Suspicious Leaves...

[Joseph Cermak]

Something seemed oddly familiar when I saw this shot come up as an SC today....and to my eye it looks like it is the exact same shot as the one posted a year ago, but with a new "fall tint" and what seems to be photoshopped in leaves. The date of one is listed as 9/29/2019, the other merely as 9/29. The shape of the trees in front of the train also appear to be exactly the same. Seems like a lot of trickery going here, certainly much more than the expected "cloning out a wire" or something of the sort. Perhaps I'm wrong and they are different, but I'd like to get some other eyes on this...

PhotoID: Photograph ©

PhotoID: 712408 Photograph © Ddrennenphoto

[Jackson Glozer]

I agree with you on all accounts.

It looks to me that these are the same frame, as the trees in in front of the locomotive line up, and the flags are the same. There is some weird blur going on here as well, as if this was a real pacing shot all the blur would be in the same direction at the same angle, where as in the "new" image there is some differing angles of blur near the top of the frame as well as on the bottom (most likely to cover up the road that is present in the old frame). The smoke, sky, and passenger cars in the "new" shot look to be added in post as well.

[vcode455]

Wow, heavily Photoshopped.

[vcode455]

Was the original heavily tweaked as well? Look at the tree in front of the pilot that goes from 2 branches into one. The same exact tree looks to be inserted just above the headlight, filling out the tree line above the engine. Those trees are missing in the later shot, which probably contains the original tree line. The road paved with grass is a really big tip-off. Makes you wonder what the original image actually looked like.

[KevinM]

There have been a couple of eye-grabbing steam shots in the last 24 hrs. One of them looked real and the other one looked very much contrived. One sits at the To24, while the other hasn't yet made the Top 10.

PhotoID: 750946 Photograph © Axel Bozier

PhotoID: Photograph ©

One got a favorite from me and one didn't, mainly because the latter just didn't look real. A panning shot is probably the easiest type of photo to doctor, because nothing but the subject is expected to be sharp, and therefore, the eyes don't tend to wander off like they might on an image in which there's a lot more in focus.

In general, I'm OK with folks creating Photoshop art, but I'm only OK with it when they disclose that fact to the screeners and the viewership in their caption. I'm not OK with presenting such an image with implication that it was simply a fortuitous capture in which absolutely everything came together magically. As someone else noted, it is one thing to clean up a few wires that don't connect to anything and quite another to create a scene that didn't really happen.

[Joseph Cermak]

Originally Posted by vcode455

Was the original heavily tweaked as well? Look at the tree in front of the pilot that goes from 2 branches into one. The same exact tree looks to be inserted just above the headlight, filling out the tree line above the engine. Those trees are missing in the later shot, which probably contains the original tree line. The road paved with grass is a really big tip-off. Makes you wonder what the original image actually looked like.

It's very hard to tell what the original would have looked like and how much even the first shot was edited. Comparing the two posted on RP now, it's very easy to spot the differences (added leaves, added passenger cars, road removed, etc) but without the original, who knows what was edited on the first shot. There is no steam/smoke/fog headlight beam in the second shot but it is in the first one, leading me to believe that was probably an added effect.

[Moffat Road]

Based on RP’s own photo submission guidelines…

Manipulation:

The purpose of our website is to display genuine, authentic photographs of trains and railroad related scenes. Bearing this in mind, digital manipulation of photographs (beyond standard post-processing techniques such as levelling, sharpening, dust removal, etc.) is not permitted on photographs submitted to RailPictures.Net.

…this photo should not be excepted. Way too much Photoshop and fake trickery to be considered a real “photograph.”

Mike Danneman

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by Moffat Road

Based on RP’s own photo submission guidelines…

Manipulation:

The purpose of our website is to display genuine, authentic photographs of trains and railroad related scenes. Bearing this in mind, digital manipulation of photographs (beyond standard post-processing techniques such as levelling, sharpening, dust removal, etc.) is not permitted on photographs submitted to RailPictures.Net.

…this photo should not be excepted. Way too much Photoshop and fake trickery to be considered a real “photograph.”

Mike Danneman

And..... it’s gone, just like KB’ s leaser.

[TedG]

The photographer admits as much on his F/B page:

"A re-composite for my favorite shot from my trip to Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad last fall. I’ve wanted to come back to this shot since the original, this time I’ve added a few elements for more of an autumn feel."

/Ted

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by Joseph Cermak

Something seemed oddly familiar when I saw this shot come up as an SC today....and to my eye it looks like it is the exact same shot as the one posted a year ago, but with a new "fall tint" and what seems to be photoshopped in leaves. The date of one is listed as 9/29/2019, the other merely as 9/29. The shape of the trees in front of the train also appear to be exactly the same. Seems like a lot of trickery going here, certainly much more than the expected "cloning out a wire" or something of the sort. Perhaps I'm wrong and they are different, but I'd like to get some other eyes on this...

BTW, nice catch, Joe. I thought that was Jean-Marc's exclusive domain:

https://www.railpictures.net/album/1146/

[Moffat Road]

Aside from the image not being a true “photograph” in the pure definition, it is a creative piece of digital artwork!

Mike Danneman