Competition 241 :: Voting

[Jordy]

http://www.railforums.co.uk/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=43

Votes in by 1900 next Sunday please

Cheers

Jordy

 

[Gizmogle]

1 by a mile.

 

[me123]

^ What she said

 

[Craig]

^ What they said

 

[Aureol]

^ agreed

 

[mbonwick]

^ Same

 

[CraigS]

^ Indeed

 

[jacknottm]

^ Same

 

[Ilove165's]

^ Seconded

 

[Mintona]

^ And again

 

[37427]

^ Me too

 

[JoshW1992]

^ Yep.... what they said

 

[Proud Salopian]

Ditto!

 

[60033 'Tees Steel Express']

^ Yep deffo 1!

 

[Royston Vasey]

Not to be contrary or anything, but although 1 is well composed, nice light, pretty etc, I think 3 has more of a feeling of movement and the way the catenary frames the 325 and the track appeals more to me...!

 

[eezypeazy]

Yep, 3 got my vote, too.... for the same reasons as Royston's....

 

[curly42]

Have to go along with both Royston and eezypeazy on this,3 is most definitely a better shot.No.1 is o.k. but is over exposed.I also like number 2,well caught that man.

 

[Boxcars]

Well I liked numbers 2 and 4 the best (not because, being older, I prefer steam because I don't). I really thought number 2 was the best (to me anyway).

 

[class 313]

2

 

[Pumbaa]

3...

 

[P156KWJ]

333

 

[mumrar]

No.1 is o.k. but is over exposed.

Whilst not taking offence, the shot is certainly not over-exposed. The weather disappeared big time, and my friends around me were shooting on ISO 1600. You'd have to be VERY stupid to over expose a shot in that kind of light.

 

[curly42]

I take your point but to me that's overexposure,or too long spent in Photoshop ( or Gimp ) or whatever.No matter really,it's still an interesting shot.

 

[Darandio]

1 for me, cant be bothered to argue why

 

[william]

I think I will refrain from voting, I can't pick a favourite this week.

Regarding photo 1; What is overexposure exactly? (Forgive my ignorance of all things photographic).

 

[curly42]

Think of it as letting too much light reach the film - this will result in shadow details looking lighter than they should and will also cause detail in the highlight area to drop off and become washed out.Obviously there are varying degrees of overexposure.
In the days of film,it was difficult to rescue pictures that were very overexposed.Nowadays,with the use of Photoshop and the like,you have far more chance of getting a workable shot from an overexposure.
Obviously it's a lot more complicated than that - in fact,at art college in the late 1960s whilst doing a photography course we spent several weeks dealing with the theory of over/underexposure and just what (little) you could do about it.

 

[class 313]

Whilst not taking offence, the shot is certainly not over-exposed. The weather disappeared big time, and my friends around me were shooting on ISO 1600. You'd have to be VERY stupid to over expose a shot in that kind of light.

You're kinda saying who took the shot...

 

[devon_metro]

You're kinda saying who took the shot...

Gold star to Loader for making it even more obvious

 

[Gizmogle]

 

[Jordy]

Thanks for letting us know but I dont think it'll make much difference now, most people have voted by now.