Jack Barton said:
Dave,Are you incapable of starting a post without quoting me? Opinions are like, well you know what they say, we each have one. I can’t help it that yours is bigger. Butt then again I was never in the Navy!
Jack
Butt?
Gawdalmighty, I do enjoy quoting you…
Congrats to all the winners! I think they are all good photos. I especially like the composition and scenery in the 1st Place pic.
Congrats, Bruce, and also to Kevin, and everyone else who won… it’s nice to see good work so well recognized!
Matthew (OV)
What, Dave? You’re not even going to mention the obviously unprototypic Kadee coupler on the front? You’re slipping. 
It’s so unlike you to pass up an opportunity like that.
Dave’s argument about the fence in the background of my photo is well founded. If I were to come across such a photo in a contest, I’d knock off a few points for that as well. It is, in fact, for that very reason why I didn’t expect that photo to place, despite its other strengths. I had other photos which I thought would fare better. His criticisms about the whistle and front pilot are, in my opinion, yet another attempt to get a rise out of me simply because. (A common tactic he freely admits to.) Minor issues like that have never raised a flag in any contest I’ve judged, so long as they don’t detract from the overall effect of the photograph. Almost every photograph of a model can be picked apart for this detail or the other. These are no exception.
Dave mentions “good roadbed and track appearance” of the first place winners in contrast to my image, and I have to take definite exception to that. John’s track is sitting on top of what scales out to 2’ of cast concrete. In terms of distractions from realism, that’s every bit outstanding as a fence in the background. I don’t see how one can hold that up as an example of why John’s photo deserves its place higher to any other. I’m not saying John’s photo doesn’t deserve its place, but it doesn’t do so because of the realism (or lack thereof) of the trackwork. If you’re going to criticize one photo for unprototypic elements, you cannot use similarly unprototypic elements in another photo to prop it up against the first. Consistency is key both in judging and criticism.
(Bruce’s bridge is great, though I can hear Fred choking on his holy water over the lack of proper guard rails.)
I have no complaints about the placement of any of the photos in the contest. I’ve entered and judged enough photo contests to know that everything in any such contest is purely subjective. I’m sure when Dan posts some of the Honorable Mention photos, we’ll all look at them and say “why didn’t that one place?” But if one is going to criticize a photo, then one needs to be consistent in that criticism. Double standards weaken the credibility of the critic.
Later,
K
I looked close, certainly cannot see concrete under the ties.
From the angle of the camera, if it is there it’s hidden pretty good.
Kinda like smoke outta the stack would have hidden some fencing.
I am limited on my RR in places I could take photos that MH would accept, specifically due to fences and houses in the background.
Model Railroader used to have all sorts of “how-to’s”, long before anybody ever considered a Kevin version of the Strong clan, about taking photos either for submission or just to “check” on your progress, get the film developed and printed, get a stiff drink, good lighting, kick back in your easy chair and open the envelope.
Look objectively, and you would see the pilot beam not level…the running boards not parallel to the rails…the cab sitting up on one side…the whistle leaning…
I still see photos where nobody looked.
Wheels off the track. Headlamps twisted. Smokeboxes not seated on cylinder saddles.
I recall many years ago a photo of an articulated built with Bachmann 4-6-0’s.
Siderod twisted around with one driver so far out of quarter from the rest, there was no way it could run.
Remember, I didn’t start this thread.
I was just puzzled as to the “robbed” part, so I went and looked at the pix.
Hence the commentary.
Nobody got “robbed”, from what I see.
The concrete is very visible under John’s stock cars. The mulch used as ballast is disturbing, also. There is a lack of weathering on the rolling stock, too.
Bruce’s photo is at least two stops over exposed. The lack of the walkway with guardrail and fire protection water barrels is glaring, also. There are no tie plates and only one spike holding the rail to the tie. There is evidence of light weathering on the rolling stock, however. The well maintained rolling stock is in jarring juxtaposition to the poverty stricken condition of the track.
Wayne was smart enough not to provide a photo large enough to nit pick. Still, his bridge also lacks the walkway, guard rails and fire protection barrels. His photo is over exposed, too.
Matthew’s rolling stock appears as though it just rolled out of the paint shop, faux weathering and all. The buildings appear freshly painted, as does the coal tipple. The silver painted tank (not sure of it’s use) also appears to have its rust freshly covered with paint. Matthew, did you tell them that you were coming to photograph their railroad? It looks like they got ready for you. 
