Old 12-07-2008, 12:12 AM   #126
M.L.Gabert
Senior Member
 
M.L.Gabert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: State of Confusion
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
You're right I do not, but if you want your photography to qualify as railroad photography you must follow the guidelines of railroad photography.

I needed a good laugh today. I wonder what Link (RIP), Steinheimer, Benson, would think of that. hmmm
M.L.Gabert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 02:46 AM   #127
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Craft
Don't you know? Mike B. is RP.NET's very own Al Haig. "I'M IN CHARGE!!!11!!"

It must be a terrible fate to be so superior to everyone, yet we 'idots' can't see it, and inferior photos keep slipping past the screeners while his get rejected. If only we'd accept Mike's overlordship, I'm sure the world would be a better place.
Get your head out of your ass, I never claimed to be superior to anyone nor did I call anyone an idiot (I did say someone was ACTING like one though).

When have I ever claimed or even complained that my photos are getting rejected? I did start a rejection thread early last year because it was a bogus rejection reason and a screener agreed with me. I'm not saying I never get photos rejected because I do, rarely, but if you think that is the reason for my mentality you couldn't be more wrong. If I'm upset about the screening, it's because they aren't strict enough.

The world would be a better place if everyone followed the 'rules' that I have for myself, but then I wouldn't have anything to complain about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinderpath
News-flash: Photography, regardless of subject matter, be it trains down to porn, is both a form of documentation...
It's not documentation if it doesn't portray an accurate image. Well, I shouldn't say that because I guess you could classify doctored photos as inaccurate documentation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M.L.Gabert
I needed a good laugh today. I wonder what Link (RIP), Steinheimer, Benson, would think of that. hmmm
It's people who have been the icons of railroad photography that have put forth these 'rules' that railfans have followed until lately. Even one of my favorite photographers who will remain nameless has succumbed to some breaking some of these rules. Digital photography is a wonderful thing and I've wanted to clone out a telephone wire (for example) several times but haven't because it just seems wrong and misleading to the viewer. If I saw a great shot and wanted to replicate it but when I arrived I discovered a wire running through it (for example), I would be very upset.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 03:33 AM   #128
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
I think you're more interested in shots being eye catching rather than being an accurate representation of the scene. That kind of mentality is not what railroad photography is about.
Lord, I hate when one guy somewhere makes a declaration as to what an entire genre of (in this case -- railroad photography) is all about. Kinda like when a movie critic, who probably wishes he coiuld direct movies, but can't, tells me why the latest Oliver Stone (random name of director) movie sucks.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 03:36 AM   #129
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
.....but if you want your photography to qualify as railroad photography you must follow the guidelines of railroad photography.
Did I miss that memo? Damn it. Forget to check e-mail one day and I didn't get the guidelines of railroad photography?




Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 03:39 AM   #130
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccaranna
What we all need to do is place Mike B. on "Ignore" status, but it's just too tempting to read his posts for their entertainment value. It's kind of like having an obsession with train wrecks. You just *have* to see the carnage to believe it.
I tried that one time and it doesn't really work. You'll see blank posts with some comment that "Mike B. is on your ignore list." or some such. And then some fool like me will quote Mike and you'll see his drivel anyway.




Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 03:42 AM   #131
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

May I humbly suggest the following "rule" for railroad photography as the single rule that we should all agree on (and why shouldn't I try to make the rules - other people seem to do it! ) :

Railroad photographs are photographs of railroad equipment or infrastructure.

A drastic suggestion, I know! Especially since the rule doesn't say anything about documentation, or art, or anything else like that . . .

Jon
__________________
"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." - Mark Twain

Click here to see my photos on RP.net!

Do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, click here. Don't even think about it. I'm warning you!
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 04:01 AM   #132
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,887
Default

OK, Jon. But, ahem.... what about people in railroad photos?




Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2008, 04:12 AM   #133
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

If their clothes have a railroad logo on them, we can call the clothing railroad equipment . . . how's that? Besides, I never said there couldn't be anything else in the picture . . .

Jon
__________________
"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." - Mark Twain

Click here to see my photos on RP.net!

