Old 12-05-2008, 02:38 AM   #76
WKUrailfan
Senior Member
 
WKUrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ryan
I admire Knapp's technical proficiency with the lighting setup, but I think the post-processing has a long way to go.
I admire Knapp's proficiency as well. But with enough 580EX's and Pocket Wizards I think you would be suprised how easy it is to make night shots like his.
WKUrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 02:41 AM   #77
M.L.Gabert
Senior Member
 
M.L.Gabert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: State of Confusion
Posts: 121
Default

Maybe it's just me but, if the snow where falling as hard as it's in the headlight's, wouldn't there be snow or remnants of on there beanies and shoulder's after waiting for this train?
M.L.Gabert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 02:46 AM   #78
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WKUrailfan
I admire Knapp's proficiency as well. But with enough 580EX's and Pocket Wizards I think you would be suprised how easy it is to make night shots like his.

It is not as hard as people might think. It just takes some practice and $$$, as with everything. I am quite suprised that nobody else has tried to take a jab at it on RP besides the maybe 4 or 5 other photographers who have a few night shots like Garys.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 02:49 AM   #79
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M.L.Gabert
Maybe it's just me but, if the snow where falling as hard as it's in the headlight's, wouldn't there be snow or remnants of on there beanies and shoulder's after waiting for this train?
I am sure the people have a few snow flakes on them but they would be hard to pick up in a photo. I am not sure how much you have been around snow but it usually melts a few seconds upon contact with jackets, ec.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 02:53 AM   #80
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter S
I am sure the people have a few snow flakes on them but they would be hard to pick up in a photo. I am not sure how much you have been around snow but it usually melts a few seconds upon contact with jackets, ec.
Not when it is snowing like it is in the head lights.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 02:57 AM   #81
M.L.Gabert
Senior Member
 
M.L.Gabert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: State of Confusion
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter S
I am not sure how much you have been around snow but it usually melts a few seconds upon contact with jackets, ec.
I live in the Pacific Northwest, we occasionally see snow.
M.L.Gabert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 03:00 AM   #82
Kelly Lynch
Member
 
Kelly Lynch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 30
Default

Has anyone given any consideration to the concentration of foreground objects (snow flakes) versus concentration of midground or background objects?

The snowflakes nearest the lens are fewer and further between, and also out of focus. The further back you get, the more concentrated they are. This thicker concentration is highlighted by the headlight of the locomotive.

Gee, kinda like real life, I'd say. If I stand in the rain, the rain drops closest to me will appear to be be spread out and not as dense as say, the raindrops twenty feet away.

Oh, but for fun:



I couldn't help abusing a classic.
__________________
"I'm a businessman. I deal in images."

essential film & media production services
www.lynchpinpictures.com

Last edited by Kelly Lynch; 12-05-2008 at 03:03 AM. Reason: For fun.
Kelly Lynch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 05:10 AM   #83
Chris Kilroy
Administrator
 
Chris Kilroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 934
Send a message via ICQ to Chris Kilroy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rustyrail
Yep, maybe not, but people might think these links are interesting:

http://www.websiteoutlook.com/www.railpictures.net
http://www.websiteoutlook.com/www.jetphotos.net
Interesting, indeed (and totally wrong).

13,363 daily page views? Try 209,290 yesterday from 52,083 unique visitors.

Considering the monthly server costs for this site alone run close to $2,000 a month, it's a good thing that their "Daily Ads Revenue" tracker is off, too. I'm not going to get into specific figures, but as I've said so many times before, if RP.net (or any of my other sites, for that matter) was making as much money as a lot of people think, I certainly wouldn't wake up at 6:30 every morning to go to my regular job, working for someone else.

This site was never started to make money. It was started because everyone involved with the staff is a die hard enthusiast, and we all felt in late 2002 that we had the possibility of creating something special, and lacking on the internet at that time: a quality controlled railroad photo database. I can't speak for the others, but I can say without reservation that I take a huge amoung of pride in what RP.net has become. I also owe a huge debt of gratitude to all of you who've contributed to making RP.net into what it is today.

