Old 01-16-2011, 02:31 AM   #1
IHapsias
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rejection for Cloudy, while another is accepted.

Hello everyone, I had this shot rejected for Poor Lighting ( Cloudy ) and Underexposed.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=895442&key=0

I understand the Poor Lighting, but, yet this photo was accepted by Ben Sutton:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=351215&nseq=0

Why was his accepted and mine rejected for poor lighting? ( dis-including the underexposed. )


I find it rather unfair that one person can get a photo accepted on a cloudy day, while another person is rejected for cloudy day ( once again, dis-including the underexposed in this scenario. ). They also can't give it a similarity because the 2 shots are none alike.

Any answers to this would be greatly appreciated by the writer.

Thank you.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 02:49 AM   #2
nikos1
Senior Member
 
nikos1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,775
Default

Whoever was screening was in a really bad mood or something, 70 in the que and less than 20 get accepted? wtf. I might just chalk it up to that.
__________________


Wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=7861

More wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://nikos1.rrpicturearchives.net/

Video wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's
http://youtube.com/profile?user=nikosjk1
nikos1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 02:59 AM   #3
IHapsias
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That's very true Nikos, I did notice only 13 images were accepted. Though what is your advice to that if the screener was in a bad mood, etc. Appeal? I'm not trying to jump the gun and say to automatically appeal it because the screener might have been mad or something, but just a thought. Just playing it safe rather than sorry I suppose.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 03:24 AM   #4
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,895
Default

I think a cloudy/common shot has to be better than average to get in. Your shot isn't bad, but it doesn't yell at me to look at it either. The train is placed kinda low and too far to the left in the frame which then leaves a lot of space in the shot. This could have swayed the screener without him even being aware of it. Sometging looked a little off and he chalked it up to the weather conditions when maybe another rejection for cropping was needed too.

Ben's shot has a wide angle factor going for it. It's just a bit more appealing to look at on it's face and, well, it is exposed right.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 03:34 AM   #5
mersenne6
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 69
Default

Way back the comment was made by the site owners that, on average, they accept around 30%. I went ahead and tracked the rate for about a week - it varied and 18%, while on the low end, was within limits - the grand average that week happened to be 29
%.
mersenne6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 04:22 AM   #6
J. E. Landrum
RailPictures.Net Crew
 
J. E. Landrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Posts: 136
Default

I wish I had that sort of time. So much slide scanning to be done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mersenne6 View Post
Way back the comment was made by the site owners that, on average, they accept around 30%. I went ahead and tracked the rate for about a week - it varied and 18%, while on the low end, was within limits - the grand average that week happened to be 29
%.
J. E. Landrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 05:28 AM   #7
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 IHapsias View Post
Hello everyone, I had this shot rejected for Poor Lighting ( Cloudy ) and Underexposed.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=895442&key=0

I understand the Poor Lighting, but, yet this photo was accepted by Ben Sutton:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=351215&nseq=0

Why was his accepted and mine rejected for poor lighting? ( dis-including the underexposed. )


I find it rather unfair that one person can get a photo accepted on a cloudy day, while another person is rejected for cloudy day ( once again, dis-including the underexposed in this scenario. ). They also can't give it a similarity because the 2 shots are none alike.

Any answers to this would be greatly appreciated by the writer.

Thank you.
Your photo is dull. Nothing of interest. A very boring photo. Ben's photo is dramatic, due to the use of the wide angle lens and a more appealing composition. Your can be easily done on a sunny day. Sure, Ben's photo can be as well, but as it is, it's dramatic enough to warrant being accepted.

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 01-16-2011, 06:21 AM   #8
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

You're shot isn't bad, I would try it when its sunny though. Or at least pouring down snow.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 07:02 AM   #9
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase55671 View Post
Your photo is dull. Nothing of interest. A very boring photo. Ben's photo is dramatic, due to the use of the wide angle lens and a more appealing composition. Your can be easily done on a sunny day. Sure, Ben's photo can be as well, but as it is, it's dramatic enough to warrant being accepted.
I disagree on that completely... there is nothing dramatic about ben's shot and the fence is distracting. I would have cropped Ian's photo differently, but I think it's kind of silly to say what you said. Using a wide angle lens makes things dramatic?

Ben's photo is also showing signs of distortion, is very soft. I am guessing he used a 10-22...

