Old 06-15-2011, 04:57 PM   #1
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default Fwiw

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...key=1157278903

Enjoy it while it lasts!

Another short timer for your viewing pleasure!

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=941150&key=0

Last edited by oltmannd; 06-19-2011 at 01:07 PM.
oltmannd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2011, 02:31 PM   #2
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default

and another...

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...d=941799&key=0
oltmannd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2011, 02:54 PM   #3
Hatchetman
Part-Time Railfan
 
Hatchetman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,381
Default

There's a good chance you can improve those last two. Not sure if you can work miracles on a slide scan, but you can improve it.
Hatchetman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2011, 02:54 PM   #4
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

The two Conrail shots can be lightened very easily in any editing program (if you wanted to - up to you - have to admit my last rejection was "fixible" I just didn't agree so I didn't bother). I do agree with them on these two Conrail shots. They are slightly too dark (the scans - not necessarily the shots themselves). Very easy fix.

As to the roundhouse one - that is a toughy. I think you played screener roulette and lost, getting the "don't care about historical value" screener. There are other screeners (I think, don't know) who are much kinder to thirty year old images.

Do you have someplace else that you are sharing these? They are great.

Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2011, 03:40 PM   #5
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

The image quality on the caboose shot is quite poor. As it is otherwise unexceptional, I see no hope for it on RP, unless you can rescan it and get better image quality.

On the curve, looks fixable.

Roundhouse, I don't the historical value myself, lots is obscured, but I might think better of it if you can get some detail out of the shadows, and do something about the overexposed area on the pole and pilot. Especially the shadows, that will significantly add to the historical value. You may need to do multiple scans and different exposure levels and then combine them in an HDR manner.
__________________
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 06-21-2011, 05:55 PM   #6
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

While J's not wrong on the quality issue on either shot that he critiques - if one is to use recently accepted uploads of images from this timeframe as a measure, both shots are legitimate contenders.

I think the idea of multiple scans on the Portland Terminal image is a good one if you're up for the work. Might be a lot more there than the one exposure is allowing you to see (might also not be - Kodachrome wasn't very forgiving).

I think the caboose just needs some lightening. If it gets kicked for blurry or PIQ, I'd be suprirsed but it wouldn't be wrong - just unfair in light of recent acceptance examples.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2011, 06:20 PM   #7
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

I don't recall seeing any recent images that were of the quality of the caboose shot. We are, of course, free to disagree.
__________________
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 06-21-2011, 06:23 PM   #8
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

And free to be you and me.

I don't want to call shots out - but one without its border cropped comes to mind (looked like there was Vaseline on the lens).

There was a D&H shot, maybe not that recently - but recent enough, that looked like it was painted on sand.

There and an L&N shot in black and white that was grainier and softer).

I think we are disagreeing over subtelties here though. I've had some L&HR and D&H shots rejected that were better quality (blur/grain) than the caboose shot and were hit for that in the recent past - so there is a luck aspect to it.

Last edited by Freericks; 06-21-2011 at 06:26 PM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 01:57 AM   #9
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
And free to be you and me.

I don't want to call shots out - but one without its border cropped comes to mind (looked like there was Vaseline on the lens).

.
I kinda thought they were not as stringent on image quality on older shots like 30+ years old

BTW is this the shot your talking about?
Image © Jeremy Plant
PhotoID: 364205
Photograph © Jeremy Plant
sd9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 01:58 AM   #10
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sd9 View Post
BTW is this the shot your talking about?
Image © Jeremy Plant
PhotoID: 364205
Photograph © Jeremy Plant
I thought that was odd as well, that it got in with the borders...
__________________
- My photos at RailPictures.net
- My videos at Rail-Videos.net
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 02:15 AM   #11
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

yes... that was one - here are the other two - so folks don't freak... both shot by excellent photographers who have done us a real service sharing their images, but both also good demonstrations that sometimes with the older images the quality can be allowed to be be less.

Image © Donald Haskel
PhotoID: 334723
Photograph © Donald Haskel


Image © Ron Flanary
PhotoID: 335943
Photograph © Ron Flanary


Now, I'm not 1/100th the photog that Donald or Ron are - and I truly treasure their contributions - again, I point these out, because compared to the caboose shot above, (let alone the roundhouse) - I don't believe picture quality is as big an issue.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 02:27 AM   #12
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Hmm, well, the monitor at home sees the caboose shot a little better. Don't know why the quality gap between monitors is so much larger with this shot compared to others.

Attached is a rework, sharper, bring up the shadows a bit (although little point, the image as uploaded has no details in the shadows), reduce noise, get rid of dust in the sky, reduce nose a lot in the sky. Lots of things one can do with slides to make them better.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 2811b.jpg (225.5 KB, 88 views)
__________________
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 06-22-2011, 02:30 AM   #13
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Charles, I do think there is a difference on RP between mid 1960s and 1980 in terms of acceptable image quality. No way, in my experience/recollection, the Flanary shot gets on if 1980, and if a caboose in a generic setting.
__________________
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 06-22-2011, 03:04 AM   #14
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Hmm, well, the monitor at home sees the caboose shot a little better. Don't know why the quality gap between monitors is so much larger with this shot compared to others.

