???Clipart Train????

[travsirocz]

PhotoID: 262095 Photograph © Gary Knapp

I hate calling anyone out but everything but the train looks real and the train is really bad. If fixed this will be a great shot.

[JimThias]

Fixed, maybe...but I still can't get past the guy in the blue coat and the car in the bottom right of the frame. Both of those elements really distract my eyes too much to enjoy this image. The rest of the people are great, but the blue coat randomly walking across the scene is bad, and I probably would have cloned out the car.

[Walter S]

Im thinking that it may just be the paint on the train that is making it glow. I have seen alot of photos taken during the day have the same effect after post processing, but with it being nigh time it just brings the color out more.

[JRMDC]

This is an older shot. I vaguely remember a previous discussion about Knapp's work and one of the screeners saying they were working with him on his post processing. I recall something about him using a lot of shadows/highlighting or maybe third-party software that works on that end of things.

EDIT: Oops, I must have misread a digit in the id number. This is a new shot! I think the post-processing went awry.

For some reason I don't mind the person or the car that much, it sort of provides an entry into the scene, more of a feel that one is standing there, the next one on the platform waiting for boarding, standing on something for elevation. Maybe I just like the color of the coat. I might have a different opinion tomorrow.

[travsirocz]

Originally Posted by Walter S

Im thinking that it may just be the paint on the train that is making it glow. I have seen alot of photos taken during the day have the same effect after post processing, but with it being nigh time it just brings the color out more.

The plow and snow on the plow of the locomotive do not fit reality.

[jnohallman]

The whole thing looks posterized to me . . . not just the train but the people and the station, especially the sign and the shadows.

Jon

[travsirocz]

Originally Posted by jnohallman

The whole thing looks posterized to me . . . not just the train but the people and the station, especially the sign and the shadows.

Jon

The whole image looks photoshopped but I can live with that. I live a lot of HDR images. It's that the train looks to have been photoshopped in. It is a lot more processed then the rest of the scene.

[Cinderpath]

Originally Posted by JimThias

Fixed, maybe...but I still can't get past the guy in the blue coat and the car in the bottom right of the frame. Both of those elements really distract my eyes too much to enjoy this image. The rest of the people are great, but the blue coat randomly walking across the scene is bad, and I probably would have cloned out the car.

I have to agree with Jim on this one. Personally I'd also like a little less saturation, but that is a personal taste thing.

[Bryant Kaden]

I agree with Travis about the train looking fake. Here's the giveaway for me: the amount of snow falling in the train headlights compared to the amount of snow falling in the rest of the photo. Could the difference really be that great??? Compare with this one to see what I'm talking about:

PhotoID: 219529 Photograph © Gary Knapp

The volume of snow captured in the headlights in both those photos appears to be nearly equal, yet the amount of snow visible in the rest of the photograph is significantly less in the holiday train image. Anyway, there have been plenty of discussions and debates about proper and improper use of computer manipulation, so I won't go any farther than to say that this one looks to me to be a bit overdone.

[BarrySr]

Look at the locomotive's left front underside right behind the snowplow; look at the rails....

BarrySr
Kingwood, TX

[Joe the Photog]

I don't really get what anyone is saying here. Maybe it's too early. But if you think something is fake, then say it. Don't ask me to look for myself, because I don't see it right now. The shoot looks a little over processsed to me, a little too HDR, but I think it's mostly fine. I think it looks more like a post card than a photograph though.

Are some of us projecting our Knapp jealousy here?


Joe

[jdirelan87]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

Are some of us projecting our Knapp jealousy here?

I think the better term would be Knapp frustration. Personally, I find virtually all his shots (including daylight ones) EXTREMELY over processed to the point where I cannot enjoy them. Its frustrating because 1) he doesn't appear to be making any steps to getting better at post processing (if anything, he shots are getting more over processed) and 2) despite this they always seem to make it into the database.

He spends so much time setting up and preparing his shots, but all that effort is wasted when he bumps the highlight up to 80% on every single shot. If only he could let the editors of trains to do his post processing work, that article vs. his shots on RP were like night and day!

[Joe the Photog]

I do agree that he over processes many of his shots. They range from just a hair over processed to grossyily and wildly overdone. I'm guessing he processes them as he likes them. I'd think that if someone was going to spend 8500 dollars on lighting equipment, that he would at least process them as he likes them, which is different from (to me anyway) than him not knowing what he's doing.

