Old 03-10-2006, 05:44 PM   #1
David Telesha
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Just curious..

Considering the super-picky standards that send photos back for even the slightest exposer and contrast corrections or "bad motives" and "bad angles", how do shots like this get in the database?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=131695

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=136255

Last edited by David Telesha; 03-10-2006 at 05:46 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 05:56 PM   #2
ccaranna
Senior Member
 
ccaranna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 740
Default

I think those are in because of the elements involved, but I could be wrong; I've been wrong many times before.
ccaranna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 06:21 PM   #3
VirginiaSouthern
Banned
 
VirginiaSouthern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sumter, SC
Posts: 391
Send a message via AIM to VirginiaSouthern Send a message via Yahoo to VirginiaSouthern
Default

Hard to say as the screeners rarely ever seem to respond to these types of questions posted in the forums.
VirginiaSouthern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 07:16 PM   #4
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

First one: it's a good action shot. It's a unique perspective that can't be easily duplicated. The 2000+ views is a testament as well for a non-derailment, non-new paint scheme shot.

Second one: Doesn't do much for me, but the screener liked it.

BTW, I don't think pointing out one contributor's stuff in the vein of "how did this make it in" is the smartest thing you should be doing.

Maybe in future threads like this, how about the curious member post their own stuff and ask, "How did this get in?" Just something to think about...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 08:02 PM   #5
David Telesha
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
First one: it's a good action shot. It's a unique perspective that can't be easily duplicated. The 2000+ views is a testament as well for a non-derailment, non-new paint scheme shot.

Second one: Doesn't do much for me, but the screener liked it.

BTW, I don't think pointing out one contributor's stuff in the vein of "how did this make it in" is the smartest thing you should be doing.

Maybe in future threads like this, how about the curious member post their own stuff and ask, "How did this get in?" Just something to think about...
You're making it about the photog instead of the screening and the photo... Why?

First one is front coupled, shadowed, and underexposed, not to mention a UP -9 wedgie..... Perhaps you missed that.

The second doesn't scream "train"... It "could" be on anything.

The point is its confusing and inconsistant. I'm probably a little sour over past rejections I thought were nice and was proud of - then I start scratching my head when somethings get in the database.

Last edited by David Telesha; 03-10-2006 at 08:22 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 08:22 PM   #6
bnsf sammy
Senior Member
 
bnsf sammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 638
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
First one is front coupled, shadowed, and underexposed, not to mention a UP -9 wedgie..... Perhaps you missed that.
Yea but it has some pretty narley looking snow action which is why I think it got accepted. Cool shot Ray!
__________________
BNSF SAMMY
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
bnsf sammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 08:28 PM   #7
ccaranna
Senior Member
 
ccaranna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
You're making it about the photog instead of the screening and the photo... Why?
No offense, but perhaps because they're from the same photographer? It may not have been intentional, but the coincidence appears to be a bit suspicious.

Last edited by ccaranna; 03-10-2006 at 08:31 PM. Reason: wording was clunky
ccaranna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 08:39 PM   #8
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
You're making it about the photog instead of the screening and the photo... Why?
You made it about the photog when you singled out Ray Lewis' two photos, not me. And, I gave my reaction to the two photos in question. If you didn't see it, let me type it another way.

Photo 1: Yes, it's front-coupled. Yes, it's a Dash 9. But it's not a standard wedgie. It has much more to it. Search the database and try to find something similar to that shot. It's uniqueness (location, snow, action, etc.) certainly outweigh the front-coupled and Dash 9 aspect. This falls into the 'creative' or 'artistic' shot in my book. But it's a subjective call, and when it comes to be subjective, it's hard to wrap 'standards' to that type of criteria. If I was a screener, I would have accepted this shot.

Photo 2: I don't find it appealing. If I was the screener, I would have rejected it, but it's not my call. It's an 'artisitic' shot, and I would have passed, but again, being subjective, the set of eyes that looked at it liked it. Period.

Quote:
The point is its confusing and inconsistant. I'm probably a little sour over past rejections I thought were nice and was proud of - then I start scratching my head when somethings get in the database.
You're trying to apply logic to a subjective grading system and that's not going to work. As a photo submitter, your 'job' is to take the photos, process them, and submit them if you think they're RP.net-worthy. It's not your job to worry about the 'standards' or the screening process here. If they make it, fine. If not, so what? You tried; it's this site's loss. Getting worked up about rejects and then posting other people's work in the fashion that you did makes you look bad and identifies you as a whiner.

Perhaps you missed this when it was posted earlier in numerous threads:

It's not your site, it's the screeners. They can chose to accept or reject whatever they want. Period.