Last edited by troy12n; 01-16-2011 at 07:08 AM.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 12:16 PM   #10
Darryl Rule
Senior Member
 
Darryl Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 260
Default

Ian, maybe you should way oversaturate yours and it would get on....
__________________
View my Railpictures Photos
Darryl Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 12:54 PM   #11
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

I see it as a cloudy shot thats in now "Ben's wide" not that its the same shot but give two weeks and fix its flaws first.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 01:30 PM   #12
nikos1
Senior Member
 
nikos1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,775
Default

I really dont get what makes you think Ben's is dramatic, if anything his should have been done on a sunny day, theres a huge expanse of white sky at the top of the frame, which should have been a shot killer. I think Ian shot the right way for the condition, telephoto to minimize the blagh sky.
__________________


Wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=7861

More wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://nikos1.rrpicturearchives.net/

Video wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's
http://youtube.com/profile?user=nikosjk1
nikos1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 01:39 PM   #13
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase55671 View Post
Your photo is dull. Nothing of interest. A very boring photo. Chase
Ouch! Really Chase? Have you moved to the dark side of the Forums?

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
Ben's photo is also showing signs of distortion, is very soft. I am guessing he used a 10-22... and the fence is distracting.
I have to agree with Troy here, his words were my thoughts. It's one of those photos that overall looks great but under closer inspection has a few distracting flaws.

Ian, I think the answer to your question is two fold with two answers:

First:
It IS unfair and it IS inconsistency on the part of the screeners.

While it is unlikely, and perhaps even not a good thing for 5 screeners (assuming there is a "secret screener") to be denied a certain level of discretion and flexibility, I believe it would be in the best interests of
the site to be a bit more coherent in keeping to the general rules.

The fact that some get rejections while others do not for the same circumstances can be extremely frustrating - cloudy day, same as similar, unlevel images, foreground clutter, fuzzy /distorted images, PEQ's...
These issues are somewhat easy to identify and depend less on likes and
dislikes then actual fact. So, at just what level will admin be willing to
establish the cut off point that can be adhered to by all (for the most part)?

Second:
The rejection is the result of a single screener's opinion. Maybe he's the one following the rules and the issue is Ben's photo? Or, maybe Ben's photo was in fact perceived, even with the few issues to be "dramatic" and /or different enough to break the cloudy day common power "rule".

Here is your answer - keep up the "good fight". By "fight", I do not mean in terms of maliciousness, but instead just as you are doing. If perceived faults and discrepancies are not pointed out, they can never be evaluated. If your points have merit, the forum regulars agree AND they are not too timid to admit it, such site issues have a chance of being corrected.

And of course, the simple answer is to appeal.

The question is - why should it get on? Because Ben's did or because it is in fact an appealing image worthy of breaking the cloudy day rule.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 01:51 PM   #14
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

One person's foreground distraction is another person's interesting foreground element.

I don't see the distortion, other than perspective distortion. I'm not even sure how to think about pincushion or barrel distortion in an ultra-wide shot with all diagonals. What is this distortion you are seeing? As for perspective, I happen to prefer perspective-corrected shots myself but such shots are common; I've got one myself from last fall. I don't have a problem with it here.

Ultra-wide is perceived as more dramatic, innately, I think. So Ben's shot is in some sense a common wedgie and I think in few years we will think less of it, as more ultra-wide shots are out there. But I think ultra-wide in most cases conveys some spice and that was enough here.

Ian's shot would have done much better if made brighter. If one submits a dark shot one is just giving the screener another reason to kick it out, regardless of which reason is ultimately selected.
__________________
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 01-16-2011, 02:47 PM   #15
IHapsias
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
Ouch! Really Chase? Have you moved to the dark side of the Forums?



I have to agree with Troy here, his words were my thoughts. It's one of those photos that overall looks great but under closer inspection has a few distracting flaws.

Ian, I think the answer to your question is two fold with two answers:

First:
It IS unfair and it IS inconsistency on the part of the screeners.

While it is unlikely, and perhaps even not a good thing for 5 screeners (assuming there is a "secret screener") to be denied a certain level of discretion and flexibility, I believe it would be in the best interests of
the site to be a bit more coherent in keeping to the general rules.

The fact that some get rejections while others do not for the same circumstances can be extremely frustrating - cloudy day, same as similar, unlevel images, foreground clutter, fuzzy /distorted images, PEQ's...
These issues are somewhat easy to identify and depend less on likes and
dislikes then actual fact. So, at just what level will admin be willing to
establish the cut off point that can be adhered to by all (for the most part)?

Second:
The rejection is the result of a single screener's opinion. Maybe he's the one following the rules and the issue is Ben's photo? Or, maybe Ben's photo was in fact perceived, even with the few issues to be "dramatic" and /or different enough to break the cloudy day common power "rule".

Here is your answer - keep up the "good fight". By "fight", I do not mean in terms of maliciousness, but instead just as you are doing. If perceived faults and discrepancies are not pointed out, they can never be evaluated. If your points have merit, the forum regulars agree AND they are not too timid to admit it, such site issues have a chance of being corrected.

