Go Back   RailPictures.Net Forums > Railroad Photography Forums > Railroad Photography Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-10-2013, 08:55 PM   #1
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Talking Welcome to Evergreen Land, a Wholly Owned Province of Candyland!

Holy crap Batman, my monitor just went green!

Image © Steve Patterson
PhotoID: 420798
Photograph © Steve Patterson



And the other guy's photo got rejected for color?

http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=16056

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 01-10-2013 at 08:57 PM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 12:42 AM   #2
magicman_841
Senior Member
 
magicman_841's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 1,024
Default

All it would take is a hit with the color temp eyedropper in the ballast... took me a whopping 30 seconds to do.
__________________
Mathieu Tremblay
Choo photos
magicman_841 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 03:37 AM   #3
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb

It just glows at me!!!

Like something radioactive.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 08:55 AM   #4
adickson
Senior Member
 
adickson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Central NC
Posts: 236
Default

Image © Dave Schauer
PhotoID: 416819
Photograph © Dave Schauer


yup
__________________
Anthony Dickson
www.vidivides.com
www.flickr.com/photos/adickson87/
adickson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 06:52 PM   #5
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb Engines and stuff.

That is not as bad, at least you can blame it on the lights.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 08:36 PM   #6
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

[quote=Holloran Grade;163026]Holy crap Batman, my monitor just went green!

Image © Steve Patterson
PhotoID: 420798
Photograph © Steve Patterson


You guys should appreciate the subject matter and date, and the medium (color slide film). Had this been shot yesterday, that would have been different.

I can tell you that sometimes it's darn near impossible to bring scanned slides into something usable. I've given up on several of my shots and never even bothered trying to upload them.
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 09:02 PM   #7
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
......I can tell you that sometimes it's darn near impossible to bring scanned slides into something usable. I've given up on several of my shots and never even bothered trying to upload them.
I would say that is the case many times, however even this one can be helped.

Name:  6944.1357800599.jpg
Views: 245
Size:  158.8 KB
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 09:02 PM   #8
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

Ron, how bad does the color of a slide have to be before a screener rejects it for bad color? This one seems to be really extreme.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 09:23 PM   #9
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb Word.

Depends on who you are......
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 10:33 PM   #10
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
Depends on who you are......
Indeed it does. Lifetime accomplishments normally should bring some degree of respect.

Besides, is the site about photography, or digital correction of images? The latter is not my cup of tea, and it's not an issue I ever had to deal with as a writer/photographer in the years past. That stuff was left to the magazine's art department.

I do think us old guys who shot on film should be given more latitude than the young bucks who have the Canon TechnoBlitz Nimrod 4000 with afterburners and McPherson struts. And---good luck on catching the CP Canadian at that spot today...
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 01:34 AM   #11
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
I do think us old guys who shot on film should be given more latitude than the young bucks who have the Canon TechnoBlitz Nimrod 4000 with afterburners and McPherson struts. And---good luck on catching the CP Canadian at that spot today...
What bugs me is that some of the old guys do get that latitude, compared to others also doing film.

Still a little vexed, I guess, that this one got a lot of hassle about color (6 rejects, I think), didn't make any difference to the final product IMHO, and yet I see atrocious color with some regularity.

Image © Janusz Mrozek
PhotoID: 298938
Photograph © Janusz Mrozek


Why did Steve get a break and not me? I know, I know, can't compare individual shots on RP.

And - pet peeve of mine - I do try hard in most cases to de-pebble the sky as I think it looks very bad and it is easy to gaussian blur, and then I see absolutely horrible stuff get on.

I say that if one can do an autocorrect or a quick color temp adjustment and get an easy improvement, then that is what should be required. I don't view it as an issue of "respect". I don't see how allowing Steve Patterson to upload the green monster is offering him respect. No one is respecting his artistic choice in this matter because no such choice was made to go wacky green. Rather, it is allowing him a lower threshold. And when a notably higher threshold can be surmounted with a few seconds effort, literally, then I find the current system undesirable.
__________________
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

Last edited by JRMDC; 01-12-2013 at 01:37 AM.
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 02:21 AM   #12
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

What I want to know is why Steve is happy with the color of that image? I'd be horrified. But that's just me.

And Ron, some of us young bucks work pretty hard to get some of the shots we have, so it's not like having a digital camera and processing automatically makes photography easier.

