the roster shot category; since he had the SOO SD60 as the lead engine. and the nose is cut off.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 08:10 AM   #21
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

I'm not a fan of the cropping, either. I think at least half of the trailing loco should have been cropped out. The way it is now, it just feels awkward that close to the nose. I think something like this would have worked better:

Image © Jim Thias
PhotoID: 225224
Photograph © Jim Thias
__________________
.
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 02-04-2009, 11:46 AM   #22
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 JimThias
I'm not a fan of the cropping, either. I think at least half of the trailing loco should have been cropped out. The way it is now, it just feels awkward that close to the nose.
I think so to but its his shot and its in the DB.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 02:00 PM   #23
MDH
Senior Member
 
MDH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
I'm not a fan of the cropping, either. I think at least half of the trailing loco should have been cropped out. The way it is now, it just feels awkward that close to the nose. I think something like this would have worked better:

Image © Jim Thias
PhotoID: 225224
Photograph © Jim Thias
I like JT's shot above and to show the other way you could go here's one where I included most of the first car (since it really ID's the train also to knowledgeable observers as being the UP-CSX perishables train):

Image © Michael Harding
PhotoID: 252623
Photograph © Michael Harding


I agree with the others that the crop on the nose looks a little awkward, although otherwise it's a nice shot.

My 2 cents...
MDH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 02:30 PM   #24
MichaelJ
The Photo Journalist
 
MichaelJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 630
Default

I do not think I have seen many Australian 'meet shots' accepted. They are normally rejected for going away.

I agree with most people that more of the nose should have been cut off so that your eye is drawn to the railway logo. The current crop makes me think that a person was annoyed the missed that shot and then submitted it.
__________________
My portfolio at RailPictures.Net!
My portfolio at Flickr!

The views expressed in this reply are personal and do not represent the views or policy of my employer.
MichaelJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2009, 03:28 PM   #25
WKUrailfan
Senior Member
 
WKUrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
I'm not a fan of the cropping, either. I think at least half of the trailing loco should have been cropped out. The way it is now, it just feels awkward that close to the nose. I think something like this would have worked better:

Image © Jim Thias
PhotoID: 225224
Photograph © Jim Thias
I agree. Its shot much too wide for a "meet" shot.
WKUrailfan 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 08:37 PM.


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