Old 07-03-2014, 01:47 AM   #1
Mberry
Senior Member
 
Mberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 639
Default Beating my head against a wall

I know this is beating my head against a wall, and I've said this on the forums many times in many threads, but admins, stop wasting our time (and yours too) with fixable rejections followed 10 minutes later by killer rejections (which means the same screener is undoubtedly screening both).

Rejections in this order should not happen. Chris Kilroy talked about a new screening process that would eliminate this, but that seems like a pipe dream at this point. Everyone loses with the old way, photographers waste their time and get pissed off, screeners waste their time too...... etc.

This rejection (fixable):
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...57&key=8102069

Followed by this rejection (killer):
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...76&key=4742232
Mberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 03:01 AM   #2
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,898
Default

At the risk of asking a stupid and snarky question, did you not see the shadows? Did you really need a screener to point them out to you? They were there when you took the shot, looked at it on the back of the camera, loaded it on the computer, processed it, loaded it to RP, saw the rejection, "fixed" the rejection and reuploaded.

I opened the first link and said, "Yep, distracting shadows" and I wasn't even wearing my glasses! Come on! Bitch about the screening process when it goes wrong. Not when you should have seen the rejection coming from a mile away!
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 03:07 AM   #3
Mberry
Senior Member
 
Mberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
At the risk of asking a stupid and snarky question, did you not see the shadows? Did you really need a screener to point them out to you? They were there when you took the shot, looked at it on the back of the camera, loaded it on the computer, processed it, loaded it to RP, saw the rejection, "fixed" the rejection and reuploaded.

I opened the first link and said, "Yep, distracting shadows" and I wasn't even wearing my glasses! Come on! Bitch about the screening process when it goes wrong. Not when you should have seen the rejection coming from a mile away!
Look, the point isn't about the validity of the rejection that I posted. Yes, it's a valid rejection, but I thought there was a small chance it would get on. I'm not saying the rejection is wrong. This thread is about the order of the rejections and the time wasted and how the current system needs improvement.
Mberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 03:10 AM   #4
MassArt Images
Senior Member
 
MassArt Images's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA area
Posts: 718
Default

I think you got a different screener. This probably would not happen if the same screener would be made to review your corrected image.
__________________
Carl


My RP pics are HERE

My website is HERE
MassArt Images is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 03:28 AM   #5
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

I think your thread topic should have been:

talking to the wall

Personally, I have no issue with multiple unique rejections. With dozens of images to screen, I would not advocate each image being screened to the point where all applicable rejections are noted - too much work, likely. Just fix 'em and resubmit, no biggie. However, to your point, missed by Joe - if there is an uncorrectable and obvious uncorrectable rejection, that should be noted FIRST, not last.

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 03:31 AM   #6
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Michael, why didn't you shoot the lead engine in that nice wide open space of sunshine about one loco length back? Looks like it's wide enough for two units to be fully lit.
__________________
.
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 07-03-2014, 03:38 AM   #7
Mberry
Senior Member
 
Mberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgoldman View Post
I think your thread topic should have been:

talking to the wall

Personally, I have no issue with multiple unique rejections. With dozens of images to screen, I would not advocate each image being screened to the point where all applicable rejections are noted - too much work, likely. Just fix 'em and resubmit, no biggie. However, to your point, missed by Joe - if there is an uncorrectable and obvious uncorrectable rejection, that should be noted FIRST, not last.

/Mitch
Yep, that's my point.
Mberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 03:39 AM   #8
Mberry
Senior Member
 
Mberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Michael, why didn't you shoot the lead engine in that nice wide open space of sunshine about one loco length back? Looks like it's wide enough for two units to be fully lit.
I didn't expect this train to be on this track, so I was not well positioned to shoot it.
Mberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 04:11 AM   #9
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,734
Default

Is there some great thrill when you sneak one in or something? You recognized the flaw in the shot (as it pertains to RP, not that the shot is good or bad overall) before you submitted it.

Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 05:42 AM   #10
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,221
Default

Well, there's plenty of nose light (ever so important to some people), but those shadows don't bother me. Not even a little.
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 11:11 AM   #11
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

I wouldnt beat myself over this shot.

I know your point is the (flawed) process and lack of consistency, but still
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 11:52 AM   #12
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mberry View Post
I didn't expect this train to be on this track, so I was not well positioned to shoot it.
That opening of sun is available on all the tracks. What do you mean you weren't well positioned? Is this a grab shot and you weren't able to get into position and push the shutter button until too late?

I've had those moments, thinking, "Damn, if only I had arrived 10 seconds sooner."
__________________
.
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 07-03-2014, 11:14 PM   #13
wds
Senior Member
 
wds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
Is there some great thrill when you sneak one in or something? You recognized the flaw in the shot (as it pertains to RP, not that the shot is good or bad overall) before you submitted it.

Loyd L.
Yeah, there must be!

Image © Michael Berry
PhotoID: 488009
Photograph © Michael Berry


Sorry Michael, couldn't resist!

What's with the thumbs not showing up again, starting this afternoon? Quite annoying! Maybe they're embarrassed??
__________________
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!

Last edited by wds; 07-03-2014 at 11:17 PM.
wds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2014, 11:26 PM   #14
Mberry
Senior Member
 
Mberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wds View Post
Yeah, there must be!

Image © Michael Berry
PhotoID: 488009
Photograph © Michael Berry


Sorry Michael, couldn't resist!

What's with the thumbs not showing up again, starting this afternoon? Quite annoying! Maybe they're embarrassed??
Maybe I needed that screener yesterday......

I submitted that because I couldn't get this on, even on appeal. They said it's unlevel and I'm convinced it is.

