Old 07-12-2014, 08:54 PM   #1
wds
Senior Member
 
wds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 793
Default Cluttered and a PAQ

Yeah I know, MofW is a hard sell here at the best of times and certainly when it's foreground clutter:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...31&key=8047332

or in the middle of a dust cloud (which in itself could be considered foreground clutter):

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...33&key=7580956

Still I thought there might be a few folks who would enjoy them, had they been accepted...
__________________
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
wds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2014, 09:25 PM   #2
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

The pan shot is absolutely a winner, but the cloud of dust is, well....mostly a cloud of dust. From a one-time MofW guy, thanks for sharing (and sorry that first one didn't make the cut...because it's a good un!).
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2014, 10:00 PM   #3
wds
Senior Member
 
wds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
The pan shot is absolutely a winner, but the cloud of dust is, well....mostly a cloud of dust. From a one-time MofW guy, thanks for sharing (and sorry that first one didn't make the cut...because it's a good un!).
Thanks Ron, I have a couple more pans which might have less "clutter" but I think I'll hold off on trying them for a day or three. As for the ball of dust I was hoping for a bit of dirty drama, sort of like a ballast cleaning train going full-tilt, but I guess it fell short by a bit!

In the meantime, here's one of the pans I was considering; what do you think as far as not only obstructing objects is concerned but overall composition? Looking at it now it looks a bit tight to me...

Click image for larger version

Name:	20140712030.jpg
Views:	95
Size:	1.03 MB
ID:	8673

I do have a bit more room to play with on this one, but not much. I chose it because you can see the front plow moving ballast. Unfortunately all of the ones that have the regulator with the wings down profiling the ballast are too obstructed to see the work being done...
__________________
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
wds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 02:44 AM   #4
conrail1990
Senior Member
 
conrail1990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 203
Default

Its not as cluttered, but its also not as crisp. I would say RP would reject it just on that alone.
__________________
Evan Schilling
My Photos on RP.
My Photos for sale
conrail1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 03:36 AM   #5
wds
Senior Member
 
wds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by conrail1990 View Post
Its not as cluttered, but its also not as crisp. I would say RP would reject it just on that alone.
You're right, I can see that now. I was looking at clutter and not at sharpness. Seems I can only focus on one thing at a time in my old age. Is this one any better?

Click image for larger version

Name:	20140712019a.jpg
Views:	92
Size:	1.11 MB
ID:	8674
__________________
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
wds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 01:40 PM   #6
conrail1990
Senior Member
 
conrail1990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 203
Default

Way better. However the foreground object reject may come back on you for the front and rear of the equipment.
__________________
Evan Schilling
My Photos on RP.
My Photos for sale
conrail1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 08:00 PM   #7
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,630
Default

The rejected pan is tack sharp - the other one is first blurry and later "oversharpened".

As for each - I would side with RP on the foreground issue. I mean - it IS there and it IS RP. Next time, find a better spot or bring a ladder. Still - it's a cool shot, and very nicely captured technically.

The dust devil, lol - really? Save that one for DustDevils.net.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 09:56 PM   #8
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
As for each - I would side with RP on the foreground issue. I mean - it IS there and it IS RP. Next time, find a better spot or bring a ladder. Still - it's a cool shot, and very nicely captured technically.

/Mitch
Nope...the "foreground clutter" helps to make the shot a success. Again, that's just an RP "thing" that really doesn't cut the mustard in the real world (IMHO). Foreground clutter can be, and should be, an essential element in many shots, as it is here.

Maybe I don't understand how to take train "pitchers"...
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 10:22 PM   #9
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
Nope...the "foreground clutter" helps to make the shot a success. Again, that's just an RP "thing" that really doesn't cut the mustard in the real world (IMHO). Foreground clutter can be, and should be, an essential element in many shots, as it is here.

Maybe I don't understand how to take train "pitchers"...
So you are saying if you had a shot where the entire subject was not obscured, you'd instead go with the one in the link?

The foreground obstruction, unless it was intrinsic to the shot - like shooting through the woods, is, in my opinion, similar to having an image where part of the subject in inadvertently cut off in the frame. It's like having part of someone's body in the shot.

So - in my own opinion, I would not say it's strictly an RP thing - otherwise, I'd have pushed for this shot on RP instead of TO's or FB:

(Dang it - my original file disappeared! Fortunately, I found a low res copy I had posted on TO's and was able to retrieve it vs rescanning and a new edit with 9 years more experience).



/Mitch
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CO Bush Pan LR.jpg
Views:	637
Size:	296.4 KB
ID:	8675  
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 01:15 AM   #10
John West
Senior Curmudgeon
 
John West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mill Valley, CA
Posts: 1,074
Smile

I really like the first one. How many pix does RP have of a ballast regulator at speed? But there is too much foreground. I think the bottom part of the foreground might be cropped a bit, perhaps moving the frame up is there is room at the top.
__________________
John West
See my pix here and
here and here

Last edited by John West; 07-14-2014 at 01:18 AM.
John West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 01:45 AM   #11
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John West View Post
I really like the first one. How many pix does RP have of a ballast regulator at speed? But there is too much foreground. I think the bottom part of the foreground might be cropped a bit, perhaps moving the frame up is there is room at the top.
Maybe that's what it needs....just a crop of all that green stuff below.