And of course, the simple answer is to appeal.

The question is - why should it get on? Because Ben's did or because it is in fact an appealing image worthy of breaking the cloudy day rule.

/Mitch
Mitch, I appreciate the reply! I understand your points made entirely, and agree with what you say. Much appreciated.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 02:54 PM   #16
IHapsias
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Okay - as a precaution and to save screener's time, here is my re-do of it being a bit brighter. Opinions are welcome.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Ianx19.JPG (799.9 KB, 125 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 02:57 PM   #17
IHapsias
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryl Rule View Post
Ian, maybe you should way oversaturate yours and it would get on....
Ha - I just caught onto this post. Maybe, lets see if 20 saturation does the trick.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 03:09 PM   #18
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IHapsias View Post
Okay - as a precaution and to save screener's time, here is my re-do of it being a bit brighter. Opinions are welcome.
I would let that go and wait for a sunny day. There's nothing overtly special about that train, right? Just try again when the sun is shining...it'll be a much better image.
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 04:36 PM   #19
Chris Z
Senior Member
 
Chris Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Libertyville, Il
Posts: 937
Send a message via Skype™ to Chris Z
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween View Post
I would let that go and wait for a sunny day. There's nothing overtly special about that train, right? Just try again when the sun is shining...it'll be a much better image.
The problem I've had there, is with all the trees. Distracting shadows all over the place. See attached. May have better luck with an early morning, foggy, or night shot.

Chris Z
Attached Images
File Type: jpg NS 7571 copy 2.jpg (624.0 KB, 110 views)
Chris Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 07:15 PM   #20
Greg P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Baltimore MD
Posts: 1,003
Send a message via AIM to Greg P
Default

That is a tough one, I guess the difference to the screener was the wide angel lens.

Truth be told, one of the issues may be that that location is photographed sooo very much with conventional lenses.
Greg P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 07:22 PM   #21
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Z View Post
The problem I've had there, is with all the trees. Distracting shadows all over the place. See attached. May have better luck with an early morning, foggy, or night shot.

Chris Z
Good point, Chris. I'm not familiar with the location, so with that, perhaps an actively snowing shot would work better there.

FWIW, I like Ian's shot better than Ben's...but I'm a 'mash guy more than an ultra-wide guy!
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 07:50 PM   #22
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

That area is so narrow it's a tough location to shoot. East bounds in the AM are prime at the other end. Ian and I were set up for an eastbound coal drag when this came through, so we set up there for the westbound shot. Would we have wanted snow? Hell ya! But this is the best we could do. I had no say in whether mine got on or not. Lest we forget the post I made about all those rejections in a row? I may be wrong, probably am, but I'm feeling a little hostility towards this shot. Sorry boys, it's not going anywhere. And sorry for the attitude or "drama" but this kinda rubbed me the wrong way, wouldn't you feel the same if your worked was singled out?

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 08:08 PM   #23
ssw9662
Senior Member
 
ssw9662's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 839
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IHapsias View Post
Okay - as a precaution and to save screener's time, here is my re-do of it being a bit brighter. Opinions are welcome.
A little better, but you need to lose the extra sky up top. Try going for a 3x2 crop (around 1024x683) to get rid of the dead space. Or, if you have any extra space below and to the left in the uncropped shot that would be even better.
__________________
Austin
Canon EOS 7D
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon 50mm f/1.8
My Railpictures.net Photos
flickr
ssw9662 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 08:38 PM   #24
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80 View Post
I may be wrong, probably am, but I'm feeling a little hostility towards this shot. Sorry boys, it's not going anywhere. And sorry for the attitude or "drama" but this kinda rubbed me the wrong way, wouldn't you feel the same if your worked was singled out?
What hostility? And your shot was singled out by ... wait for it ... the person with whom you went to the spot! What is your point?

I don't think anyone in this thread said anything like, for example, you should pull the shot off RP. They just pointed out some issues with it. It's a nice shot.

I think RP can be a bit strict about brightness in snow shots.
__________________
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 01-16-2011, 08:45 PM   #25
crazytiger
Senior Member
 
crazytiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: NS Greenville District
Posts: 1,473
Default

I tend to agree with the screeners here. Ian's shot is a simple cloudy day shot that should be redone on a sunny day, or at least a snowy day. As for Ben's shot, I find the fence an addition, but I don't see any reason not to give it the "Reshoot in Sun" reject.
__________________
Peter Lewis | Portfolio | Profile | Flickr | Facebook

Canon EOS 40D
Canon EF 50 f/1.8 II
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM


Quote:
Originally Posted by A Friend
everytime i see non-train photos of yours i think, "so much talent. wasted on trains."
crazytiger 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 04:43 AM.


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