Old 05-16-2011, 05:10 AM   #1
BurghMan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 130
Default Another Bootleg Photo?

I may be wrong, but I think a model RR manufactuer has taken one of my photos from the site and manipulated it for use in their advertising. The first car number is the same, the sun glints are the same, the shadows are the same. Even the tree branches in the background are the same. The angle is different but I think they did that in Photoshop. If you look at the front of the first car, you can see how it is distorted.

Being an old film guy, I still haven't devleoped an eye for the digital world so I'd welcome the expertese of everyone on here. Is this the same photo?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=291478&nseq=9

http://www.broadway-limited.com/para...whighhood.aspx

Thanks in advance!
BurghMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 05:16 AM   #2
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Exclamation I don't think so.

Look at the nasty blue flare in the advertisement photo. (I wonder why they didn't photoshop that out?)

That is not in your photo and the engines are completely different.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 05:54 AM   #3
N. Herring
Senior Member
 
N. Herring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 215
Default

It looks to me like they used the back half of the pic, but why in the world would they distort the shape of the cars? It is the same number car in both shots but their version the cars end is slanted down
__________________
Nathan Herring
Amarillo, TX, USA


Railpics
Railvids
Youtube
N. Herring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 06:56 AM   #4
NorfolkSouthernC40-8
Member
 
NorfolkSouthernC40-8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Maynard, MA
Posts: 54
Send a message via AIM to NorfolkSouthernC40-8
Default

Its certainly the same spot that you took your photo. The trees match up exactly.
__________________
MY RAILPICTURES.NET PHOTOS
YOUTUBE ACCOUNT

"Well wake her ass up, we gotta' win tomorrow!"
NorfolkSouthernC40-8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 10:28 AM   #5
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Wow, what a terrible photoshop job... yep, it's yours. Lawyer up and prepare to get paid.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 10:33 AM   #6
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Duplicate post.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 10:34 AM   #7
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

That is so weird! It looks like they took your shot all the way through the long hood and then 'shopped on a different nose and cab. The nose and cab have no glint whatsoever.

Also, the slope of the track changes pitch rather drastically between the engine and first car.

There is lot of work involved in doing all this, no, transforming the angle of view to the cars, the slant? Why would they do all this? Weird.

Any chance they went to the same spot to take a shot?

Hard to 'shop in blue flare.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 10:43 AM   #8
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

Yea thats part of your photo, But was someone shooting lower then you? at the same time?
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 11:14 AM   #9
BurghMan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
That is so weird! It looks like they took your shot all the way through the long hood and then 'shopped on a different nose and cab. The nose and cab have no glint whatsoever.

Also, the slope of the track changes pitch rather drastically between the engine and first car.

There is lot of work involved in doing all this, no, transforming the angle of view to the cars, the slant? Why would they do all this? Weird.

Any chance they went to the same spot to take a shot?

Hard to 'shop in blue flare.
I think they took my photo and used Photoshop's Camera Distoration tool to change the pitch and angle. You can see the distoration rather clearly in the front end of the first car. Then they moved the loco that I shot and substitued a photo of their model.

I don't think they reshot it. What are the chances that they shot the exact same train on a different day with the exact same shadows and glint while having the train line up exactly with the branches in the background?

As for the bizarre photoshopping, perhaps they hired the people who did that CSX calendar a few years ago????

I don't mind so much that they bastardized my photo. I'm just upset that they didn't ask for permission to use it. I've worked with several model RR manufactures in the past and I've always had positive experiences. To have someone use my work without permission in an ad is very troubling.

I appreciate everyone's input.
BurghMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 11:21 AM   #10
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

[quote=BurghMan;137541I've worked with several model RR manufactures in the past and I've always had positive experiences. To have someone use my work without permission in an ad is very troubling.

I appreciate everyone's input.[/QUOTE]

Well Is there something they make you want! ask for it!
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 12:19 PM   #11
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BurghMan View Post
I think they took my photo and used Photoshop's Camera Distoration tool to change the pitch and angle. You can see the distoration rather clearly in the front end of the first car. Then they moved the loco that I shot and substitued a photo of their model.
There's no reason to "think" they took your photo...they DID take your photo. Anyone who can't see that it's identical from the first car back needs to have their eyes checked.

Quote:
I don't think they reshot it. What are the chances that they shot the exact same train on a different day with the exact same shadows and glint while having the train line up exactly with the branches in the background?
There are no chances of that happening.