It's not that hard of a concept. Use the appeal function if you think you were wronged. Post the photos here so other eyes can look at them. There are other ways to handle your frustrations...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 08:44 PM   #9
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Senior Member
 
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marlboro, NJ
Posts: 1,956
Send a message via AIM to Andrew Blaszczyk (2) Send a message via Yahoo to Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
Personally, I like this photo. First, its a cool concept to shoot the pusher head on rather than "going away". Second, it shows the track in the background. And third, it shows the snow being kicked up (always cool to see).

No comment. I see your point here. This shot is why people have problems with the "bad motive" reject when their photo clearly shows something railroad related.
__________________
-Andrew Blaszczyk a.k.a. AB(2)
Proud fan of the Sabres, Islanders, Rockies, and Lions.

"My camera is an artistic medium, not a tool of terrorism."

www.ab2photography.com Coming soon!
My photos on RailPictures:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=960
Andrew Blaszczyk (2) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 08:57 PM   #10
cmherndon
Banned
 
cmherndon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lawrenceburg, KY
Posts: 883
Send a message via AIM to cmherndon Send a message via Yahoo to cmherndon
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
Considering the super-picky standards that send photos back for even the slightest exposer and contrast corrections or "bad motives" and "bad angles", how do shots like this get in the database?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=131695

David, I believe this photo has already been discussed before. You're doing nothing more than beating a dead horse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
not to mention a UP -9 wedgie..... Perhaps you missed that.
Then it should be right up your alley.
cmherndon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 10:24 PM   #11
J
Senior Member
 
J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 532
Default

Not to mention the photographer probably had to hike a considerable distance during tough winter conditions to get that shot.

We can editorialize about various photographs but most of us don't take the time and trouble to establish and maintain this type of website.


I posted the following thread awhile back after the photographs were rejected.

http://www.railpictures.net/forums/s...ead.php?t=2606

I defer to the screeners but, thinking the photographs included interesting subjects not available to the general public and that they were reasonably well composed I stuck them in the thread. Do the same the next time you're rejected.

Last edited by J; 03-10-2006 at 10:26 PM.
J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2006, 11:10 PM   #12
J. E. Landrum
RailPictures.Net Crew
 
J. E. Landrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Posts: 136
Default

I didn't screen either of them, but I'd have accepted both. They convey emotion and that counts for something.
J. E. Landrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 12:36 AM   #13
David Telesha
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Coincedental, not intentional or personal...

Anyway, I felt like venting - no offense intended. I'll take J's advice (though I've done what he suggested before)..

I don't quite get the emotion thing - almost every photo has emotion, but anyway..

Suggest this thread be locked before it gets more redundant...
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 12:41 AM   #14
raylewis
Junior Member
 
raylewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 22
Default Thoughts

Occasionally I have photos rejected. Rarely do I resubmit them, never do I cry or call someone else out on behalf of my own rejections. Dave, I appreciate your criticism, and you have the right to say what you want. That being said, the first shot, of course it was accepted because of the the scenery as well as the fact that the REAR UNIT was plowing snow. Its hardly a standard wedgie, as I was well above the rails, the amount of snow.....any indiscernible attributes would be due to the fact that I was highlighting the snow being kicked up, which required a tight zoom. Moving on to the next photo, I can only imagine that the icicles formed over the "self start" sticker was something that would catch ones eye, as it did mine. Its not something your average railfan would take the time to notice. Its just one small detail that I found that sunny winter day that accented the loco's hood. By the way, how would that not be an indication of a locomotive? Do they put these stickers on non-powered railroad equipment as well? I took a look at your pictures, and if you really wanted advice from a somewhat often published (railfan only) photographer, then I would be more than happy to.....but offline. I dont mean here on rp.net, I mean magazines, calendars, posters, books, etc. Look at the rest of my photographs, they arenít all exactly the same, some are views rarely or never seen. I try to find eye catching scenes, in many aspects of railroading, and I am more than confident with my photography skills. But the most important thing that I have learned in this hobby is this; You cant please everyone who views your images!! But not everyone can view images like mine that are their own.
Respectfully,
Ray Lewis
(Trying not to sound too cocky, more proud of my accomplishments)
raylewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 01:20 AM   #15
4kV
Senior Member
 
4kV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Homeless, alcoholic drifter with no permanent address
Posts: 653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raylewis
(Trying not to sound too cocky, more proud of my accomplishments)
As Dizzy Dean said, "It ain't bragging if you can back it up." You should be proud, as your work is admirable. It sounds like others might be venting their envious feelings.
__________________
WTFWDD

