Old 01-27-2014, 02:34 AM   #26
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
And it also doesn't take long to find some really horrible garbage that was produced from the 50s to the 70s.
But at the same time there was some VERY, VERY good stuff made too. You cant say that now. The best stuff now is no better than the garbage like Leif Garrett or Bobby Sherman in the 70's. Garbage.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 03:11 AM   #27
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
There is no doubt that this current generation's music is the worst shit ever. Very little made since year 2000 has any musical merit. Music today just sucks ass. I can look back from the late 90's all the way back to the 30's and find good music, so I am not one of those "my generation's music is the best" people. Probably the 70's and 80's music was most eclectic, diverse. There were stupid genre's in there (IMHO) like disco, new wave. But even inside of those genre's there was some musical talent.
Now this is ignorance. Yeah most main stream stuff does suck but look just a little deeper and there's an abundance of great stuff.
__________________
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 01-27-2014, 04:40 AM   #28
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holloran Grade View Post
Not directed at you - "(and I thought I made that clear)"




You did.
.....I didn't read it as closely as I should have. It was indeed clear---but it takes me a lot of time to read, since I move my lips...
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 04:46 AM   #29
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
Now this is ignorance. Yeah most main stream stuff does suck but look just a little deeper and there's an abundance of great stuff.
Well...let's not call it ignorance. I think most of us would agree the main stream stuff is pretty abysmal, but yes---in any given time, there's always good music being made somewhere, even now. I think we could all agree the intellectual depth of much of the public is rather shallow these days, so in general, their taste runs to some misguided attempts at creative music. We'll just leave it there---particularly since we started talking about old cameras and old guys who took pictures, and not whether those two guys dressed as robots on the Grammys this evening will be relevant 50 years from now, like the Beatles. I'll go out on a limb and say probably not...
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 10:15 AM   #30
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
Now this is ignorance. Yeah most main stream stuff does suck but look just a little deeper and there's an abundance of great stuff.
Do tell...
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 12:17 PM   #31
Wizzo
Senior Member
 
Wizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSX1702 View Post
Okay, I have to give my opinion on the music thing. Today's music does suck. And I am a youngster compared to most of you. Then again, I was raised on bluegrass and never quit listening to it. Lol.
Every generation chooses their music to basically p**s their parents off. The difference is that we now look back at the music of the 50s, 60s, 70s and (almost), the 80s and 90s and see it had musical merit that has stood the test of time. Will the music of the last 10-20 years be looked back on with the reverence now reserved for The Stones, Led Zeppelin, Creedence Clearwater Revival, The Who, David Bowie etc etc.......I don't think so
__________________
STEVE

Press here to see my pics on railpictures.net

More pics here D1059 on Flickr
Wizzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:03 PM   #32
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Somewhere out there in the great big interwebs is a forum with a thread titled "The Realities of Old School Transportation."

Within that thread contains a debate about how great it was when you had to use a horse and buggy to get around. And then one day, that newfangled thing called the "automobile" came along and changed everything in the transportation world (hell, it even helped to kill the passenger train!).


And Ron, music isn't any worse or better today than it was when you were growing up. It's just more accessible, meaning it's much easier to be exposed to the crap (which generally appeals to the LCD of society). There is complex, beautiful music out there if you take the time to look for it. And it also doesn't take long to find some really horrible garbage that was produced from the 50s to the 70s.
And your point is _______ (?) I don't think I implied the old camera and film stuff was better. It wasn't. It was crap compared to today's technology. There was simply a premise that if you had to go back to that stuff (and you had never had to deal with it, because you're too young), it might give you a greater appreciation for the difficulties back then.

And sorry, Jim...but a heavy percentage of music today is garbage. I'm a musician---and I know a few things about the structure of the stuff.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:15 PM   #33
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

To get back to the focus () of the thread--I scanned a couple of shots taken in August 1963 with the plastic Kodak Brownie in the image that started all this. Considering the primitive nature of the camera, the shots aren't all that bad:





Of course I would love to be able to shoot these subjects with my Nikon D600--but such is not possible.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 02:29 AM   #34
Flowing
Senior Member
 
