Old 10-26-2005, 03:27 AM   #1
socalrailfan
Master Railfan
 
socalrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 714
Default Question about photo manipulation

I came across this photo in the gallery tonight, to me it's obviously been PS manipulated. Don't get me wrong I totally dig the photo, but I thought this was against the guidelines.


http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=123209
__________________
Thanks,
Dave
www.SoCalRailFan.com
See more of my train photos at:
http://community.webshots.com/user/firehouse16
See my train videos at:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=SoCalRailFan
socalrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2005, 03:32 AM   #2
bnsf sammy
Senior Member
 
bnsf sammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 638
Default

It just has some really intense lighting on the black paint that makes it look really glossy and shiny with a refeltion..., the smoke looks real.
__________________
BNSF SAMMY
Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!
bnsf sammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2005, 03:34 AM   #3
socalrailfan
Master Railfan
 
socalrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 714
Default

Everything looks real to me, it just looks photoshopped, maybe not, maybe so, still a nice shot!
__________________
Thanks,
Dave
www.SoCalRailFan.com
See more of my train photos at:
http://community.webshots.com/user/firehouse16
See my train videos at:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=SoCalRailFan
socalrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2005, 03:38 AM   #4
socalrailfan
Master Railfan
 
socalrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 714
Default

After looking at this again I believe this photo was actually taken at Area 51 in Nevada and not Tenn! It's either government manipulation or aliens!
__________________
Thanks,
Dave
www.SoCalRailFan.com
See more of my train photos at:
http://community.webshots.com/user/firehouse16
See my train videos at:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=SoCalRailFan
socalrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 02:15 AM   #5
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,899
Default

It's obviously a lit shot which probably adds to th effect. Then he may have upped the saturation and contrast, but other than that, I don't think it's shopped at al. Also, take a look at his other shots. They're all colorful, but not overly so.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 04:20 AM   #6
Pat Lorenz
Senior Member
 
Pat Lorenz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 326
Default

I would say its not PS'ed. It looks like it is just a very harsh flash relecting off the brand new paint.
Pat Lorenz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 04:54 AM   #7
Wyn
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 62
Default

I can't tell by looking at them, but there are photos posted that are manipulated. Some comments read here, then the picture gets accepted on appeal, "rotate it a degree or so (CW or CCW)", "lighten it up a bit", "darken it up some", "crop out those (pick one, trees, bushes, cars, power lines, buildings)", "it might look better if you make it a black and white".

I'm not a photographer, but it sounds to me like all those are some kind of manipulations and the photos get accepted.
Wyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 01:17 PM   #8
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,899
Default

Wyn;

Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their shots straight out of the camera -- whether we're talking film or digital -- and post straight to th web without doing ANY post processing? You almost have to sharpen a digital image at least once to get it looking right. But what about resizing? My camera shoots at 3072x1024. RP asks for 1024x768 (or 800x600). Is resizing all right with you?

Adding color, lightening the shot or adjusting the contrast is something that people have been doing for years. That's not "manipulating" a photograph. That's post processing.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 03:15 PM   #9
ericb
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 52
Default

Isn't there some way to address this issue without holding one person up as an example in a public forum?
ericb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 03:19 PM   #10
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
I'm not a photographer, but it sounds to me like all those are some kind of manipulations and the photos get accepted.
Yeah, if you're just taking shots straight out of your camera, you are shorting yourself and not getting the most out of the image.

This has been posted before, but...

Straight from the camera/No post-processing (except for resizing to 1024):

http://paulhamus.rrpicturearchives.n...aspx?id=173147

Post-processed:

http://paulhamus.rrpicturearchives.n...aspx?id=173148
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 11:34 PM   #11
Frederick
Senior Member
 
Frederick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Hastings, Minnesota
Posts: 594
Default

It doesn't matter if they do post processing, unless you photoshopped the image to depict something that didn't happen in real life.
__________________
Railpics Photos

Flickr Account
Frederick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 02:28 AM   #12
Slopes09
Senior Member
 
Slopes09's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here.
Posts: 837
Send a message via AIM to Slopes09
Default

Even professional photographers crop, resize, burn, dodge, etc. in the darkroom. The only difference here is that since the images are digital, digital techniques are being used.
Slopes09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 03:12 AM   #13
Pat Lorenz
Senior Member
 
Pat Lorenz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 326
Default

I think this thread is going off topic, and i hate to see where it might end up. It was just a simple question of whether or not it looks abstractly Photo Shopped. I dont think the intent was to badger or critisize the photographer, it was just curiosity worth mentioning.
Pat Lorenz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 05:07 AM   #14
brunswickrailfan
Senior Member
 
brunswickrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Jefferson, MD/Shippensburg, PA
Posts: 208
Send a message via AIM to brunswickrailfan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Lorenz
whether or not it looks abstractly Photo Shopped.
Not overly...but IMO, too much contrast.
__________________
--Dan
KB3LDB
Web Photo Editor, SU Slate
http://dputz.deviantart.com
http://members.trainorders.com/dputz/v2
brunswickrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 05:13 AM   #15
Wyn
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
Wyn;

Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their shots straight out of the camera -- whether we're talking film or digital -- and post straight to th web without doing ANY post processing? You almost have to sharpen a digital image at least once to get it looking right. But what about resizing? My camera shoots at 3072x1024. RP asks for 1024x768 (or 800x600). Is resizing all right with you?

Adding color, lightening the shot or adjusting the contrast is something that people have been doing for years. That's not "manipulating" a photograph. That's post processing.


