PDA

View Full Version : Is it real ?


rpalmer
08-10-2004, 04:02 PM
Maybe I'm being a pessimist, and you are all welcome to scold me for assuming the worst, but I've looked at this photo:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=73077

several times and have a hard time believing that it really happened, and wasn't created in Photoshop by merging several images.
Notice how all three trains are almost perfectly positioned in the photo and the photographer was in the perfect spot to capture it. The odds of this happening with all three moving have to be astronomical. Even if one train was stopped for some reason, the odds that the remaining two trains would show up at the same time are almost as great.

Aaron
08-10-2004, 04:29 PM
Rob you know I may tend to agree with you

After looking long and hard at the photo I feel that the shadowes are inconsistant on the two CSX units on unit 365 looks as if it is getting noon sun (shining sraight down on it) and the other unit 290 looks as if it is getting better light as if it were morning or afternoon where the trucks look to have much more light. I was looking for inconsistancies with the colour and background and on the CSX unit 365 the background looks artificial through the windows. But who knows I could be wrong, thats just my two cents worth!

Warren
08-10-2004, 07:32 PM
It's a HO layout! :lol:
Seriously guys it looks real. I disagree on the shadows point I think they are consistant. If you notice under both trains the rail closest to the camera is in shadow and the building shadow matches also. And using a zoom lens depth perception is lost on those shadows a bit.

Ween
08-11-2004, 03:53 AM
I think that blue shanty to the left of the frame is obviously Photoshoped in, but the red fuel tank is real. :lol:

dsktc
08-14-2004, 06:37 PM
"The odds of this happening with all three moving have to be astronomical."

As an amateur astronomer, I've concluded the image
is real and unaltered. :lol:

Occasionally, the extraordinary happens and you are
in the right place at the right time. Rob Nordstrom
was incredibly lucky to have seen this and captured it
with his camera.

chris crook
08-14-2004, 08:54 PM
There is a line of pixels up the right hand size of the frame that indicate cutting and pasting the train to the right. Sky and trees show up where engine should be. Also, zooming in at the center of the image shows a line where the tree branches don't quite meet. So it appears that a little more attention to detail would have make this fraud much more effective.

Chris

dsktc
08-14-2004, 10:15 PM
The anomalies Chris discovered, which
I see now as well, suggest that this photo
was doctored. It is unfortunate if this is
indeed true.

Chris Kilroy
08-14-2004, 10:25 PM
The anomalies Chris discovered, which
I see now as well, suggest that this photo
was doctored. It is unfortunate if this is
indeed true.

I agree totally.

The line of pixels on the right edge of the photo could always be the edge of a slide, or print, but the anomalies on the tree about 50 pixels to the left of the 365, unfortunately, lead me to believe this image is a fake.

I will contact the photographer for his side of the story before removing it.

Warren
08-14-2004, 11:11 PM
Wow it seems like a long way to go to get a photo accepted and at the same time it is strange he did such a good job and missed that line. However because of that line I would have to agree it has been doctored! :evil:

Guilford350
08-14-2004, 11:50 PM
Not to start a bashing thread here but what about this photo, http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61979, from the same photographer? While the rest of the photo has motion blur, the view through the windows does not.

Warren
08-15-2004, 02:40 AM
Oh ya Chris nailed it. Look down the center you will see a vertical line that runs from above the bridge down thru the rails and ballast. The rails don't even match up perfectly along this vertical line! :twisted:
http://www.boomspeed.com/ua1678/fraud.jpg

Ween
08-15-2004, 04:52 AM
Maybe it's a hair in front of the lens causing that vertical line! Yeah, right!

I almost with the photographer threw in a Sasquatch or Leprechaun to complete this "astronomical shot." :lol:

Seriously, though, what're the repercussions for a foul like this? Obviously he'll lose some credibility. But he never claimed to catch all three at once anywhere that I can see. His remarks were something like, "East meets West meets North." He never said, "Hey, check out this once-in-a-lifetime shot I got!!! I am the greatest." Of course, that photo received 6 comments, which he never refuted or said, "I'm not that lucky; it's doctored."

Either way, it's pretty chicken feces to pass something like that off as truly happening if it really didn't. Look for the Loch Ness Monster in my next couple of submissions...

ddavies
08-15-2004, 12:34 PM
Actually, I have images of each of the three trains, and they didn't meet other trains at the junction.

Robert had a camera on a tripod, and was taking pics of each train to make this to show his father.

It is a total photoshop fabrication and should not have been submitted here.

Warren
08-15-2004, 01:01 PM
removed

Joe
08-15-2004, 02:49 PM
Well, Mr. Nordstrom got us good for awhile, but the wind and his slightly unaligned photoshop gave it all away! :D And nice one, Warren! :lol:

P.S. What about the NS unit? I can't find any lines in that one. Maybe it was just the 290 and 9320 that met...

ddavies
08-15-2004, 03:18 PM
I was with him, nothing met there. In 20 years at the Junction, I only remember one engine over engine meet, and I was on the wrong side (for the sun).