Less and less rare by Michael Berry Railfan, on Flickr
Mberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2014, 10:02 AM   #15
Mark T
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mberry View Post
Maybe I needed that screener yesterday......

I submitted that because I couldn't get this on, even on appeal. They said it's unlevel and I'm convinced it is.

Less and less rare by Michael Berry Railfan, on Flickr
Looks to me like it needs a smidge CCW rotation.
__________________
My Railpictures.net

My flickr
Mark T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2014, 06:44 PM   #16
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

Sky is a bit blown out too.
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2014, 08:19 PM   #17
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mberry View Post
Look, the point isn't about the validity of the rejection that I posted.
For some reason, this made me think of this:
http://andyradical.tumblr.com/post/3...anything-other
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 03:51 AM   #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 Joe the Photog View Post
At the risk of asking a stupid and snarky question, did you not see the shadows? Did you really need a screener to point them out to you? They were there when you took the shot, looked at it on the back of the camera, loaded it on the computer, processed it, loaded it to RP, saw the rejection, "fixed" the rejection and reuploaded.
Fellows---there is NOTHING wrong with the shadow issue. He waited to nail the front of the unit in sun, so it's a good 'un. This "distracting shadow" rule (?) is just another RP.net "thing" that has nothing to do with photography in the real world.

These are the kinds of things that drive pros (I'm not one...) nuts about RP.net. Where in God's name did this "rule" come from?? What's the next rejection reason: Photographer had a sudden attack of flatulence when shutter was triggered.

You remove the shadows and this becomes a boring-as-hell sunny day shot. As it is now, it has (in my opinion, at least) some character. Is that what we want....more sunny, boring and exceedingly average choo-choo pictures?
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 09:56 AM   #19
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
What's the next rejection reason: [i]Photographer had a sudden attack of flatulence when shutter was triggered.
Point taken, Ron, but as this thought would not have occurred to me I realize that I must make a mental note never to spend time trackside with you.
__________________
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 07-06-2014, 02:33 PM   #20
Mberry
Senior Member
 
Mberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
Fellows---there is NOTHING wrong with the shadow issue. He waited to nail the front of the unit in sun, so it's a good 'un. This "distracting shadow" rule (?) is just another RP.net "thing" that has nothing to do with photography in the real world.

These are the kinds of things that drive pros (I'm not one...) nuts about RP.net. Where in God's name did this "rule" come from?? What's the next rejection reason: Photographer had a sudden attack of flatulence when shutter was triggered.

You remove the shadows and this becomes a boring-as-hell sunny day shot. As it is now, it has (in my opinion, at least) some character. Is that what we want....more sunny, boring and exceedingly average choo-choo pictures?
If Ron Flanary says my shot has character, I might as well include the Flickr link since the rejection link will die soon!

6 engines strong! by Michael Berry Railfan, on Flickr
Mberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 05:40 PM   #21
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
This "distracting shadow" rule (?) is just another RP.net "thing" that has nothing to do with photography in the real world.
Ask any architecture or portrait photographer worth their salt about shadows cutting across on the main area of interest, and I bet you'll find none of them saying that it 'adds character'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post

You remove the shadows and this becomes a boring-as-hell sunny day shot. As it is now, it has (in my opinion, at least) some character. Is that what we want....more sunny, boring and exceedingly average choo-choo pictures?
He should have taken it out of focus. and tilted about 15 degrees. That would have boosted the character tremendously, and certainly separated it from the normal boring-as-hell sunny day shots.

Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.

My personal photography site

Last edited by bigbassloyd; 07-06-2014 at 09:03 PM.
bigbassloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 09:39 PM   #22
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
Where in God's name did this "rule" come from??
Obviously...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	moses.jpg
Views:	123
Size:	34.7 KB
ID:	8656  
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2014, 03:19 AM   #23
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
Ask any architecture or portrait photographer worth their salt about shadows cutting across on the main area of interest, and I bet you'll find none of them saying that it 'adds character'.


Loyd L.
We don't need to consult Frank Lloyd Wright on this one, Loyd....the "main area of interest" is not the side of the locomotive, it's the front, and it's lit up the best tradition of the three quarter wedge. Does the shadow add character. Hell yes!! A portrait photographer? We're not photographing faces here---it's trains, and the same rules don't always apply.

I wouldn't want you guys to always labor under the notion that RP.net's "standards" are all that and a bag of chips. They're generally good for most railroad photography, but the devil is in the details. Of course if you want to get a shot accepted here, conformity is the only answer. That's all well and good....but a rejection from RP.net (other than purely technical) shouldn't necessarily mean a shot is crap (it could be, though!). It just means they won't accept it.

It's their site, of course, and I respect their right to run it as they wish.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2014, 04:59 AM   #24
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
FWhat's the next rejection reason: Photographer had a sudden attack of flatulence when shutter was triggered.
I'd never get another picture on.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2014, 05:04 AM   #25
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
Fellows---there is NOTHING wrong with the shadow issue. He waited to nail the front of the unit in sun, so it's a good 'un. This "distracting shadow" rule (?) is just another RP.net "thing" that has nothing to do with photography in the real world.

These are the kinds of things that drive pros (I'm not one...) nuts about RP.net. Where in God's name did this "rule" come from?? What's the next rejection reason: Photographer had a sudden attack of flatulence when shutter was triggered.

You remove the shadows and this becomes a boring-as-hell sunny day shot. As it is now, it has (in my opinion, at least) some character. Is that what we want....more sunny, boring and exceedingly average choo-choo pictures?
Prior to RP, no one ever stated, "Too bad for that shadow"?

I'd rather have a boring as hell full sun shot than a boring as hell shot with a big boring shadow.
__________________
.
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 10:53 PM.


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