Trackside with Erik and Mike, Vol. 39: September 26, 2005

[Anonymous]

I voted for #2 due in part that to me this picture screams OLD.. and the date on the bridge pier shows that.. the veining of the stone... the rusty bridge girders.. all of it combine to make an extremely pleasing shot. I also like the idea you two are using this week. A non-traditional approach to railfanning. I know what I am about to say is anathema to many here, but when I am out trackside, I watch for unusual grafitti instead of just consists (although I shoot those also). as much as it IS damage/defacement of private property it IS a part of Railroadiana...

[Anonymous]

Wow, "B" is winning. I voted for B. 1902, wow.

[FrankStratton]

"B" B-Cause it is geriatric. Always respect your elders.
My apologies to Barstow, Illinois who is old too.
[:D]

[stmtrolleyguy]

My vote went to B. I think both photos are interesting, looking at a railroad with a different perspective. However, I think B is a much better shot.

The placement of the abutment in the photo is right in the middle of the depth of field, with a clear foreground and background, emphasized by the point on the crumbling ston support. The texture of cracks and mortar adds lots visual interest to the image. In some sense, you almost wonder if the subject is the brige or the rock; the only human/railroad aspect is the lone date (1902) and the rusty iron.

There are a few things I like about photo A. It takes skill to make an interesting photo of a piece of rail. I like how one rail is right up front, and the other is cut of in the photo right down the middle of the shiny and worn portion of the rail head. The little bit of gray/whie in the reflection from the sun picks up the color and ties that part of the photo (predominantly brown tones from the rail/ties) in with the ballast up front.

[88gta350]

I think B was the much more interesting shot. All shots were great and I'd like to see more votes like this in the future.

[fish1467]

I thought B was a more interesting photograph. I also like the blind voting. It helps to focus on the photo instead of the person who took the photo.

[Anonymous]

I loved 'em both--proof that wonderful RR pix don't have to show any rolling stock at all! [8D]

[Anonymous]

"Devil is in the details", I have enjoyed the artistic aspect of photography and architecture for years.Photo B is one that I would like to have blown up and hanging on the wall over my desk to look at and wonder about the elements that went into the construction of the rail road and the events that lead to its condition in the photo. It captures the imagination more than the rail in photo A
Will

[Anonymous]

You know, that when the Human natrue see's the age of a subject,it
immeditatly strikes an intrest in us. Such as Exibit "B". To know that it is 103 years old really sets our mind off to wandering what has passed over that Abutment in its life time, Not to mention what had caused the large chip in
its corner.
Great subjet this week. Thanks for sharing with us your finds.
By the way I voted for "B" [swg]

[Anonymous]

I like exhibit B because it is old and has more personality. Exhibit A was good too, but I liked exhibit B just a little bit better.

[gannbb1]

B because I can understand the message in the inscription. Nice change of pace.
was getting very tired of loco shots.

[Anonymous]

"A" is nothing more than an illustration of no particular artistic or compositional value. "B" has a slightly more interesting viewpoint.

[fuzzybroken]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mandelswamp

I reached the same conclusions as many of the others, namely that both pictures are interesting and well shot but that Exhibit B was just a tad bit more appealing so that it gartnered my vote. The historical impact of the date on the bridge pier stone and the cracks and chips just draws the viewer in to study it further. This was a most unusual and quite enjoyable Trackside event!

[#ditto]

[RailRon]

Basically I like both pics. Along the right of way there are lots of details to see besides locomotives and trains.
I have a similar photo like A blown up on my wall - but with a little difference: There is a small, bright green plant peeking up through the ballast, giving just a bit of color contrast. And IMO that is absent here - almost everything is in the same shade of rusty red.
Although pic B doesn't show a real color contrast either, the color nuances between all the reds, oranges and browns are much richer. The dusting of rust over the surface just screams 'railroad'. (Wish I could get that effect on my model RR bridges!) And the white veins of concrete 'milk' oozing out of the cracks somehow are accenting the grime of age on that bridge pier. And yes, the pic tells a story: What on earth has happened on that bridge, knocking away such a chunk of concrete?
For me, pic B is a true little piece of art. Thank you, Eric or Mike, for sharing!

Ron

PS: Blind voting now and then is a good idea. Keep such votes coming!

[Anonymous]

Very nice pics and I agree, railroads are not just about trains, lets see more old structures and line side relics which lets face it retian an element of history on the railroad while trians get modernised
Overall B wins it for me. The colour and composition are supreb and the date / grain in the rock alongside the rusted metal just tells a great story.
Brilliantly observed and worthy of any gallery or exibition