Attached is a rework, sharper, bring up the shadows a bit (although little point, the image as uploaded has no details in the shadows), reduce noise, get rid of dust in the sky, reduce nose a lot in the sky. Lots of things one can do with slides to make them better.
That looks good J! I think if he reworks it like you did I think it would get in
sd9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 03:07 AM   #15
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sd9 View Post
That looks good J! I think if he reworks it like you did I think it would get in
As long as he doesn't get sloppy on the dust/speck removal in the sky, as I now see I did.
__________________
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 06-22-2011, 03:22 AM   #16
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Charles, I do think there is a difference on RP between mid 1960s and 1980 in terms of acceptable image quality. No way, in my experience/recollection, the Flanary shot gets on if 1980, and if a caboose in a generic setting.
You may have a point there. I got killed on some 1975 shots with PIQ kind of rejections on shots that were more along the quality of Don Oltmand's caboose (but rare stuff, LH&R C420s, D&H RF16s).

Last edited by Freericks; 06-22-2011 at 03:26 AM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 03:34 AM   #17
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

At fear of getting yelled at (I promised twice before to never bring this up again), this shot from the early 1950s was rejected though.

http://knox.rrpicturearchives.net/sh...spx?id=1008307
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 03:35 AM   #18
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks
How dare you bring that one up once again
__________________
- My photos at RailPictures.net
- My videos at Rail-Videos.net
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 03:40 AM   #19
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

I almost said, Carl's gonna get me on this - but then thought, maybe he forgot.

Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 03:42 AM   #20
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
I almost said, Carl's gonna get me on this - but then thought, maybe he forgot.
I actually just looked at an old thread about it earlier and was bummed to find the Balboa image I linked to was no longer valid.
__________________
- My photos at RailPictures.net
- My videos at Rail-Videos.net
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 03:11 PM   #21
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

This thread inspired me to go and work on an old CR caboose shot of my own:

Image © Janusz Mrozek
PhotoID: 366690
Photograph © Janusz Mrozek


Don't know what the greenish stuff is on the side of the GP, mold? algae?
__________________
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 06-22-2011, 03:44 PM   #22
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

A lot of the late 1970s images have that greenish tinge when shot on cloudy days. Not sure if it is from some sort of degradation or was there from the get go (maybe Kodachrome over adjusted for the clouds with the green?).
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 04:48 PM   #23
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Charles, I do think there is a difference on RP between mid 1960s and 1980 in terms of acceptable image quality. No way, in my experience/recollection, the Flanary shot gets on if 1980, and if a caboose in a generic setting.
Sure. It's a technology issue. Not a railfan issue.

What happened between the 60s and the 80s was the rise of the consumer grade 35mm SLR, so there is more 80s material out there in the world to choose from than the 60s. Few railfans had cameras well suited for the job in the 60s. Built-in light meter? Nope. You used the guide that came in the film box or purchased a hand held light meter. Focus? You guessed at the distance and set it. Framing the shot? You had to hope your view finder was close. Shutter speed? You were lucky if your camera went to 1/250th. Automatic film winder? You had to turn a knob and watch for a number in a little, red window. Ever wonder why there are so many roster shots and so few line of road shots from the 50s and 60s?

What didn't change much in that period was film quality. Ektachrome X and Ektachrome 64...pretty much the same stuff....and pretty slow for railfanning, particularly if you were using a telephoto lens. The 120 and 200 speed Ektachrome helped a bit, were really quite a bit more grainy. (and, boy, does it scan lousy...)

So, what you had at the end of the day were shots with insufficient depth of field, slightly out of focus, motion blurred (camera and/or subject) or underexposed - all compromises you had to make on the fly in order to come away with anything at all, many times. While there are many more shots from the 80s out there in the world, many of them are slightly flawed one way or another. (some are A LOT flawed....) But, many of them were suitable for sharing at informal slide shows and were part of the narrative that went along with them.

I have no doubt nearly everything I scan and process couldn't be tweaked this way or that to improve it a bit. That's not what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to share interesting (to me) stuff that I have in my collection that might be of interest to others. RP is a good place to do this, but if they don't pass muster, so be it. I have others. I'll move on.

No apologies for the caboose shot. Anyone born after 1980 would only have a hazy memory of mainline cabooses. For an EL fan born before 1980, a ex-PRR Conrail caboose on the Erie mainline is likely to evoke some emotion....
oltmannd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 05:02 PM   #24
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

What about for an EL fan born before 1980 whose father worked for the PRR?

Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2011, 05:03 PM   #25
oltmannd
Senior Member
 
oltmannd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
I don't recall seeing any recent images that were of the quality of the caboose shot. We are, of course, free to disagree.
And, so there is only one other shot of Conrail N8 caboose on RP. A bad scan uploaded in 2003 that I may get around to replacing some day....
oltmannd 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 08:06 PM.


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