That being said, I put anywhere from 30 to 50 hours a week into the site, depending on the work load, what needs programming, etc., and if it happens to create a little play money on the side, which it sometimes definitely does, I'm not going to apologize to anyone for it. I don't expect that many of us here would last too long spending that kind of time on something for over 6 years, 7 days a week, 365 days a year (we had over 500 uploads on Thanksgiving day this year), dragging the laptop on any trip or vacation to stay connected, etc. etc. if there weren't fringe benefits here and there.

In the end, though, if you feel that we're somehow "profiteering" from your work, by all means, don't submit it to us! Believe me, we have plenty of photos to screen as it is. Almost more than we can handle, at times. As was said 10+ times in the previous 4 pages, nobody's forcing you to recognize RP.net's existence, let alone contribute your work.
__________________
Chris Kilroy
Editor, RailPictures.Net
- View My Photos at RailPictures.Net!
- View My Photos at JetPhotos.Net!
Chris Kilroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 09:29 AM   #84
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Hello Gary Knapp(2).
Image © Travis Dewitz
PhotoID: 262451
Photograph © Travis Dewitz
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 12:14 PM   #85
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
Hello Gary Knapp(2).
Funny one!
__________________
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 12-05-2008, 12:42 PM   #86
RicHamilton
Senior Member
 
RicHamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
Hello Gary Knapp(2).
I had the same thought when I saw that.
__________________
Ric Hamilton
Berwick, NS
http://home.xcountry.tv/~r.hamilton
RicHamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 12:59 PM   #87
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
Hello Gary Knapp(2).
Image © Travis Dewitz
PhotoID: 262451
Photograph © Travis Dewitz
Not even close. This taken in the middle of the day. Also, not much processing. Here the original raw converted to jpeg.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	raw.jpg
Views:	134
Size:	349.1 KB
ID:	3561  
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 01:10 PM   #88
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
Not even close. This taken in the middle of the day. Also, not much processing. Here the original raw converted to jpeg.
You've missed the point and you have thoughtfully provided your own noose to hang yourself by providing the original image (thanks!).

The issue isn't night/day, it is the extent of processing. In processing the image you have made the train look unrealistically bright - it looks like an overdone HDR job.

Perhaps the relevant comparison isn't Knapp, but someone else. At any rate, it looks overdone to me.
__________________
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 12-05-2008, 01:37 PM   #89
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
Not even close. This taken in the middle of the day. Also, not much processing. Here the original raw converted to jpeg.
OH MY GOD!

Good thing RP's like MLB and has a lenient steriods policy. Man, that shot's more juiced than Jose Canseco it a hot tub of human growth hormone...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 01:50 PM   #90
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
You've missed the point and you have thoughtfully provided your own noose to hang yourself by providing the original image (thanks!).

The issue isn't night/day, it is the extent of processing.
That was me trying to be humorous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
You've missed the point and you have thoughtfully provided your own noose to hang yourself by providing the original image (thanks!).
To be fair to my belief, if I am called out, I have no problem showing what I started with and maybe make changes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC

In processing the image you have made the train look unrealistically bright - it looks like an overdone HDR job.
The train is bright? I thought I was going to get it for image to dark. The only issue I thought I would have with my forum peers would be the cloud detail.

I did bring the cloud detail out, but almost entirely with color adjustments and not highlight tool and then lowered the contrast when I was done.

Just to bring you there, this was the very back and side edge of the storm so sunlight was able to shine in some from two sides as the rest of the sky was black. Because of this, more cloud detail can be seen.

The photo was underexposed so the small bright area in back between the ground and sky wasn't blown out.

5 minuetes to process, no HDR techniques were used, all done on single raw file.

Anyone else think the train is bright?

Last edited by travsirocz; 12-05-2008 at 01:53 PM.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 02:06 PM   #91
J Douglas Moore
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: "It's a dry heat" Arizona
Posts: 724
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween
OH MY GOD!