I don’t think I can pick apart Kevin’s photo any more than it has been, already.
Bill has done the best job of weathering a model that I’ve ever seen. Are you sure that is not a photo of a 1:1 critter, Bill? Very impressive. Still, the verticals are not vertical. The lack of ballast and the obviously plastic ties are bothersome. The tree growing out of the cab draws attention away from the subject of the photo. The critter being smack-dab in the middle of the photo does a dis-service to the composition of the photo.
It is easy to pick apart someone else’s work. There are always things that can be improved upon. Photographs are made, not taken. Still, this sort of criticism is why we enter photo contests in the first place, to improve our craft. All of these photos are well done. Each of the photographers should be proud of their work. I learn something new whenever I look at someone else’s work. I say that all are winners.
Ah, so.
My monitor is set a tad darker than others in the house.
I was looking at sunlight areas.
Maybe if fences were in shadows, eh?
I was just puzzled about “robbed”, and like you say, they’re all whiners…er…winners, and if you don’t want comments, don’t enter contests!
Reminds me of car shows.
Steve Featherkile said:Steve, I agree with you 100%!
All of these photos are well done. Each of the photographers should be proud of their work. I learn something new whenever I look at someone else's work. I say that all are winners.
“was robbed” is a common phrase from where I grew up. It does not carry a literal definition other than meaning I have a different opinion.
I always worry when some critics ride such “high horses”. The fall is liable to really hurt when one is unseated.
Jack
I can’t believe I didn’t place…
(http://www.lscdata.com/users/cale_nelson/americanstillinbox2.jpg)
Quote:
… . . . The subject matter is completely up to the photographer so long as it depicts 1:20 modeling. Photos taken inside or outside - of single cars or entire trains - of scratch-built or mass produced models - just about anything is acceptable for entry into the contest, so long as models depicted are in 1:20 scale… . . .
I would’a thought my 4-4-0 still in the box would have been considered “just about anything”…I’d loved to have seen his face when Dan opened up that submission! cale
Cale, that has got to be the funniest thing I’ve seen in a loooong while.
Hi, all. Breaking a precedent here. Been lurking for ages, but had to say “Thank you” for your comments. The photo of my critter was never ment for a photo contest but was just a snap to document my model. My wife had already given me a ration over the composition. Back to lurking.
Bill Schoch
Needmore, PA
Hey, I saw the photo.
I LIKE that critter.
Weathering is quite nice.
Corrugated tin roof is VERY classic!
Welcome, Bill. Can you provide some more detail on your critter? (Maybe in a separate post. ) I like that rust on the exhaust.
Welcome aboard! That’s a really nifty little critter.
This was another entry, trying to show how much fun Fn3 trains can be when your 4th baby (in 5 years) arrives before you finish RCS and sound install…note cobwebs!
(http://www.lscdata.com/users/cale_nelson/cobweb.jpg)
since photo was taken, I’ve completed install and really love the way the Little Porter runs! cale
Bill Schoch said:
Hi, all. Breaking a precedent here. Been lurking for ages, but had to say "Thank you" for your comments. The photo of my critter was never ment for a photo contest but was just a snap to document my model. My wife had already given me a ration over the composition. Back to lurking.Bill Schoch
Needmore, PA
and contrary to your “representatives” we “Needmore” PA folks!
cale
Agreed, those Yorke kits sure are nice when all rustied up like that. Nice job to all.
Jack Barton said:
"was robbed" is a common phrase from where I grew up. It does not carry a literal definition other than meaning I have a different opinion.I always worry when some critics ride such “high horses”. The fall is liable to really hurt when one is unseated.
Jack
“Was Robbed” on “high horses”.
Amazing.
Must have been some neighborhood you grew up in.
Yes, critter is a Hartland Mack with parts from Thomas Yorke’s 18-ton critter conversion kit.
Bill Schoch
Needmore, PA
Curmudgeon said:Jack Barton said:
"was robbed" is a common phrase from where I grew up. It does not carry a literal definition other than meaning I have a different opinion.I always worry when some critics ride such “high horses”. The fall is liable to really hurt when one is unseated.
Jack
Gee.
Really?“Was Robbed” on “high horses”.
Amazing.Must have been some neighborhood you grew up in.