Flowing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 190
Default

As a member of the 'younger' crowd (in my late 20's), one thing I feel rather alone about among my peers is the fact that I try to shoot the picture right the first time, in camera. My philosophy is, in my spare time, I'd rather be out shooting photos than sitting at a computer trying to make them look right. As a result I only have a cheap (read: free) basic photo editing program, and don't shoot RAW or the like. I take test exposures out 'in the field' because there's no excuse for blowing an exposure with a digital camera unless the light changes faster than you can react. I also prefer to shoot with fixed lens for their wide aperture, generally superior sharpness, and light weight - and any one focal length is always more versatile than I'd have thought. I shoot in manual exposure mode and I pretty much keep my ISO locked at 200 because it just works for most daytime lighting. And I do all this by choice because I feel like it gives me greater control of my photos, without having to sit at a computer tinkering with them. I took the time to learn the camera and to make it do what I want it to do, and the resulting knowledge has been perhaps the most rewarding part of railroad photography for me, and made me appreciate what it took to obtain great photos before technology did most of the work for us.
Flowing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 03:20 AM   #35
WMHeilman
Senior Member
 
WMHeilman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Napoleon, OH
Posts: 486
Default

Ron is one of the guys I've looked up to in this hobby for a long time. Guys like Mel Patrick (my rail photography idol), Tom and Mike Danneman, Don Faris, and others have all influenced me heavily. I'd like to think that I'm one of the "kids" who has an eye for this stuff. Lots of us do, some of us don't, and that's just how it is. There will always be those people who pull up to random grade crossings and shoot the same shots over and over because they don't care, and that's fine for them.

The challenge of getting the shot is something I've loved since I got "serious" about this stuff. Trial and error. Success and failure. You learn every step of the way, and I hope I never stop learning.
WMHeilman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 03:44 AM   #36
Chris Z
Senior Member
 
Chris Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Libertyville, Il
Posts: 937
Send a message via Skype™ to Chris Z
Default

One of my earliest shots. I had just gotten out of the Marine Corpse and my railfan buddy and I decided to go out west and shoot some pictures.

This was shot somewhere west of North Platte, Nebraska. It reminds me of friendlier times when people were more trusting. I remember going into yard offices and being offered a cup of coffee and given the line up of trains. Stories were shared and we always left with a smile. I guess film cameras and friendlier times is a culture long gone.

I can't explain why, except that maybe the surveillance cameras have taken over, everyone's being watched and are afraid to get in some kind of trouble.



Chris z
Chris Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 12:56 PM   #37
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
And your point is _______ (?) I don't think I implied the old camera and film stuff was better. It wasn't. It was crap compared to today's technology. There was simply a premise that if you had to go back to that stuff (and you had never had to deal with it, because you're too young), it might give you a greater appreciation for the difficulties back then.

Exactly my point. People have it easy today with technology, whether it's a camera, automobile, microwave oven, cell phone, etc.


Quote:
And sorry, Jim...but a heavy percentage of music today is garbage. I'm a musician---and I know a few things about the structure of the stuff.
It seems a heavy percentage of it is because it's more accessible. More people in the world + more wannabe musicians + easy accessibility = perception of more garbage. It doesn't mean that quality music doesn't still exist. You and others who think that just aren't looking in the right places for it. Again, there was plenty of absolute garbage that was produced in the 50s-70s. It was just less obvious because there were fewer musicians and less accessibility in the world of music.

And today, with a gazillion more genres of music, there are hidden gems everywhere.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 03:01 PM   #38
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowing View Post
As a member of the 'younger' crowd (in my late 20's), one thing I feel rather alone about among my peers is the fact that I try to shoot the picture right the first time, in camera. My philosophy is, in my spare time, I'd rather be out shooting photos than sitting at a computer trying to make them look right. As a result I only have a cheap (read: free) basic photo editing program, and don't shoot RAW or the like. I take test exposures out 'in the field' because there's no excuse for blowing an exposure with a digital camera unless the light changes faster than you can react. I also prefer to shoot with fixed lens for their wide aperture, generally superior sharpness, and light weight - and any one focal length is always more versatile than I'd have thought. I shoot in manual exposure mode and I pretty much keep my ISO locked at 200 because it just works for most daytime lighting. And I do all this by choice because I feel like it gives me greater control of my photos, without having to sit at a computer tinkering with them. I took the time to learn the camera and to make it do what I want it to do, and the resulting knowledge has been perhaps the most rewarding part of railroad photography for me, and made me appreciate what it took to obtain great photos before technology did most of the work for us.
That makes perfect sense to me. Keep at it!
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 03:04 PM   #39
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WMHeilman View Post
Ron is one of the guys I've looked up to in this hobby for a long time. Guys like Mel Patrick (my rail photography idol), Tom and Mike Danneman, Don Faris, and others have all influenced me heavily. I'd like to think that I'm one of the "kids" who has an eye for this stuff. Lots of us do, some of us don't, and that's just how it is.
Ah yes....great point! It matters much, much less about the equipment or the technology, but the "eye" for knowing lighting and composition. That's been the same for all these years.