Quote:
Originally Posted by milwman View Post
Yea thats part of your photo, But was someone shooting lower then you? at the same time?
If this were shot at a different angle, nothing would line up identically above the cars as it does. This is obviously a photoshop hack job with the distortion tool.

I'm really disappointed that anyone on this forum would even think that it's not the same photo. Come on, you guys, your eyes are better than that.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 01:32 PM   #12
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

Also, the trees is the BG of both are the same. Nature is too random for a coincidence.
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 02:16 PM   #13
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
If this were shot at a different angle, nothing would line up identically above the cars as it does. This is obviously a photoshop hack job with the distortion tool.
I had played with liquefy (?) once, but never distortion. Interesting tool. I have no use for it, but interesting tool!

Quote:
I'm really disappointed that anyone on this forum would even think that it's not the same photo. Come on, you guys, your eyes are better than that.
Fair enough, although in my case I was not so much asserting it was a different shot but just speculating on all the possibilities of how it came to be. I guess the logic of "why would they do this?" allows one to consider the alternatives. Still, they merged on a new nose/cab, that is a lot of effort to make it work seamlessly. Or they did a lot of distorting, then got the glint off the cab side (why?). Or they merged on an entire engine, and then glinted just the long hood (why?). It all makes no sense!

J
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 02:51 PM   #14
Heymon
Senior Member
 
Heymon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 125
Default

I think the photoshopped attachment of the different locomotive front end was done because this is a model. They seem to be trying to show how realistic their model is by "morphing" it with a real locomotive. That's why the attempt looks rather hamfisted.

I agree that it is your photo on the back half, since there are too many coincidences for it not to be. The strange part is that they had to have added lens flare, which to most people would be undesirable. However, it may be their "out" when you come along trying to assert that they took your photo. They'll say, "Look, there's even lens flare in ours. Why would we add that?!?"
Heymon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 03:19 PM   #15
PLEzero
Senior Member
 
PLEzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh,PA
Posts: 675
Default

I'm certain that is part of your photo. The cars look the same and the trees behind them match up. You can even see the distortion on the front of the first car. Congratulations, it looks as though you've just won yourself 2 or 3 new HO scale locomotives if you so choose!
__________________
Brad Morocco
Candyland, PA
My Flickr Photos
My RP.net Photos
PLEzero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 03:23 PM   #16
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Look at the back of the locomotive. There are many differences between the two, most noticeably the radiator coverings. No doubt the cars are from your photo, and duh the numbers are the same.
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 03:47 PM   #17
mSummers
Member
 
mSummers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heymon View Post
The strange part is that they had to have added lens flare, which to most people would be undesirable. However, it may be their "out" when you come along trying to assert that they took your photo. They'll say, "Look, there's even lens flare in ours. Why would we add that?!?"
I don't think the lens flare is an "out". If you look closely at the upper headlights, you can see that they added lens flare centered on the headlights. The blue portion on the right side of the image appears to be in line with the flares at the headlight so they can't use the flare as a way to deny the use of the photograph.


You can also see the distortion applied to the original photo in the track. If you look at the merged shot where the locomotive meets the first car,the track appears to crest at that point. In the original photo, the grade is smooth.
__________________
-Michael

My RP.Net Photos

My Photo Galleries
mSummers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 04:04 PM   #18
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb No.

Those are not the same photo and I don't even think you can claim it was taken at the same spot.

The trees don't even look the same.

Additionally the add has power wires over the train and the DB shot does not.

The angles are not even the same, and the work required to change that angle in PS goes against the reason why everyone is even talking about these photos in the first place - lazy people who swipe images are not going to spend hours manipulating them in PS.

Additionally, why would anyone put that flare in the add?

Don't believe me?

Let see some of your best flares put into some photos in PS.

It ain't easy to make them look like they do when they are there naturally.

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 05-16-2011 at 04:18 PM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 04:37 PM   #19
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

This is so damn obvious, look at the high short hood and the tone/brightness of the black, then look at the long hood and how it is different. Completely different exposure and lighting.

Thats more blatant than someone who photoshopped a dash9 cab with the sun pointing in the opposite direction as the rest of the scene
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 05:01 PM   #20
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

Oh El Roco, you can sure be a twit sometimes...the trees and angle look different because it's a 5 minute photoshop stretch job. For the flare, I'd be willing to bet it's just a plug-in. The trees and bushes are in exactly the same places, if you look, and the number on the coal hopper is the same. Also, the light is EXACTLY the same - and that's something that's extremely hard to duplicate.
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 05:11 PM   #21
PLEzero
Senior Member
 
PLEzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh,PA
Posts: 675
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holloran Grade View Post
Those are not the same photo and I don't even think you can claim it was taken at the same spot.