Good thing RP's like MLB and has a lenient steriods policy. Man, that shot's more juiced than Jose Canseco it a hot tub of human growth hormone...
MAN......... It IS juiced.... 5924 is really a green patched BN and he made it orange....wow
__________________

"Thanks for looking"

It is a proven fact that birthdays are good for you. The people with the most always live longer!
J Douglas Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 05:10 PM   #92
rustyrail
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 40
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kilroy
my regular job, working for someone else
I have to admit, those models are pretty sweet. I wouldn't want to quit my day job if I was a talented modeler that produced work like that!
rustyrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 05:28 PM   #93
Cinderpath
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ferndale, MI (Detroit area)
Posts: 98
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
Not even close. This taken in the middle of the day. Also, not much processing. Here the original raw converted to jpeg.
I don't have so much of a problem with the highlight/shadow detail as I do with too much saturation, and this is in no way pointed at you specifically, as this is the case with many photos. When the clouds in the sky go from grey (which it is) to a touch of blue, or with some other photographers, extreme blue, on an overcast day, and headlights go from off-white to orange, it is usually a dead give away that a global saturation adjustment has been made. This is very often the case with night photos- headlights, and ditchlights appear in reality more white than orange at night. This is the case with many night shots, and my critical eye picks this off first. As well notice how new CSX Maize yellow (which does have an orange component in it), goes to almost completely orange, stripes on pavement go from yellow to orange?

As mentioned previously in this thread, I do this professionally as well for such magazines as Locomotive, and have learned a few things, and am still learning a lot. When I do post processing, generally I use other tools and plug-ins for saturation, and generally stay away from the PS saturation slider, or prefer to only use it for selections in photos, and not the whole image; it is a blunt object, like a hammer, kind of like mid-tone slider on levels adjustments, when in reality curves are better tools. If I do use it for a global adjustment, The absolute max I set it at is 15%, and this would be an extreme case, and usually 8-10% does the trick. For night photography this is even more tricky- it can make street lights look way too orange, or too green, (or more importantly get the white balance corrected properly) and they should therefore be masked out. I have seen some photos posted on here that were shot during twilight, when the sky is anyway quite blue, and then it is turned cobalt-radioactive blue, again because of a global saturation adjustment. A little goes, along, long, way.


I think this image that you posted (Which I like a lot BTW) would look more natural with globally less orange, and blue saturation; again a little goes a long way. Don't forget the rule as well that saturation comes at the expense of shadow detail, and tonality and increases contrast. If you re-process, and use less saturation, you'll also won't need to use as much increase in shadows on the shadow/highlights, and gain tonality and contrast in the process. As we know, too much shadow detail comes at the expense of contrast, (and thus looks flat). For the sky, simply select or reverse mask it, and actually slight adjustment of the sky levels only, will bring out the contrast, but keep the correct color balance. The whole thing is truly a balancing act to create a vibrant color image, that retains its natural (how the eye would see it) look. Nature photographer Galen Rowell was an absolute master at this balancing act, and is often referred to as the "Ansel Adams of color photography". My only regret is that he passed away too soon, and did not make it too much into digital imaging.


I don't even want to get into the nuances of RGB to CMYK conversion for offset printing- that has a whole other set of problems to go with it. (long)

And btw- you'd be shocked how some of my own RAW files look compared to the final product. A good Raw file is flat, lacks contrast, but has the correct exposure data. As Ansel Adams said: The negative, (in our case a RAW file) is the sheet music, the print (in our case web-image) is the concert performance.

-Hope some of this helps.
Cheers. M. Ross Valentine

Last edited by Cinderpath; 12-05-2008 at 05:45 PM.
Cinderpath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 06:56 PM   #94
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinderpath
I don't have so much of a problem with the highlight/shadow detail as I do with too much saturation, and this is in no way pointed at you specifically, as this is the case with many photos. When the clouds in the sky go from grey (which it is) to a touch of blue, or with some other photographers, extreme blue, on an overcast day, and headlights go from off-white to orange, it is usually a dead give away that a global saturation adjustment has been made. This is very often the case with night photos- headlights, and ditchlights appear in reality more white than orange at night. This is the case with many night shots, and my critical eye picks this off first. As well notice how new CSX Maize yellow (which does have an orange component in it), goes to almost completely orange, stripes on pavement go from yellow to orange?

As mentioned previously in this thread, I do this professionally as well for such magazines as Locomotive, and have learned a few things, and am still learning a lot. When I do post processing, generally I use other tools and plug-ins for saturation, and generally stay away from the PS saturation slider, or prefer to only use it for selections in photos, and not the whole image; it is a blunt object, like a hammer, kind of like mid-tone slider on levels adjustments, when in reality curves are better tools. If I do use it for a global adjustment, The absolute max I set it at is 15%, and this would be an extreme case, and usually 8-10% does the trick. For night photography this is even more tricky- it can make street lights look way too orange, or too green, (or more importantly get the white balance corrected properly) and they should therefore be masked out. I have seen some photos posted on here that were shot during twilight, when the sky is anyway quite blue, and then it is turned cobalt-radioactive blue, again because of a global saturation adjustment. A little goes, along, long, way.