With Photoshop, you can do about anything :)

http://members.cox.net/dbdavies/

The horsehead was really the trailing unit in the consist, I had to also remove the boxcar coupled to it. You are invited to look for artifacts of manipulation.

chris crook
08-15-2004, 03:45 PM
Well, since he didn't mention anywhere that it was fake, that makes him a liar and a cheat, doesn't it? I don't think a serious photographer would do such a thing and pass it off as real, either by claiming it so or by 'lies of omission' maybe I take these things too seriously, but darn it, I just don't like it.

I didn't set out to dispute his picture. But I was curious, since someone else had questions it, I figured I would take a look. I never would have thought to check it out otherwise. I just opened it and then saved it on my computer to give it a closer look. The zoom in photoshop brought out the tiny clues.

Warren
08-15-2004, 07:41 PM
What do you mean "good one" Joe? Didn't you know that Sloth from the Goonies was a engineer with UP? :D
http://www.boomspeed.com/ua1678/up9676cu.jpg

Ween
08-15-2004, 08:17 PM
Sloth loves Chunk! [/Sloth]

Seriously though, that's a bunch of horse scat to try and 'pull one over' on people like that. Shame.

rpalmer
08-16-2004, 12:57 AM
Not to start a bashing thread here but what about this photo, http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61979, from the same photographer? While the rest of the photo has motion blur, the view through the windows does not.

That's an obvious use of Photoshop to create an interesting shot. I don't think it was intended to represent anything other than that.
I was suspicious of this shot:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=70171
a while back, but never pursued it.

Joe
08-16-2004, 01:54 AM
That train disapearing into grass is a bit suspicious in that shot... :shock: But if it was photoshopped, there would still be tracks to the left of those trees...Maybe there is a sharp curve just there. Hmmmmm...

Warren
08-16-2004, 02:30 AM
There is a berm on the left end of that top train if you look close you can see the tops of the cars continue to the left. I haven't found anything on that photo but I didn't see anything on the first one either! :lol:

Aaron
08-17-2004, 07:03 AM
Well, I suppose this very interesting thread has come to an end since the suspected photo has been proven to be a fake. The photo I have noticed today has been removed from the data base, however it was quite humours the see the photo, and its flaws. However, I still stand by my original statement that the shaddows where all messed up. Some of you guys were upset that someone posted a photo where it had been altered but you know what, it does not bother me at all. This photo has done a lot for RP, I mean look at this very popular post! It got people talking, and even though it was photoshopped it was still a nice picture to look at! Anyways, that is my closing remarks for this thread!

Warren
08-17-2004, 12:25 PM
From General Composition Issues & Guidelines:

We encourage creativity in our submissions.
There is no mention of what has happened here in the guidelines and it probably should contain something to stop this from happening in the future.

Ween also asked a good question
Seriously, though, what're the repercussions for a foul like this?

Chris Starnes
08-17-2004, 02:43 PM
I guess we assumed that people would know that altering images in such a way would not be acceptable. Minor edits are not a problem (sharpening, lightening up an image, or color balance) but when you totally re-work a photo to reflect something that never happened, it is not welcome here.

We are still waiting to hear from the photographer to get his side of the story before we remove that photo.

I hope that this doesn't become a problem in the future. We have enough photos to screen as it is and don't need to be playing "games" to determine if an image is real or fake.

Photoshop is a great tool and it is neat to create images like this from time to time....but they have no place here.

jrice
08-24-2004, 12:28 PM
As the person who took the second photo mentioned here( http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=70171 ), I wanted to add something.

I agree with those who disaprove of representing as real something assembled in photoshop. In the case of my photo, I assure you it happened exactly as shown. The photo was cropped and edited in Photoshop Elements and I did remove a telephone pole and some wires.

In this age of easily generated and modified digital images, it is reasonable to be suspicious of photographs depicting events of low probability.

Does anyone have any suggestions for ensuring photographs submited are not tricked out?

Is removing a telephone pole from the photo acceptable?

I think this whole concept of what is acceptable and what is not in terms of editing photographs is worthy of further exploration.

Ween
08-25-2004, 04:16 AM
Is removing a telephone pole from the photo acceptable?

I think you answered your own question:

I agree with those who disaprove of representing as real something assembled in photoshop.

The photo is doctored and is not 'real.' Just my opinion though...

Chris Starnes
08-25-2004, 06:04 AM
We finally got in contact with the photographer of the three-way meet shot. He did own up to creating a fake.

We have removed the photo and I think the issue is solved. I hope this doesn't become a problem in the future.

ddavies
08-25-2004, 04:01 PM
Actually, the best means of making sure the images is not doctored (for court use), is the testimony of the photographer that it is a fair and accurate representation of the scene.

Unfortunately, there are those who will lie in court also :x

chris crook
09-01-2004, 07:28 PM
If you take anything out of a picture, pole, wire or otherwise, or add anything to it, it is no longer an accurate representation of a scene.

Joe
09-03-2004, 02:02 AM
This one looks a bit fishy...A huge temple with 20 foot high fences in the middle of a field? :shock: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=76377

Guilford350
09-03-2004, 02:03 PM
No, I don't think so.

Here's another photo of it: http://www.steam-railway-videos.co.uk/video_images/ironhorse2/LindongPagoda.JPG