If anything, digital allows us to be more freely creative. Some 50 years ago (in my case), there were just too many things I couldn't do with the camera and film, because it was beyond my expertise, and/or beyond the capability of the equipment. I think we all wish we could go back and shoot things in our past with our current digital camera.

Wonder how it will be another 50 years from now? I would wager we'll look like cave men (and women) to future generations.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 03:06 PM   #40
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Z View Post
One of my earliest shots. I had just gotten out of the Marine Corpse and my railfan buddy and I decided to go out west and shoot some pictures.

This was shot somewhere west of North Platte, Nebraska...



Chris z
Wow, Chris...that's quite a shot! I piloted one of these things for Southern Railway in 1970--for about a year.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 03:10 PM   #41
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post

It seems a heavy percentage of it is because it's more accessible. More people in the world + more wannabe musicians + easy accessibility = perception of more garbage. It doesn't mean that quality music doesn't still exist. You and others who think that just aren't looking in the right places for it. Again, there was plenty of absolute garbage that was produced in the 50s-70s. It was just less obvious because there were fewer musicians and less accessibility in the world of music.

And today, with a gazillion more genres of music, there are hidden gems everywhere.
...Oh, I agree with you. I think it's the main stream music that's so lame today. I download all kinds of great stuff---recorded recently---so I know quality music is being played and recorded every day.

And yes...your point about garbage in the '50s to '70s is right on target. We all could list some exceedingly lame music from our younger days. But again, it was main stream, top 40 stuff where you usually found it.

"...See the tree how big it's grown, but friend it hasn't been too long..." GAG!
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 11:35 PM   #42
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
"...See the tree how big it's grown, but friend it hasn't been too long..." GAG!
Hey, I like that song!

By the way, could you imagine this song being released today?



(for the record, I love that song)
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 12:05 AM   #43
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

^ The bee gees get a bad rap, they have lots of quality stuff. Most people know them just for disco, their loss.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 12:38 AM   #44
Mark Rosnick
Senior Member
 
Mark Rosnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Shiremanstown, PA
Posts: 200
Default

Troy how would you like to be a fan of Rush since the mid 70s when the 'critics' said their music was crap...I was thrilled when they got into the Rock and Roll HOF last year, but you're 100% correct about the Bee Gees...they did have some good music that wasn't disco.
Mark Rosnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 01:21 AM   #45
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rosnick View Post
Troy how would you like to be a fan of Rush since the mid 70s when the 'critics' said their music was crap...I was thrilled when they got into the Rock and Roll HOF last year, but you're 100% correct about the Bee Gees...they did have some good music that wasn't disco.
"critics" are often idiots

Peter O'Toole, Cary Grant and Richard Burton, Stanley Kubrick, Alfred Hitchcock never won an academy award. Martin Scorsese didnt win one until very recently

Rush probably didnt get as much recognition because they are dirty Canadiens. I am a big fan of their stuff, especially Signals and Grace under pressure.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 01:57 AM   #46
MagnumForce
Senior Member
 
MagnumForce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 602
Default

Geddy Lee's voice makes me want to kick puppies
__________________
-Brent Kneebush
Defiance, Ohio
MagnumForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 03:30 AM   #47
CSX1702
Senior Member
 
CSX1702's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,268
Default

My thing Ron, is that I already respect/ appreciate how much harder photography was back then so I feel I shouldn't have to stop taking pictures the new fashioned way.
__________________
Derek

Flickr

Out Of Place Album
CSX1702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 03:35 AM   #48
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSX1702 View Post
My thing Ron, is that I already respect/ appreciate how much harder photography was back then ..........
An example of the same twisted logic -

I don't need to have a tooth drilled or pulled without anesthetic to appreciate that in the old days, such a procedure was as painful as fu_k.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 03:39 AM   #49
CSX1702
Senior Member
 
CSX1702's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holloran Grade View Post
An example of the same twisted logic -

I don't need to have a tooth drilled or pulled without anesthetic to appreciate that in the old days, such a procedure was as painful as fu_k.
^Yeah. Pretty much.
__________________
Derek

Flickr

Out Of Place Album
CSX1702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2014, 03:47 AM   #50
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Exactly my point. People have it easy today with technology, whether it's a camera, automobile, microwave oven, cell phone, etc.
I was just thinking about that today it was 15 below zero when I got in my vehicle and started it up and I was ready to go.
Back in the day you had to set the choke by pumping the gas a few times, and then when it started you definitely had to wait for it to warm up because it wasn't going to run right if you didn't, not to mention I would always check to make sure the tires were all up, now we have idiot lights to tell us our tires are low by a few pounds.
People might have it easier today but those days were simpler
sd9 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 06:08 PM.


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