The trees don't even look the same.

Additionally the add has power wires over the train and the DB shot does not.

The angles are not even the same, and the work required to change that angle in PS goes against the reason why everyone is even talking about these photos in the first place - lazy people who swipe images are not going to spend hours manipulating them in PS.

Additionally, why would anyone put that flare in the add?

Don't believe me?

Let see some of your best flares put into some photos in PS.

It ain't easy to make them look like they do when they are there naturally.
I can't disagree with you more. Give me a few minutes and I'll prove you wrong. Just because they took the image doesn't mean they won't spend time doing other work in Photoshop.
__________________
Brad Morocco
Candyland, PA
My Flickr Photos
My RP.net Photos
PLEzero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 05:12 PM   #22
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
This is so damn obvious, look at the high short hood and the tone/brightness of the black, then look at the long hood and how it is different. Completely different exposure and lighting.

Thats more blatant than someone who photoshopped a dash9 cab with the sun pointing in the opposite direction as the rest of the scene
I wonder who that was.... lol

But yeah its more than obvious that its been photoshopped, and a horrid job at that. I don't see how anyone could go back on a different day and shoot the exact same angle with the same lighting..
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 05:22 PM   #23
PLEzero
Senior Member
 
PLEzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh,PA
Posts: 675
Default

How can you say the trees do not look the same? They line up perfectly as shown by the red line. If you look at the rest of the trees below that line the texture also lines up perfectly.

It's pretty obvious they added the power lines in Photoshop.

Stealing the image doesn't make them lazy, it makes them cheap. It may take you hours to do that work in Photoshop but it took me less than 10.

The image is backlit, they obviously thought it looked better with the lens flare. It's pretty easy to do it in Photoshop if you know what you're doing, there is even a filter for it.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg BurghmanStolen.jpg (49.3 KB, 151 views)
File Type: jpg burghmanLensFlare.jpg (253.8 KB, 143 views)
__________________
Brad Morocco
Candyland, PA
My Flickr Photos
My RP.net Photos

Last edited by PLEzero; 05-16-2011 at 05:27 PM.
PLEzero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 05:46 PM   #24
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
Oh El Roco, you can sure be a twit sometimes...the trees and angle look different because it's a 5 minute photoshop stretch job.
Put your money where your mouth is, lets see you produce that stretch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
For the flare, I'd be willing to bet it's just a plug-in.
Really, where?

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
The trees and bushes are in exactly the same places,
Similar yes, and it could be a popular spot to take pictures from, so any yuk could grab a camera at twilight and get a shot of a coal drag from there.

What about the wires in the add?

Is that an add on too?

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
if you look, and the number on the coal hopper is the same..
Is the number a reporting mark?

If it is not, then how can you be so sure the same number is not on every one of those cars at the position?

If the number is unique to that car, how can you be so sure someone else didn't go take another photo?




Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
Also, the light is EXACTLY the same - and that's something that's extremely hard to duplicate.
Not really, the picture in the DB gives the date and all you need to do is go to that part of track at about the same time of year, or adjust the time of day and re-shoot it.

Also the orange glow is attainable by moving the saturation and color sliders around - which is easy.

I am not convinced.

Similar yes, the same - no.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PLEzero View Post
I can't disagree with you more. Give me a few minutes and I'll prove you wrong. Just because they took the image doesn't mean they won't spend time doing other work in Photoshop.
Ok, lets see it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
This is so damn obvious, look at the high short hood and the tone/brightness of the black, then look at the long hood and how it is different. Completely different exposure and lighting.
It is obviously a worked over image and that high hood was not the engine that was originally in the photo.

Look at the front truck, the wheels don't even match up with the track.

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 05-16-2011 at 06:06 PM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 06:18 PM   #25
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
This is so damn obvious, look at the high short hood and the tone/brightness of the black, then look at the long hood and how it is different. Completely different exposure and lighting.
Thats because it is a model...
The angle is different because they took a picture of their model then stretched the cars to match it...
__________________
I personally have had a problem with those trying to tell us to turn railroad photography into an "art form." It's fine for them to do so, I welcome it in fact, but what I do have a problem with is that the practitioners of the more "arty" shots, I have found, tend to look down their nose's at others who are shooting more "mundane" shots.
Railroad photography is what you make of it, but one way is not "better" than another, IMHO. Unless you have a pole right thought the nose of the engine! -SG
coborn35 is offline   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 10:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.