RailPictures.Net Forums

RailPictures.Net Forums (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/index.php)
-   Off Topic Forum (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   Senior Pics (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=15132)

crazytiger 03-15-2012 05:29 AM

Senior Pics
 
There might have been an article in the April Trains about this, but this is about the worst I've ever seen.

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-...28503242_n.jpg

JimThias 03-15-2012 12:10 PM

I bet she didn't get as dirty as this girl, though:

http://railroadfan.com/gallery/album...acks-10218.jpg

Joe the Photog 03-15-2012 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazytiger (Post 152865)
There might have been an article in the April Trains about this, but this is about the worst I've ever seen.

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-...28503242_n.jpg

Wow. That almost leaves me speechless. FWIW, it you go to his web site there is a Facebook link and in the folder Senir Pics 2012 (real photographers should never refer to them a "pics" but I digress) you will find this photo. There are a few comments on how great the picture is, but so far none on how both photog and model could have died a very violent and nasty death.

bigbassloyd 03-15-2012 04:51 PM

They aren't photographers. Real photographers wouldn't endanger their clients in that manner.

Loyd L.

Mark Gayman 03-18-2012 06:55 PM

The worst situation I have seen was a photographer taking engagement photos at an active grade crossing here in Utah. The couple was seated between the rails and the photographer was on a medium tall, aluminum step ladder, also between the rails! My warning was answered with a naive "We'll keep a look out", or words to that effect.

travsirocz 03-19-2012 06:43 PM

Here is a link about warning parents to choose the right photographers that stay away from the tracks.

http://www.violetphotographyanddesig...-photographer/

KevinM 03-19-2012 08:55 PM

I guess I don't understand the fascination with being photographed standing, sitting or lying on railroad tracks....active or abandoned. :confused:

Mgoldman 03-20-2012 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinM (Post 153013)
I guess I don't understand the fascination with being photographed standing, sitting or lying on railroad tracks....active or abandoned. :confused:

Aww... c'mon Kevin. Even Steinheimer had *some* fascination with the idea!

http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=14832

/Mitch
http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smile...ogs-780771.gif

jnohallman 03-20-2012 07:37 PM

After seeing this come up on Facebook a little while ago, I actually went to the trouble of going to the website and using the "contact us" link to send an e-mail about trespassing, endangering clients lives and limbs, etc. No response, of course - surprise, surprise. But I had to make the effort.

Jon

troy12n 03-21-2012 07:44 PM

The whole "senior pics" thing is vain and silly enough without throwing yourselves on the tracks.

CN Railfan 03-24-2012 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 152867)
I bet she didn't get as dirty as this girl, though:

http://railroadfan.com/gallery/album...acks-10218.jpg

Is it just me, or is the bokeh absolutely terrible in that photo?

JimThias 03-24-2012 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CN Railfan (Post 153221)
Is it just me, or is the bokeh absolutely terrible in that photo?

Considering it was shot with a crappy Rebel XT, what would you expect?

JRMDC 03-24-2012 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 153243)
Considering it was shot with a crappy Rebel XT, what would you expect?

I was unaware that a sensor could much affect bokeh. I think that is a lens characteristic. The focal length was 400mm; I don't know much about lenses in that range. The cheap 75-300 might have poor bokeh, I don't know, but what 400 would have it that way?

JimThias 03-24-2012 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC (Post 153246)
I was unaware that a sensor could much affect bokeh. I think that is a lens characteristic. The focal length was 400mm; I don't know much about lenses in that range. The cheap 75-300 might have poor bokeh, I don't know, but what 400 would have it that way?

It was my 100-400L. I've seen great bokeh from that lens on my 5D. I'm pretty confident that image quality issues came into play shooting that scene with my rebel.

troy12n 03-25-2012 04:45 AM

Bokeh is pretty much just a function of the lens, not the sensor.

BUT...