Click on n691lf.rrpicturearchives.net for a good laugh and waste of your time.
4kV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 01:25 AM   #16
David Telesha
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4kV
It sounds like others might be venting their envious feelings.
Thats uncalled for....
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 01:33 AM   #17
4kV
Senior Member
 
4kV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Homeless, alcoholic drifter with no permanent address
Posts: 653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
Thats uncalled for....
That's just the way it seems to me, and that's not necessarily referring to you. The whole practice of picking out someone else's photos on the forum to judge seems out of place, unless the photographer requests such a critique. I have never really liked that, but that's just my opinion. That, and I I've seen and heard people bashing Ray's shots, not only on forums, but in conversations with others. To me, 99% of them are great, express a vision more than the standard wedgie, and always convey a sense of awe, mostly through scenic beauty or weather extremes. People's work is bashed when it sucks. People's work is bashed when it is great. I guess the only way to not have critics is to hide under the rock of mediocrity, but who wants that?
__________________
WTFWDD

Click on n691lf.rrpicturearchives.net for a good laugh and waste of your time.
4kV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 01:41 AM   #18
David Telesha
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raylewis
Occasionally I have photos rejected. Rarely do I resubmit them, never do I cry or call someone else out on behalf of my own rejections. Dave, I appreciate your criticism, and you have the right to say what you want. That being said, the first shot, of course it was accepted because of the the scenery as well as the fact that the REAR UNIT was plowing snow. Its hardly a standard wedgie, as I was well above the rails, the amount of snow.....any indiscernible attributes would be due to the fact that I was highlighting the snow being kicked up, which required a tight zoom. Moving on to the next photo, I can only imagine that the icicles formed over the "self start" sticker was something that would catch ones eye, as it did mine. Its not something your average railfan would take the time to notice. Its just one small detail that I found that sunny winter day that accented the loco's hood. By the way, how would that not be an indication of a locomotive? Do they put these stickers on non-powered railroad equipment as well? I took a look at your pictures, and if you really wanted advice from a somewhat often published (railfan only) photographer, then I would be more than happy to.....but offline. I dont mean here on rp.net, I mean magazines, calendars, posters, books, etc. Look at the rest of my photographs, they arenít all exactly the same, some are views rarely or never seen. I try to find eye catching scenes, in many aspects of railroading, and I am more than confident with my photography skills. But the most important thing that I have learned in this hobby is this; You cant please everyone who views your images!! But not everyone can view images like mine that are their own.
Respectfully,
Ray Lewis
(Trying not to sound too cocky, more proud of my accomplishments)
You have a lot to be proud of Ray, hopefully you understood I wasn't singling out you, rather two photos that stood out to me in the database.

I too am certainly confident with my photography and hardly submit the majority of my work to RP - for exactly the reason everything is subjective.

The point I intented (unsucessfully) to make, was about screening and the standards about artistic, abstract, other than a wedgie shots...

I apologize since it seems to come across otherwise and offended. Sorry to you especially and other members too.

Last edited by David Telesha; 03-11-2006 at 01:48 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 01:50 AM   #19
4kV
Senior Member
 
4kV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Homeless, alcoholic drifter with no permanent address
Posts: 653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
Coincedental, not intentional or personal...
And, David, my apologies if I came across as singling you out, especially given the quote, which I seemed to have missed. Nice job reading the thread, Pat!

Anyway, though, the general point I am making still stands. If you do a good job, people will be envious, and some will be spiteful. I've had two people brush me off as a snobbish railroad photographer simply because I upload pics to railpictures.net, and not much of my stuff is high caliber, published stuff. Anyone who knows me knows I am far from snobbish. I guess they think this site is only for the greats, and they couldn't hack it. Who knows.
__________________
WTFWDD

Click on n691lf.rrpicturearchives.net for a good laugh and waste of your time.

Last edited by 4kV; 03-11-2006 at 01:53 AM.
4kV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2006, 07:56 PM   #20
busyEMT
Senior Member
 
busyEMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 902
Default

And speaking of calendars... Mr. Lewis has two shots in this years UP calendar. Nice work.
__________________
Aaron Florin- Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
Visit Twin Cities Railfan.com
Visit the Twin Cities Railfan forums.

Don't do anything you wouldn't want to explain to the paramedics!
busyEMT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2006, 10:13 PM   #21
ccaranna
Senior Member
 
ccaranna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Not to mention the photographer probably had to hike a considerable distance during tough winter conditions to get that shot.
I know that this thread has run its course, but I wanted to throw one last response to the above comment.