Last edited by JimThias; 01-12-2013 at 02:24 AM.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 01:34 PM   #13
Ron Flanary
Senior Member
 
Ron Flanary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Big Stone Gap, VA
Posts: 1,327
Default

Guys: I don't think Steve did the color correction on that shot---someone with RP.net did. It's not as big a deal as you fellows are making it. Chill...

Jim: I didn't say the "young bucks" didn't work hard to get their shots. But---it's considerably easier to come back with a great shot these days than it was forty or fifty years ago. Isn't that called "progress"? That's why I was suggesting you can't always compare a shot taken in the '70s (on very slow slide film that yields questionable colors, and then fades and color shifts over time) with something you shot yesterday. It's just not a fair comparison.

I'm sorry...but photography today has the benefit of the "Easy" button. I was shooting back then, and I'm still shooting today, so I think I should know...
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 01:43 PM   #14
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
Guys: I don't think Steve did the color correction on that shot---someone with RP.net did. It's not as big a deal as you fellows are making it. Chill...
So Steve's original shot looks great and someone with RP turned it green?



Quote:
Jim: I didn't say the "young bucks" didn't work hard to get their shots. But---it's considerably easier to come back with a great shot these days than it was forty or fifty years ago. Isn't that called "progress"? That's why I was suggesting you can't always compare a shot taken in the '70s (on very slow slide film that yields questionable colors, and then fades and color shifts over time) with something you shot yesterday. It's just not a fair comparison.

I'm sorry...but photography today has the benefit of the "Easy" button. I was shooting back then, and I'm still shooting today, so I think I should know...
I agree. Hence the at the end of my post.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 02:40 PM   #15
Dennis A. Livesey
Senior Member
 
Dennis A. Livesey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,986
Wink

Ron,

You are absolutely right that photography is much easier today.

And as guy who took his first picture over 50 years ago, all I can say is amen to that!

Today I greatly appreciate not wasting time with the exigency of film and using that saved energy creating images instead.
__________________
Dennis

I Foam Therefore I Am.

My pix on RailPics:

I am on Flickr as well:

"Dennis is such a God, he could do that with a camera obscura and some homemade acetate." Holloran Grade

"To me it looks drawn in in Paintshop. It looks like a puddle of orange on the sky." SFO777
Dennis A. Livesey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 09:29 PM   #16
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
So Steve's original shot looks great and someone with RP turned it green?
I'm sure it didn't. That's why I said "color correction." You can never really tell, because many scanners don't honestly portray how a slide may actually look. I have several slides that are really terrific when projected (mostly daybreak shots, with low light), but they don't scan well, and it's difficult to pull them into something that would be acceptable to RP.net. So---I don't bother.

Digital technology is great, but it has some limitations. All old images don't translate well.

This all misses the point, however. Could Steve's shot be less green, and thus "better." Of course it could. As I frequently note, shots accepted to RP.net only have to pass a base level of adequacy. It's not accurate to say the shots here are necessarily the "best." It's more accurate to say the real crap-o shots are probably not here (note, I said "probably." No process involving human judgement is that good.).
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 11:09 PM   #17
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Talking The Oracle Speaks -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Flanary View Post
.........." It's more accurate to say the real crap-o shots are probably not here ...........
Conclusion to be drawn by all of this:

I take a lot of "real crap-o shots."
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 12:23 AM   #18
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
Conclusion to be drawn by all of this:

I take a lot of "real crap-o shots."
Yes. I have boxes and boxes of 'em too...
Ron Flanary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 03:44 AM   #19
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adickson View Post
Image © Dave Schauer
PhotoID: 416819
Photograph © Dave Schauer


yup
Really? What are you even talking about? Its a light green primer with huge yellow lights inside the facility. Color looks fine.
__________________
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 01-13-2013, 04:01 AM   #20
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Talking An now, a word from Mad Max...

Dude, were're picking here.

The white light from outside in the upper left hand corner "could" be a little more white and a little less green/yellow.

But you are right, in my opinion as stated above, this is not bad.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 04:50 AM   #21
adickson
Senior Member
 
adickson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Central NC
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
Really? What are you even talking about? Its a light green primer with huge yellow lights inside the facility. Color looks fine.
So you would say there is a yellow cast from the lights? Easy fix. Enhance/Color/Remove Color Cast. Then click on the white fuel filters and wa-lah!



Yes, the primer is green. The engine is grey and the filters are most certainly white. My point being with mere seconds this photo (much like the original photo on this thread) could have been greatly improved. I don't doubt that getting the color "right" with film slides is difficult. I have worked on some of my Grandpa's old shots and I understand the frustration. However, I feel an effort should be made to do your best. You don't have to have an incredible amount of experience with photoshop or similar programs. Many of them have "auto" features that will turn out better color.