The inference in some of the posts above, however, is that he was faking his shots by cloning a train in, unless I am reading them wrong.


Joe

[travsirocz]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

I don't really get what anyone is saying here. Maybe it's too early. But if you think something is fake, then say it. Don't ask me to look for myself, because I don't see it right now. The shoot looks a little over processsed to me, a little too HDR, but I think it's mostly fine. I think it looks more like a post card than a photograph though.

Are some of us projecting our Knapp jealousy here?


Joe

I am jealous of his work. I just think that this photo and composition would be great but the train doesn't match the rest of the photo?

[Bryant Kaden]

I didn't mean any offense by my comment. I think some of Gary's photographs are some of the most interesting and beautiful in the database, so of course I wish I took them They obviously take a lot of skill and preparation to accomplish. However, I also know when to call a thing for what it is. I didn't say that I think the train is fake, I said it looks fake and that to my eyes and taste, there appeared to be a bit too much photo manipulation involved in producing the final image. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. Stay tuned for my next post in 2 years...

[Andrew Blaszczyk (2)]

Originally Posted by jdirelan87

I think the better term would be Knapp frustration. Personally, I find virtually all his shots (including daylight ones) EXTREMELY over processed to the point where I cannot enjoy them. Its frustrating because 1) he doesn't appear to be making any steps to getting better at post processing (if anything, he shots are getting more over processed) and 2) despite this they always seem to make it into the database.

He spends so much time setting up and preparing his shots, but all that effort is wasted when he bumps the highlight up to 80% on every single shot. If only he could let the editors of trains to do his post processing work, that article vs. his shots on RP were like night and day!

Amen! Those shots looked fantastic. I just wish I could see the unedited versions which probably only need slight tweaking and look close to reality already.

[Ween]

And now it's Photo of the Week...

[rustyrail]

I wish the S10 was as well-lit as the train.

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by Ween

And now it's Photo of the Week...

Well, his shot with the fake stars was a #1 PCA, so it's no surprise.

[Cinderpath]

Originally Posted by JimThias

Well, his shot with the fake stars was a #1 PCA, so it's no surprise.

-Which one was that? (Some of us johnny come lately types, are out of the loop

[Mgoldman]

He should do this, he never does this, I'd like to see the real unprocessed pics, fake oversaturated... wow. I can't believe what I'm reading. Some of these comments remind me of threads on restoring steam; They'll never do it, why that engine, it looks dumb with the stripe.

I, for one, or for at least 60 and counting, really like this image. The amount of effort and skill that went into it is outstanding. Imagine setting up a bunch of flashes all syncronized to an impressive set up that likely combines the best of Canon and Nikon within a crowd of people late at night, in the dark, likely in freezing temperatures with perhaps a 5 second window to get it right.

If any of you are curious as to how Gary does this or has a suggestion they would like to forward you should contact Gary through RP. You'll find him to be one of kindest and friendliest of photographers you may ever meet. If ever I was to surround myself with a small group of photographers, I'd no doubt have Gary in that circle.

As for his photography - who here claims to have perfected their technique? There are not too many night photographers and Gary is a pioneer. His photos in my opinion are getting better through time. Better equipment and composition and most notably, night scenes that look more like night and less like Lumidyne night photography. The scenes appear to be darker then in the past with less overly flash filled lighting. Saturation is a bit high but to each his own. Some of us in the past have chosen Fuji vrs Kodak. Nearly all the magazines have increased saturation in publishing - I know, I've seen completely different pics from the same photolines. I will say, IMHO, however that some of the daytime pics are too saturated - for my own tastes.

As for this pic - many images appear more dynamic at night. In fact, take just about any pic and surround it with a black border. Why do you think so many photos are framed with black mats? Add to the fact that the only way to capture a moving train at night is with the use of flashes - no floodlight painting possible here. Ever shine a flashlight into the rain or snow or see sun beams light up particals of dust that were not visible elsewhere? The rail under the plow looks odd - it appears to be snow being blown off the rail.

As for the car and the blue coat kid - well, let me use an analogy for that. Let's say you have two cakes - Gary's cake has a border decoration that the box brushed up against. I have pictures where there is slight blur or the train is positioned a bit wrong - wrong track, too much foreground - that'd be a cake that is too sweet or too dry. In other words, the "flaws" mentioned do not effect the entire product.

