Old 07-22-2006, 08:07 PM   #1
Christopher Muller
Senior Member
 
Christopher Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 787
Default Old photos, lower standards?

Not pointing out any examples.

Just wondering if all photos have to meet the same criteria, or if photos that are relatively old that are being added today have lower standards? Seeing lots of stuff being added that doesn't meet the "standards".
Christopher Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2006, 08:21 PM   #2
LAHDPOP
Senior Member
 
LAHDPOP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 299
Default

I hope the standards are lower for older photos. If George Hamlin finds a photo in his archive of the Southern Crescent Limited crossing the old wooden trestle on Lake Pontchartrain in 1971, for example, it would be a waste for it to be rejected for a little backlight, or a little grain, or the trucks of those beautiful E8s in shadow. Same goes for the likes of Rob Kitchen (sp?) and others with priceless photos of long gone railroading. I sincerely hope photos like that get a little leeway from the screeners.
__________________
Bret Stringer

I didn't say it was your fault.... I said I was going to blame you.

Click Here to see my rp.net photos.

Click Here to see my "personal collection"

Last edited by LAHDPOP; 07-22-2006 at 08:43 PM.
LAHDPOP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2006, 08:49 PM   #3
Chris Starnes
Administrator
 
Chris Starnes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 927
Default

Bret is correct. Naturally we do not expect the same technical qualities out of images from decades ago as we do for images of today. Consideration is also given to the fact that lots of our old material are showing things that many of our younger viewers have never even seen run before. Basically, a slightly grainy, slightly blurry shot of a Santa Fe F-unit from many moons ago is going to stand a much greater chance of being accepted here than a standard wedge/roster shot of a common day subject under less than ideal conditions.
__________________
Chris Starnes
Co-Editor, RailPictures.net
Chris Starnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2006, 08:56 PM   #4
dsktc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 268
Default

A good photo is a good photo whether it was taken with
a DSLR in 2006 or Kodachrome in 1966.

Nevertheless, I do occasionally see scans of old slides
here that make me cringe. Historical value notwithstanding,
some of these images should have been rejected.

Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher Muller
Not pointing out any examples.

Just wondering if all photos have to meet the same criteria, or if photos that are relatively old that are being added today have lower standards? Seeing lots of stuff being added that doesn't meet the "standards".
__________________
Dave Kerr
dsktc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2006, 10:29 PM   #5
Frederick
Senior Member
 
Frederick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Hastings, Minnesota
Posts: 594
Default

Like when the scan quality is poor, and it's riddled with JPEG artifacts? That's not a fault with the photo itself, of course.
__________________
Railpics Photos

Flickr Account
Frederick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 12:18 AM   #6
CG_F45
Senior Member
 
CG_F45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 413
Default Thank you!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Starnes
Bret is correct. Naturally we do not expect the same technical qualities out of images from decades ago as we do for images of today. Consideration is also given to the fact that lots of our old material are showing things that many of our younger viewers have never even seen run before. Basically, a slightly grainy, slightly blurry shot of a Santa Fe F-unit from many moons ago is going to stand a much greater chance of being accepted here than a standard wedge/roster shot of a common day subject under less than ideal conditions.
Thank You!!!! I am very glad to hear this, and I am so glad to be a part of a site that has consideration and respect for history of such an important industry (railroading). I am glad to hear that old shots of a bygone era are appreciated and welcomed here!


So, a thanks to the admin for taking in less than perfect historical material, and a thanks to the guys like George Hamlin and Rob Kitchen (sp??) and the countless others who send in their older shots!

I love to see historical railroad photos from such a bygone era, and am glad my favorite railroad photo website (rp.net) appreciates them as well!

Man, hearing that made this sight all the better for me!

Chris..
__________________
Chris G

My photos at RailPictures.Net
CG_F45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 12:34 AM   #7
skyliner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Virginia
Posts: 125
Default Standards for older photos

Thanks for your comments, Bret and Chris (Starnes). BTW, one of my older black & whites was rejected today for being blurry--it was; just being old won't get a shot accepted. (Will have to look and see if it's the negative, or the scan.)

Ron Flanary and I have talked about how we wish that we hadn't used relatively grainy film (Tri-X) back in the 1960s, but we didn't know at the time, and changed to finer-grained film once we knew better. Cameras weren't of as good quality as today, in many cases also. "Back in the day" we got 3&1/2 by 5 inch prints made from our black & whites, and the quality (or lack of it) in the image wasn't really apparent at that size.

I know that there's lots of good older material out there, much of it better quality than my early shots; I'm looking forward to seeing more of it on the site, so that we all can enjoy!

George Hamlin
skyliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 01:43 AM   #8
TonytheTiger
Ex. Railroad Employee
 
TonytheTiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 136
Default

I appreciate the consideration my old slides have been given as well as the suggestions from the screeners as to how to improve some of my submittals.

When I first began scanning my slides, just after Christmas, I was so excited at just being able to get any kind of digital output that my eye did not pick up on the obvious defects. Now, after six months of working with my scanner and viewing the photos on this site, I know that I will have to invest in a dedicated slide scanner in the future and re-scan everything. It is very apparent and frustrating when post processing, that the slides I am scanning and submitting look a lot better projected than they do when they come from the scanner. The photos that have been rejected would probably have been accepted if I had used a better scanner (most of my rejections are “rescan at a higher resolution”). I will continue to scan and submit photos using my current scanner, but I have become more discriminating, so my production is not as prolific as it was in the spring.
__________________
Rob Kitchen
Harrisburg, PA

You know you are old when the first car you owned is now considered a "Classic".
TonytheTiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 02:41 AM   #9
skyliner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Virginia
Posts: 125
Default

Rob:
Keep 'em coming. Looking forward to your results with a slide scanner!
George Hamlin
skyliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 10:27 AM   #10
Christopher Muller
Senior Member
 
Christopher Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsktc
A good photo is a good photo whether it was taken with
a DSLR in 2006 or Kodachrome in 1966.

Nevertheless, I do occasionally see scans of old slides
here that make me cringe. Historical value notwithstanding,
some of these images should have been rejected.

Dave
Point I was trying to make.

Just asking a question, didn't mean to get everyone on the defensive. Thank you for answer admin.
Christopher Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 01:25 PM   #11
skyliner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Virginia
Posts: 125
Default Older material

Chris M: a reasonable question; no problem/offsense taken. A reasonable explanation by Chris S. Bottom line: the site is more tolerant re image quality of older material, which many people enjoy, but that doesn't guarantee that everything will "make the cut". Sounds like a good way to proceed to me!
George
skyliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2006, 07:44 PM   #12
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Naturally we do not expect the same technical qualities out of images from decades ago as we do for images of today.
So what you're saying is that if folks start putting dates from the 1960s/70s on their photos, it will increase their chances of getting in, right? Just kidding!! I enjoy the older photos mostly for the historical perspective rather than the technical qualitites of the shots themselves...
__________________
Ween 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 02:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.