Do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, click here. Don't even think about it. I'm warning you!
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 02:33 AM   #134
Cinderpath
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ferndale, MI (Detroit area)
Posts: 98
Default

Coming full circle to the to point of this thread- I really like this night shot:

Image © Michael Summers
PhotoID: 262667
Photograph © Michael Summers


I feel it has a simple elegance to it, more important the lighting is natural, and most importantly, it looks like a night shot. The natural shadows add a lot of depth to the photo, that flash often kills. Who cares if the engine is not totally lit: that is what daylight photos are for. I also like the fact that the loco is further back, and does not dominate the scene leaving room for the rest of the depot, platforms, etc. Night is about shadows and mystery; this photo has it. Obviously this is a matter of taste.
Cinderpath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 02:37 AM   #135
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

It is a nice shot, but it has the same issues that the photo that started this thread does. The processing that's been done makes it look like a print for a Christmas card rather than a photograph. That's not to say that I don't like it as artwork . . .

Jon
__________________
"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." - Mark Twain

Click here to see my photos on RP.net!

Do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, click here. Don't even think about it. I'm warning you!
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 02:44 AM   #136
Cinderpath
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ferndale, MI (Detroit area)
Posts: 98
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnohallman
It is a nice shot, but it has the same issues that the photo that started this thread does. The processing that's been done makes it look like a print for a Christmas card rather than a photograph. That's not to say that I don't like it as artwork . . .

Jon
How? Could you please explain, as I personally don't think it does. (seriously). While does not appear super sharp (I am not sure if the photographer used a tripod or not, this could also be a result of how it was post-processed), that is not the most important thing. It is still a very natural looking, night scene. If you or I went there (I have), it looks very much like that.
Cinderpath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 02:50 AM   #137
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

The WMSR shot looks noisy to me and he took it at only ISO 200. The camera he used is the Nikon D700, almost looks like P&S quality.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 02:55 AM   #138
Cinderpath
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ferndale, MI (Detroit area)
Posts: 98
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter S
The WMSR shot looks noisy to me and he took it at only ISO 200. The camera he used is the Nikon D700, almost looks like P&S quality.
-It does, but overlooking that (think scene, mood), it looks more "Night time" than a lot of flash shots, again because of natural lighting, shadows, etc. I'm not concerned in this discussion about technical aspects, I am interested in composition and lighting.
Cinderpath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 03:08 AM   #139
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Ohh no, its a awesome shot! Really stands out in the thumb also. I am just wondering why it looks noisey, as the D700 shouldnt provide noisey images at ISO 200 lol
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 03:17 AM   #140
jnohallman
Senior Member
 
jnohallman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,527
Default

I have been to Cumberland. I'm not saying the photo doesn't show the scene accurately. The thing that strikes me is that almost everything in the photo looks flat, both in terms of the quality of the color, and also dimensionally. For some reason, it doesn't have the feel of depth that I would expect from a picture, and I think that's what makes it feel like a Christmas card print to me. Some of it, I think, is the quality of the reflected light. All the glint has been taken out of it (except for the reflection on the tender). Again, I think it's a very attractive image - it just doesn't feel like a photo.

Jon
__________________
"Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." - Mark Twain

Click here to see my photos on RP.net!

Do not, under any circumstances whatsoever, click here. Don't even think about it. I'm warning you!
jnohallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 03:19 AM   #141
Cinderpath
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ferndale, MI (Detroit area)
Posts: 98
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter S
Ohh no, its a awesome shot! Really stands out in the thumb also. I am just wondering why it looks noisey, as the D700 shouldnt provide noisey images at ISO 200 lol
-A possibility, and I am guessing here, as I don't the circumstances, so my comments are pure speculation, is that is was under exposed, and might have been hand held. If it was under-exposed, and levels were increased to brighten the image, this can introduce noise. And yes a D700 is a great camera in terms of noise, and works fine up to iso 3200, especially when down-sampled.
Cinderpath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 03:49 AM   #142
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Looks to me like one of those shots where too much noise reduction was used and lots of things lose detail or go smooth. And yet at the same time one can see the patterns in the brick platform.

It's a beauty, but I'm surprised RP did not reject it as overly processed. Glad they took it.
__________________
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 12-08-2008, 08:13 PM   #143
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

I was looking over some of Garys first uploaded night shots to RP and found this one. The comments are quite funny. One guy thought it was shot on a model railroad.

Image © Gary Knapp
PhotoID: 114177
Photograph © Gary Knapp
Walter S 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 03:41 PM.


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