I'm not perfect. I recently reworked a shot after looking at it with fresh eyes and realizing I really fugged up the processing. Color and processing is something I constantly strive to improve. I want to put out the best version I can and if I learn a new trick down the road I will often double back and rework some of my favorites. I have scrapped shots because I could not get the quality where I wanted it to be. I take pride in my work and some of the shots I have seen on this site make me wonder how the photographer was okay with his/her processing results.
__________________
Anthony Dickson
www.vidivides.com
www.flickr.com/photos/adickson87/
adickson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 08:51 AM   #22
GBR
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 55
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adickson View Post
So you would say there is a yellow cast from the lights? Easy fix. Enhance/Color/Remove Color Cast. Then click on the white fuel filters and wa-lah!
But it is not the real sight. There were huge yellow lights inside the facility. Why should we have to "change" the original lighting conditions?
GBR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 05:14 PM   #23
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adickson View Post
So you would say there is a yellow cast from the lights? Easy fix. Enhance/Color/Remove Color Cast. Then click on the white fuel filters and wa-lah!



Yes, the primer is green. The engine is grey and the filters are most certainly white. My point being with mere seconds this photo (much like the original photo on this thread) could have been greatly improved. I don't doubt that getting the color "right" with film slides is difficult. I have worked on some of my Grandpa's old shots and I understand the frustration. However, I feel an effort should be made to do your best. You don't have to have an incredible amount of experience with photoshop or similar programs. Many of them have "auto" features that will turn out better color.

I'm not perfect. I recently reworked a shot after looking at it with fresh eyes and realizing I really fugged up the processing. Color and processing is something I constantly strive to improve. I want to put out the best version I can and if I learn a new trick down the road I will often double back and rework some of my favorites. I have scrapped shots because I could not get the quality where I wanted it to be. I take pride in my work and some of the shots I have seen on this site make me wonder how the photographer was okay with his/her processing results.
But thats not what it looks like in real life! Having been in that facility I can assure you that your edit is nowhere close to what it actually looks like. I understand what are trying to say but that photo is fine. Plus you made the primer look different that it really was. It actually was tinted green.
__________________
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 01-13-2013, 06:32 PM   #24
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by GBR View Post
But it is not the real sight. There were huge yellow lights inside the facility. Why should we have to "change" the original lighting conditions?
Ah, and that is the rub now isn't it?

Personally, I like the corrected version better and would have changed it even though that is not what my eyes would have seen.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 08:24 PM   #25
adickson
Senior Member
 
adickson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Central NC
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GBR View Post
Why should we have to "change" the original lighting conditions?
Quote:
Originally Posted by coborn35 View Post
But thats not what it looks like in real life!.....It actually was tinted green.
Image © Anthony Dickson
PhotoID: 411151
Photograph © Anthony Dickson


Here is a good example. In person you can walk around and see, with the naked eye, various "colors" of light. Including red, yellow, blue, and purple. Each of these colors truly casts a hue and tinge to their various areas of illumination. I processed, submitted, and was subsequently rejected for bad color. I came to the forum and bitched about how "it really looks like that in real life". A complaint everyone has heard. I received various suggestions and ended up having to isolate every light source and adjust the white balance accordingly. Talk about a pain in the rump! I even had to isolate the blue lights on the sand tower and desaturate. Furthermore I had to isolate the cast the blue lights threw on the cars and completely desaturate that to a grey before RP would accept them. In the end, I still disagree that I had to modify the scene that much to be accepted but...and this is tough to admit, I do think it looks better.

My point being, digital shooters get nicked for extremely minor "bad color". Some often have to jump through numerous hoops before reaching the promised land. Especially on shots that have multiple light temperatures. I think film shooters should be held to a similar standard. I understand that film/slides are difficult. As I mentioned before, I have dabbled in them as well. Even then, there are shots that are accepted that irk many of us simply because with a manor of seconds an obvious hue or other "bad color" incident could have been easily corrected. Meanwhile, digital shooters are scratching their head trying to figure out whats wrong with the color and which way to rotate .001 degrees to get a shot in.

There is 2 more pennies for you. Spend them wisely
__________________
Anthony Dickson
www.vidivides.com
www.flickr.com/photos/adickson87/
adickson 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 08:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.