Old 02-14-2010, 07:18 PM   #26
hioo1
Junior Member
 
hioo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 26
Default

Interesting, this is weird because this photo looks sharp to me, are my eyes going or am i missing something?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=839648400
__________________
William (Billy) Brown

Photo website

Trains Gallery

My shots on Railpictures.net
hioo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 07:46 PM   #27
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

looks good to me

appeal? see what others say first, of course
__________________
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 02-14-2010, 08:11 PM   #28
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Front looks soft to me.
__________________
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 02-15-2010, 08:07 PM   #29
hioo1
Junior Member
 
hioo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 26
Default

Question for you guys, when sharpening a photo, which part of the train do you take as an indicator, I usually look at the number plate to adjust the sharpness. Is there a better way to do this?
__________________
William (Billy) Brown

Photo website

Trains Gallery

My shots on Railpictures.net
hioo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 08:13 PM   #30
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

I look at the image overall.
__________________
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 02-15-2010, 09:58 PM   #31
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

The focal point, which is usually the nose of the locomotive. It's natural for things to get less sharp the further back or closer you go.The entire FOV cannot be sharp. Current Optics dont allow it. You shot it at F9 which should (does) give you enough DOF, so that's not the issue.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 10:28 PM   #32
cblaz
Senior Member
 
cblaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Marlboro, New Jersey
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
The focal point, which is usually the nose of the locomotive. It's natural for things to get less sharp the further back or closer you go.The entire FOV cannot be sharp. Current Optics dont allow it. You shot it at F9 which should (does) give you enough DOF, so that's not the issue.
Ummm, what?
__________________
- Christopher Blaszczyk
My shots on RP: http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=284
cblaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 11:14 PM   #33
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Thats news to me.
__________________
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 02-16-2010, 01:34 AM   #34
coborn35
Senior Member
 
coborn35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,398
Default

Congrats!
Image © William Brown
PhotoID: 314305
Photograph © William Brown
__________________
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 02-16-2010, 04:06 AM   #35
hioo1
Junior Member
 
hioo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 26
Default

WOOHOO!!! Thanks guys for the help!
__________________
William (Billy) Brown

Photo website

Trains Gallery

My shots on Railpictures.net
hioo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 01:34 PM   #36
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
The focal point, which is usually the nose of the locomotive. It's natural for things to get less sharp the further back or closer you go.The entire FOV cannot be sharp. Current Optics dont allow it. You shot it at F9 which should (does) give you enough DOF, so that's not the issue.
Unless you're shooting 4x5 like me, stopping down to say f/36 can give plenty of depth of field so that the entire FOV can be sharp enough, unless you've got too much close foreground showing anyways.
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2010, 02:41 PM   #37
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
Unless you're shooting 4x5 like me, stopping down to say f/36 can give plenty of depth of field so that the entire FOV can be sharp enough, unless you've got too much close foreground showing anyways.
On a DSLR though, shooting above F11-F16 presents issues with diffraction that was not seen in film. Furthermore, shooting a moving target at these small aperatures is not conducive to capturing a sharp focal point (locomotive) due to the inherent motion blur that will occur shooting at the low shutter speeds necessary to properly expose a shot at those F stops. Background may be in focus and sharp, but the focal point wont be.

That's what I am saying.
troy12n 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 10:47 PM.


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