It shouldn't mean a hill of beans how far some trekked or to what lengths someone went in order to get a shot. A great shot is a great shot and a poor shot is a poor shot no matter what it takes to get it. If you stand in the rain or snow, or endure ungodly adversities, and you blow the shot- well, that's too bad! My concern with that statement (no offense to J) is that when a lousy shot is rejected, I know exactly what would occur around here; the whining wouldn't stop because the photographer would feel that the screeners didn't understand what he/she went through to get the shot. Sorry, there's no "A" for effort in photography. Either you nail it, or you don't.

Which brings to me to the opposite side of the equation. Let's say that a masterpiece of railroad photography here on rp.net was achieved with hardly any effort at all? Would that change your opinion of the image or the photographer? It shouldn't.
ccaranna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2006, 05:22 AM   #22
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Let's say that a masterpiece of railroad photography here on rp.net was achieved with hardly any effort at all?
Certainly not saying it's a masterpiece, but my most popular photo was an unexpected grab shot...the train caught me with my pants down and I got lucky...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2006, 09:00 AM   #23
Christopher Muller
Senior Member
 
Christopher Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Telesha
The point is its confusing and inconsistant. I'm probably a little sour over past rejections I thought were nice and was proud of - then I start scratching my head when somethings get in the database.
Really, the only thing that caught my attention in this whole thread has nothing to do with Ray's photos at all.

I know, and understand that photos are screened for quality purposes. What I don't understand is how sometimes photos of the same quality can vary so greatly in their acceptance. One photo could be rejected for a specific reason, and then you look at newest additions, and there are photos that are even worse than the initial photo's rejection reason, the inconsistency is a little frustrating.

One thing that remains consistent, RP.net is undoubtedly the best online source for the highest quality photos, even though similar high quality photos are not available for/by all users/contributors to see.

One last thing, if I brought every photo I thought was objectionable that was accepted to the forums, I would really piss off a lot of people, and I would expect a slue of heat from flames coming at me.

Last edited by Christopher Muller; 03-14-2006 at 09:06 AM.
Christopher Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2006, 05:03 PM   #24
hoydie17
We Own The Night...
 
hoydie17's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Centreville, VA
Posts: 799
Send a message via AIM to hoydie17 Send a message via Yahoo to hoydie17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmherndon
Then it should be right up your alley.
Maybe not Caleb, seeing as the photo in question is an AC4400CW-CTE. LOL

Just a little comic relief!


Sean
__________________
See my work on FLICKR: Night Stalker Photo Works on FLICKR

Or if you want to see my work here at RP.net? Click here.

"It's just a damn train son!"
hoydie17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2006, 03:54 AM   #25
David Telesha
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher Muller
Really, the only thing that caught my attention in this whole thread has nothing to do with Ray's photos at all.

I know, and understand that photos are screened for quality purposes. What I don't understand is how sometimes photos of the same quality can vary so greatly in their acceptance. One photo could be rejected for a specific reason, and then you look at newest additions, and there are photos that are even worse than the initial photo's rejection reason, the inconsistency is a little frustrating.

One thing that remains consistent, RP.net is undoubtedly the best online source for the highest quality photos, even though similar high quality photos are not available for/by all users/contributors to see.

One last thing, if I brought every photo I thought was objectionable that was accepted to the forums, I would really piss off a lot of people, and I would expect a slue of heat from flames coming at me.
Thanks, Chris. Glad to know you at least got what I was saying and put it in a more appropriate manner.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ccaranna
I know that this thread has run its course, but I wanted to throw one last response to the above comment.

It shouldn't mean a hill of beans how far some trekked or to what lengths someone went in order to get a shot. A great shot is a great shot and a poor shot is a poor shot no matter what it takes to get it. If you stand in the rain or snow, or endure ungodly adversities, and you blow the shot- well, that's too bad! My concern with that statement (no offense to J) is that when a lousy shot is rejected, I know exactly what would occur around here; the whining wouldn't stop because the photographer would feel that the screeners didn't understand what he/she went through to get the shot. Sorry, there's no "A" for effort in photography. Either you nail it, or you don't.

Which brings to me to the opposite side of the equation. Let's say that a masterpiece of railroad photography here on rp.net was achieved with hardly any effort at all? Would that change your opinion of the image or the photographer? It shouldn't.
I agree with that 100%.. I've been frozen, rain soaked, wind blown, stuck in mud, bruised, cut, scraped, pricked by plants with barbs, chased by loose dogs, out of breath, ready to keel over*..... And it doesn't mean anything if the picture isn't a good shot.

*=Never all on the same occasion thankfully... LOL
  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 01:05 PM.


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