I think this image that you posted (Which I like a lot BTW) would look more natural with globally less orange, and blue saturation; again a little goes a long way. Don't forget the rule as well that saturation comes at the expense of shadow detail, and tonality and increases contrast. If you re-process, and use less saturation, you'll also won't need to use as much increase in shadows on the shadow/highlights, and gain tonality and contrast in the process. As we know, too much shadow detail comes at the expense of contrast, (and thus looks flat). For the sky, simply select or reverse mask it, and actually slight adjustment of the sky levels only, will bring out the contrast, but keep the correct color balance. The whole thing is truly a balancing act to create a vibrant color image, that retains its natural (how the eye would see it) look. Nature photographer Galen Rowell was an absolute master at this balancing act, and is often referred to as the "Ansel Adams of color photography". My only regret is that he passed away too soon, and did not make it too much into digital imaging.


I don't even want to get into the nuances of RGB to CMYK conversion for offset printing- that has a whole other set of problems to go with it. (long)

And btw- you'd be shocked how some of my own RAW files look compared to the final product. A good Raw file is flat, lacks contrast, but has the correct exposure data. As Ansel Adams said: The negative, (in our case a RAW file) is the sheet music, the print (in our case web-image) is the concert performance.

-Hope some of this helps.
Cheers. M. Ross Valentine
I will recheck at home but I may have to drop the saturation. One issue I have is I always have to add extra saturation because I lose it upon uploading and the amount varies. I usually have to upload photos 2-4 times to get it right. My color profiles should be correct I think it has to do with the Raw conversion. Thanks for the advice.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 08:51 PM   #95
Cinderpath
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ferndale, MI (Detroit area)
Posts: 98
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
I will recheck at home but I may have to drop the saturation. One issue I have is I always have to add extra saturation because I lose it upon uploading and the amount varies. I usually have to upload photos 2-4 times to get it right. My color profiles should be correct I think it has to do with the Raw conversion. Thanks for the advice.
-I understand this problem 100% about the upload- not only can it change saturation levels, also overall brightness. I use the Adobe 1998 color space and my monitor is calibrated, but I don't know what happens to the photo profiles once they go on RP.net. I am glad you bring this up, perhaps someone from the site help enlighten us. If we knew what the profile is, we could simply use that instead and then adjust so the photos are exactly what will be when uploaded.
Cinderpath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 09:39 PM   #96
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
Not even close. This taken in the middle of the day. Also, not much processing. Here the original raw converted to jpeg.
Not much processing?!? Show us a shot that has a lot of processing and the original.

I think you're more interested in shots being eye catching rather than being an accurate representation of the scene. That kind of mentality is not what railroad photography is about.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 09:44 PM   #97
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
That kind of mentality is not what railroad photography is about.
Railroad photography is about what the photographer wants it to be about.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 09:49 PM   #98
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

[quote=Mike B.]Not much processing?!? Show us a shot that has a lot of processing and the original.

QUOTE]

I sharpened, noise reduction, contrast, color balance, saturation. No dramatic changes, no spot processing, all done in less than 5 min. Some shots take much more than 5 minutes and need different work on different areas of the photo.
travsirocz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 10:13 PM   #99
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
Railroad photography is about what the photographer wants it to be about.
Does 2+2=5 if I want it to?

Quote:
Originally Posted by travsirocz
I sharpened, noise reduction, contrast, color balance, saturation. No dramatic changes, no spot processing, all done in less than 5 min. Some shots take much more than 5 minutes and need different work on different areas of the photo.
It doesn't matter how long it did or didn't take you to do it. The only thing that matters is the result.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 10:50 PM   #100
travsirocz
Senior Member
 
travsirocz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Eau Claire, WI
Posts: 2,459
Send a message via AIM to travsirocz
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.


It doesn't matter how long it did or didn't take you to do it. The only thing that matters is the result.
I was just explaining that to me this was not much processing for a poor weather shot. Sunny day shots that you prefer all I do is sharpen.

Last edited by travsirocz; 12-05-2008 at 10:59 PM.
travsirocz 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 02:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.