Mitch--that pan shot of the 614 is a killer!

Yes, the foreground on the ballast regulator is intrinsic to the shot. We're not taking portraits or roster shots here, so your examples don't relate.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 01:57 AM   #12
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
Yes, the foreground on the ballast regulator is intrinsic to the shot. We're not taking portraits or roster shots here, so your examples don't relate.
The foreground is intrinsic, but the brush obstructions are not - I'd buy your point of view if this were instead, a "weed regulator" or brush cutter where the path is notably clear behind the blades but not ahead.

Y'know - on second view, the "clutter" is really not all that bad - it does not protrude so high as to completely block out any component of the vehicle. And the sharpness and uniqueness of the shot should sway at least one screener to let it on.

Now - my C&O #614 pan, well that's just fun, but misses the mark. Would fit best in the back of the magazine known as "The Railroad Press" featured in the "Almost" series. The last photo from that series I recall was a shot of a Reading 4-8-4 coming at the photographer with not a clue of the date taken - other then a guy in a flashy Hawaiian shirt. Who wears Hawaiian shirts when chasing steam?!? In Pennsylvania. Fortunately, he was not in his own shot.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 02:11 AM   #13
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

OK....let's recrop the ballast regulator like this (because I do agree with you on that point, Mitch...):



OK...now that's a winner, hands down. Much better crop. Foreground clutter? No....that's not a legit reason, now or then.

RP would do well to include more MofW scenes. There's nothing more essential to railroading than track. Without it, there would be no trains. Consequently, railroad photography shouldn't be so predictable with respect to subject matter. There's a lot more important things to photograph in this industry than just another dad-gum locomotive! How many railfan photographers can debate you over the innocuous details that distinguish a C40-8 from a C40-9, but can't identify a ballast regulator, tamper, liner, or tie adzer--and probably don't understand their functions?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1388.1405195929.jpg
Views:	594
Size:	330.3 KB
ID:	8676  

Last edited by Ron Flanary; 07-14-2014 at 02:14 AM.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 02:40 AM   #14
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,773
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
How many railfan photographers can debate you over the innocuous details that distinguish a C40-8 from a C40-9...
Wait, there's a difference?
__________________
.
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 07-14-2014, 03:38 AM   #15
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,539
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Wait, there's a difference?
Ron picked a bad example. The C40-9 is extremely easy to distinguish.

and I love MOW equipment. I'd submit more if the RP powers did too...

Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 03:48 AM   #16
jac_murphy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
RP would do well to include more MofW scenes. There's nothing more essential to railroading than track. Without it, there would be no trains. Consequently, railroad photography shouldn't be so predictable with respect to subject matter. There's a lot more important things to photograph in this industry than just another dad-gum locomotive! How many railfan photographers can debate you over the innocuous details that distinguish a C40-8 from a C40-9, but can't identify a ballast regulator, tamper, liner, or tie adzer--and probably don't understand their functions?
So, should I submit this?



(Keeping in mind that they accepted Casey's self-portrait from a few weeks ago...)

-Jacques
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1044983_10152272152962565_299469848_n.jpg
Views:	580
Size:	77.1 KB
ID:	8677  
jac_murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 05:14 AM   #17
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
RP would do well to include more MofW scenes. There's nothing more essential
You can say that again!



/Mitch
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	CP Gotta Go TO.jpg
Views:	604
Size:	241.7 KB
ID:	8678  
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 01:43 PM   #18
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jac_murphy View Post
So, should I submit this?



(Keeping in mind that they accepted Casey's self-portrait from a few weeks ago...)

-Jacques
Yes I would. I would crop it a little closer, but it's a cool shot.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 01:44 PM   #19
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
Ron picked a bad example. The C40-9 is extremely easy to distinguish.

Loyd L.
OK....an EMD F5A and F7A....
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 01:58 PM   #20
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

I would do something like this:

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Edit.jpg
Views:	563
Size:	242.5 KB
ID:	8679  
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 03:59 PM   #21
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,539
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
EMD F5A
You sure have a way with picking out obscure units

Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2014, 11:28 PM   #22
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
You sure have a way with picking out obscure units

Loyd L.
Ex-Clinchfield 800 (now "C&O 8016"--one of the units at the Spencer event) was built as an F5A, and later upgraded to F7 specs.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2014, 01:39 AM   #23
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,201
Default

Ron, on matters of taste we often agree, so I am surprised to find that your preferred crop is ... well, terrible! ???

Pickup truck chopped in half, part of the trough (?) cut on the left edge, the distance all gone so the life is sucked out of the location. I just don't get it.
__________________
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 07-15-2014, 01:51 AM   #24
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
You sure have a way with picking out obscure units

Loyd L.
Hey - how's this for obscure?



/Mitch
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Amtrack Plasser MG LR.jpg
Views:	545
Size:	397.8 KB
ID:	8680  
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2014, 02:29 AM   #25
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,773
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
Ron picked a bad example. The C40-9 is extremely easy to distinguish.
The only way I can tell the difference between one of those and a gevo is that a gevo has a little white dome on top of the cab. And the horn is different. Other than that, they look the same to me. But then again, if I'm not looking at a gevo, I don't know what I'm looking at.

Oh wait, did you mean a standard cab or wide cab?
__________________
.
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
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 01:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.