Joe

The question asked about PS'ing an image. I don't care what you call it, but if you do something (rotate, darken, lighten, crop etc.) with Photoshop to an image that's PS'ing an image. I don't care if it's done or not, or what it's called, but it is some form of manipulation and those photos get posted. Like you said, they do not come right out of the camera that way, they are manipulated in Photoshop or some other program to get posted.

From what you're now saying, it sounds like all the photos that get published here are manipulated (post processed) in some form.

Like I said in my first post, I'm not a photographer, so I don't know what kind of manipulations are used to get photos to look good. In all honesty, I really did think they came out of the camera that way and the better pictures were products of better equipment and individual skills, not manipulations after the fact.
Wyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 05:27 AM   #16
Pat Lorenz
Senior Member
 
Pat Lorenz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wyn
In all honesty, I really did think they came out of the camera that way and the better pictures were products of better equipment and individual skills, not manipulations after the fact.
One thing i will give to digital photography is the abilities, when uploading pictures on a computer, to not lose image quality. What i mean by this is when images have to be scanned in and then uploaded and what not, they lose quality and color or get shifted in someways. This adds the need to in a sense, restore the photo back to the way it looked before all the uploading and scanning. So yes, many shots are manipulated in some way or another. Mainly for the purposes of getting the image back to the way it looked with out the computer.

I am going to talk about something i really am unfarmiliar about, but please correct me. I belive that people shooting Digital do not have the problem of color shifts when uploading, because it is already a digitized image.

I dont know if i am making any sense here! Its a bit late.
Pat Lorenz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 02:12 PM   #17
brunswickrailfan
Senior Member
 
brunswickrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Jefferson, MD/Shippensburg, PA
Posts: 208
Send a message via AIM to brunswickrailfan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyn
In all honesty, I really did think they came out of the camera that way and the better pictures were products of better equipment and individual skills, not manipulations after the fact.
???

Rarely, even a Kodachrome slide can be publiched without some form of manipulation. "Photoshopped" is a term usually reserved for photos that have drastic changes.

Edited, to be presentable...
Image © Daniel Putz
PhotoID: 123345
Photograph © Daniel Putz





And the original, unprocessed.



I only sharpened because as the image is resized from 6.3mp to 1mp, it loses sharpness (happens to all digial images). I also re-set the white-balance to what it actually looked like when I took the pic...

These aren't considered "photoshops" as nothing was taken out or added to, physically, the images.
__________________
--Dan
KB3LDB
Web Photo Editor, SU Slate
http://dputz.deviantart.com
http://members.trainorders.com/dputz/v2

Last edited by brunswickrailfan; 10-28-2005 at 02:16 PM.
brunswickrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 02:25 PM   #18
Wyn
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 62
Default

OK, good, I'm learning something here. I have Photoshop, know hardly anything about it. How does one go about sharpening an image with it?
Wyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 02:54 PM   #19
brunswickrailfan
Senior Member
 
brunswickrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Jefferson, MD/Shippensburg, PA
Posts: 208
Send a message via AIM to brunswickrailfan
Default

Filters > Sharpen > Unsharp Mask

50%

1 pixel radius (I do two applications)
__________________
--Dan
KB3LDB
Web Photo Editor, SU Slate
http://dputz.deviantart.com
http://members.trainorders.com/dputz/v2
brunswickrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 06:07 PM   #20
Wyn
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brunswickrailfan
Filters > Sharpen > Unsharp Mask

50%

1 pixel radius (I do two applications)
Wow!! What a difference! Thank you. All this time I thought you guys a million dollar cameras.

Thanks again!
Wyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 06:14 PM   #21
LAHDPOP
Senior Member
 
LAHDPOP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 299
Default

Look for Ween's thread on post-production of images. VERY useful tips for those that have the program. I don't, so I do a poor man's post processing. One day, I'll have PS.
__________________
Bret Stringer

I didn't say it was your fault.... I said I was going to blame you.

Click Here to see my rp.net photos.

Click Here to see my "personal collection"
LAHDPOP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 08:46 PM   #22
ericb
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Lorenz

I am going to talk about something i really am unfarmiliar about, but please correct me. I belive that people shooting Digital do not have the problem of color shifts when uploading, because it is already a digitized image.

I dont know if i am making any sense here! Its a bit late.
With digital you need to pay close attention to what format you're saving them as on your computer. A JPEG image will degrade every time you save it even if you save it at the highest setting. Compression artifacts will begin to appear and color data will be lost. If your digital camera only produces JPEGs then they should be converted to TIFF format with an image editing program before any further editing and saving is done.
__________________
"http://ex-railfan.blogspot.com "
ericb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2005, 03:59 AM   #23
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Look for Ween's thread on post-production of images.
Wyn, here they are:

http://www.railpictures.net/forums/s...ead.php?t=1699

http://www.railpictures.net/forums/s...ead.php?t=2436

This isn't the end-all, be-all to post-processing, but it's a start to get you in the programs and see what they can do and help you find the techniques that get you headed toward the results you're looking for.
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2005, 05:03 AM   #24
Wyn
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
Wyn, here they are:

http://www.railpictures.net/forums/s...ead.php?t=1699

http://www.railpictures.net/forums/s...ead.php?t=2436

This isn't the end-all, be-all to post-processing, but it's a start to get you in the programs and see what they can do and help you find the techniques that get you headed toward the results you're looking for.
Ween - super deal, thank you. They look to be a great help!! Maybe now I'll go from 0 for 9 to 1 for 10!!

Thanks again.
Wyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 07:03 PM   #25
trainmonster
Senior Member
 
trainmonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brunswickrailfan
Filters > Sharpen > Unsharp Mask

50%

1 pixel radius (I do two applications)
What do you set the threshold slider at?

Rich
__________________
"Truck trailers belong on flatcars"
trainmonster 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 06:49 PM.


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