I'm not saying we should have or express opinions. I'm glad we can and do. But remember, it's not Gary's images that are lacking, rather some preferences in styles and techniques that differ. Just as Andy Muller can't appreciate a blue Pacific and UP can reincarnate Katy.

Considering the fact that Gary is likely among the top 3 in PC's, I'd say his results speak for themselves!

/Mitch

[travsirocz]

Originally Posted by Mgoldman

He should do this, he never does this, I'd like to see the real unprocessed pics, fake oversaturated... wow. I can't believe what I'm reading. Some of these comments remind me of threads on restoring steam; They'll never do it, why that engine, it looks dumb with the stripe.

I, for one, or for at least 60 and counting, really like this image. The amount of effort and skill that went into it is outstanding. Imagine setting up a bunch of flashes all syncronized to an impressive set up that likely combines the best of Canon and Nikon within a crowd of people late at night, in the dark, likely in freezing temperatures with perhaps a 5 second window to get it right.

If any of you are curious as to how Gary does this or has a suggestion they would like to forward you should contact Gary through RP. You'll find him to be one of kindest and friendliest of photographers you may ever meet. If ever I was to surround myself with a small group of photographers, I'd no doubt have Gary in that circle.

As for his photography - who here claims to have perfected their technique? There are not too many night photographers and Gary is a pioneer. His photos in my opinion are getting better through time. Better equipment and composition and most notably, night scenes that look more like night and less like Lumidyne night photography. The scenes appear to be darker then in the past with less overly flash filled lighting. Saturation is a bit high but to each his own. Some of us in the past have chosen Fuji vrs Kodak. Nearly all the magazines have increased saturation in publishing - I know, I've seen completely different pics from the same photolines. I will say, IMHO, however that some of the daytime pics are too saturated - for my own tastes.

As for this pic - many images appear more dynamic at night. In fact, take just about any pic and surround it with a black border. Why do you think so many photos are framed with black mats? Add to the fact that the only way to capture a moving train at night is with the use of flashes - no floodlight painting possible here. Ever shine a flashlight into the rain or snow or see sun beams light up particals of dust that were not visible elsewhere? The rail under the plow looks odd - it appears to be snow being blown off the rail.

As for the car and the blue coat kid - well, let me use an analogy for that. Let's say you have two cakes - Gary's cake has a border decoration that the box brushed up against. I have pictures where there is slight blur or the train is positioned a bit wrong - wrong track, too much foreground - that'd be a cake that is too sweet or too dry. In other words, the "flaws" mentioned do not effect the entire product.

I'm not saying we should have or express opinions. I'm glad we can and do. But remember, it's not Gary's images that are lacking, rather some preferences in styles and techniques that differ. Just as Andy Muller can't appreciate a blue Pacific and UP can reincarnate Katy.

Considering the fact that Gary is likely among the top 3 in PC's, I'd say his results speak for themselves!

/Mitch

I really like most of his work and think this shot would have been amazing. The train looks like it was pasted into the shot. I'm not saying it was but the whole image besides the train looks the same, real, and a little to much highlight tool look which is ok. The train looks like a clay model and doesn't match the rest of the photo. If the whole photo was processed the same way this would be on my PCA list even though it wouldn't need my help to get one anyways.

[travsirocz]

I have talked to him also and he is a great guy that was willing to answer all of my questions.

[Mgoldman]

Originally Posted by travsirocz

The train looks like it was pasted into the shot. I'm not saying it was but the whole image besides the train looks the same, real, and a little to much highlight tool look which is ok. The train looks like a clay model and doesn't match the rest of the photo.

The train is the only subject in the entire image that is not only a shade other then white, but happens to be painted in a coat of high gloss red.
It's pretty hard to reduce the gloss and highlights without having the image turn pastel like. I think.

Perhaps this was the more pleasing of variations possible.

/Mitch

[travsirocz]

Originally Posted by Mgoldman

The train is the only subject in the entire image that is not only a shade other then white, but happens to be painted in a coat of high gloss red.
It's pretty hard to reduce the gloss and highlights without having the image turn pastel like. I think.

Perhaps this was the more pleasing of variations possible.

/Mitch

This one looks fine besides the saturation. Shouldn't they both look similiar? Same train close to same lighting.

PhotoID: 261606 Photograph © Gary Knapp