• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Competition 342 :: Voting

342

  • 01

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • 02

    Votes: 4 13.8%
  • 03

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 04

    Votes: 5 17.2%
  • 05

    Votes: 5 17.2%
  • 06

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • 07

    Votes: 3 10.3%
  • 08

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • 09

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 10

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • 11

    Votes: 5 17.2%

  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
Lots of very similar shots this week (I've gone for 6, what a surprise). Perhaps this is simple prejudice, but does this reflect how very boring these machines looked and were?
 

Phoenix

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2008
Messages
2,019
Location
birmingham
Ive got to agree the class 50's are very standard and there isn't much room for standard shots where these machines is concerned (well with competitions anyway)
 

Demps

Member
Joined
11 May 2006
Messages
692
Location
York
personally i dont see how class 50's and their EE 16 CSVT engines are boring.
 

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
personally i dont see how class 50's and their EE 16 CSVT engines are boring.
In terms of a photographic competition the engines are quite irrelevant. IMHO, the 50s are the archetypal "box on wheels" with no attempt made at improving the appearance by styling. Compare the efforts of the Design Panel and, whatever your views on its success, the image was well designed. And then look at the effort put into the designs of the 58 and 60 - again with varying success there was a part of the design brief that said what the visual aspect of the locomotive was intended to convey. If there even was a design brief for the 50s, it must have contained the word "dull".
But, of course, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
 

Phoenix

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2008
Messages
2,019
Location
birmingham
personally i dont see how class 50's and their EE 16 CSVT engines are boring.

See as you just pointed out their engines are about the only thing thats magical about the machines I mean I love being behind one and the thrash is always quality but sadly it's hard to find a moment where they look perfect for a photo but thats just my own opinion.
 

D1001

Member
Joined
16 Apr 2009
Messages
173
Location
Frimley
... it's hard to find a moment where they look perfect for a photo ...

In pieces, perhaps!


I was brought up on 52's and when these dreaded Hoovers started to take over, we cheered any failures and wished them back up on to the LMR. Having said that, I did come to love the engine sound.
 

Daimler

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
1,197
Location
Hertfordshire
Conversely, I think they look rather stylish, with their single headlight, 'tucked-in' bodysides and ever-so-slightly raked windscreens.

For me, No. 4 wins. It might not be an appropriate stock combination, but I do love the photo.
 

Demps

Member
Joined
11 May 2006
Messages
692
Location
York
In terms of a photographic competition the engines are quite irrelevant. IMHO, the 50s are the archetypal "box on wheels" with no attempt made at improving the appearance by styling. Compare the efforts of the Design Panel and, whatever your views on its success, the image was well designed. And then look at the effort put into the designs of the 58 and 60 - again with varying success there was a part of the design brief that said what the visual aspect of the locomotive was intended to convey. If there even was a design brief for the 50s, it must have contained the word "dull".
But, of course, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

I wasnt litrally speaking when i said 'see' However i dont have clue what your talking about when you like ****crates, e.g 377's and 508's. ;)
 

Demps

Member
Joined
11 May 2006
Messages
692
Location
York
It was between 03, 04 and 05.

In the end i chose 03, what a loco! a simple composure, but technically good.

04 I wrote off as that scene i have seen over 1 million times.

I would have chosen 05, if it was a tighter crop, and used more length and a wider DOF. That had the potential with all of the cold mornin' clag.

Number 1 did it for me, just a classic photo

What a strange choice.
 

mr_moo

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2009
Messages
647
Location
Cambridgeshire
No, I agree - Number 1 got my vote too. It's a good shot of the engine. The dirt and the old livery, it just looks good. It also gives you a close lok at the weird front. The handle in the middle makes it look a bit like a face!

Yeah, I'm weird, but that's just me!
 

Jordy

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Messages
8,466
Location
WCML South
Congrats to Ferret!

thumb_50027.JPG


01 - Matt Taylor
02 - Richmond
03 - matt
04 - Ferret
05 - Stacey
06 - Phoenix
07 - madannie77
08 - curly42
09 - steve 46010
10 - D1001
11 - mumrar
 

mumrar

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2008
Messages
2,650
Location
Redditch
Goddamn you Ferret, for the second time in three weeks, by one vote. I shall seek and destroy (or just keep your boots forever more!!!)
 

Stacey

Member
Joined
8 May 2009
Messages
283
Location
Stourbridge
Well done Ferret, you sod. Beating both me and Mumrar by one vote... erm, how about you don't enter the next one!!!!!! lol ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top