The same lens on a crop sensor versus a full frame sensor would look slightly different because you dont see the entire full field of view on a crop sensor, you dont see the extreme edges which usually have more of the bokeh effect than, say, just off center.

troy12n 03-25-2012 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 153252)
It was my 100-400L. I've seen great bokeh from that lens on my 5D. I'm pretty confident that image quality issues came into play shooting that scene with my rebel.

A 100-400 really is not capable of producing bokeh, it's largest aperture is f5.6

JimThias 03-25-2012 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n (Post 153274)
A 100-400 really is not capable of producing bokeh, it's largest aperture is f5.6

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17...es/roflmao.gif



Yep, you're right, the 100-400 really is not capable of...:lol:...producing bokeh...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17...hbird-0598.jpg

400mm, f5.6, ISO 1600.

Mr. Pick 03-25-2012 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n (Post 153274)
A 100-400 really is not capable of producing bokeh, it's largest aperture is f5.6

Troy, did you find a large, empty bottle beside the computer this morning?? :wink:

CN Railfan 03-25-2012 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 153284)
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17...es/roflmao.gif



Yep, you're right, the 100-400 really is not capable of...:lol:...producing bokeh...

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17...hbird-0598.jpg

400mm, f5.6, ISO 1600.


Bokehlicious! ;-)

JimThias 03-27-2012 01:49 AM

Hi, Troy. http://bestsmileys.com/waving/4.gif

trainboysd40 03-27-2012 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy12n (Post 153274)
A 100-400 really is not capable of producing bokeh, it's largest aperture is f5.6

Have you ever even used a 400mm before?

jnohallman 03-29-2012 12:25 AM

How much further behind the hummingbird are the trees than the brush is behind the idiots on the railroad track? Bokeh is a function not only of the lens, but of focal plane and depth of field. I suspect the brush behind the idiots just isn't far enough beyond the focal plane to allow for a pleasing bokeh.

Jon

JimThias 03-29-2012 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jnohallman (Post 153438)
I suspect the brush behind the idiots just isn't far enough beyond the focal plane to allow for a pleasing bokeh.

Jon

Exactly. Cheap camera, zoomed in, bad lighting, probably cropped (it's been a few years), bad almost-bokeh.

In fact, it never even occurred to me until CN railfan mentioned it.

The trees in the bird shot are about 20-30 feet beyond the bird. However, I'm only about 10 feet away as you can see my reflection in the feeder.

With the picture of the people on the tracks, I was probably 50-100 yards away from them.

JRMDC 03-29-2012 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jnohallman (Post 153438)
I suspect the brush behind the idiots just isn't far enough beyond the focal plane to allow for a pleasing bokeh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 153439)
Exactly. Cheap camera, zoomed in, bad lighting, probably cropped (it's been a few years), bad almost-bokeh.

"Exactly" makes it sound as though you think Jon agrees with you! I can't speak for him but I suspect he would disagree. In my view his point is valid and is the explanation and you are wrong about the camera. Take an expensive camera, same lens, same zoom, same lighting, etc., you get the "bad almost-bokeh." As I suggested many posts ago, Troy said it, Jon said it, nothing to do with the sensor. XT/D1X/D3 whatever, doesn't matter.

Troy can be wrong about that lens being incapable of bokeh and yet right about the sensor. :)

Mr. Pick 03-29-2012 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRMDC (Post 153442)
"Exactly" makes it sound as though you think Jon agrees with you! I can't speak for him but I suspect he would disagree. In my view his point is valid and is the explanation and you are wrong about the camera. Take an expensive camera, same lens, same zoom, same lighting, etc., you get the "bad almost-bokeh." As I suggested many posts ago, Troy said it, Jon said it, nothing to do with the sensor. XT/D1X/D3 whatever, doesn't matter.

Troy can be wrong about that lens being incapable of bokeh and yet right about the sensor. :)

EDIT: Deleted.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:59 AM.

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