Trackside with Trains.com, Vol. 94

[jayjayeff60]

Thanks Tom. I was wondering (and fantasizing a little, I guess) if someone had bought a piece of land and set up housekeeping. Its a helluva spot.

Jim

 

[loadmaster747]

I'm not sure I would call that downsizing... 2 locomotives for only 8 cars?  Unless there are some really steep grades on that line, I would call it overkill!  Both shots were excellent... the side-hill location giving a downward shot, with a train, a river, and a mountainous backdrop earned Tom's photo a vote from this flatlander.  Nice job by both of you!   

[tdanneman]

jayjayeff60,

After a closer examination of the high resolution photo, I noticed that it's actually a grouping of three things. On the left (the largest object) is a set solar panels, and to the right of that is a signal bungalow. The signal is directly behind the bungalow.

Thanks everyone for the compliments on our photos. We really appreciate it!

Tom

[jayjayeff60]

I think I agree with most readers in that both shots are great. I gotta ask of Tom, though...is that a building of some sort on the flat on the same side of the river as the local? Just curious.

[espeefoamer]

As usual,two great photos. I voted for Tom's MRL shot.I have a weakness for trains running alongside rivers.It reminds me of my train watching days in the Columbia River Gorge.Also,the SD45 was a big plus as this is my favorite second generation diesel.

[CopCarSS]

OFF SUBJECT:

Chris in Denver:  Great Photo Library, especially the large format shots.  Museum quality!

Hi LU-Trains,

Thanks for the very kind words! I haven't had the large format gear out lately, but I need to get out soon and get some shots with it. Large format is a lot of fun because it really hasn't changed in the past 100 years. There's something really special about getting under a darkcloth and composing a shot on the ground glass. It's just me and the photo to be. It's a feeling that can't be equalled by any digital SLR.

Thanks again!

[LU-Trains]

OFF SUBJECT:

Chris in Denver:  Great Photo Library, especially the large format shots.  Museum quality!

[Partsman_ba]

Thanks, guys, for the compliments. I didn't have a tripod with me, so even though the train was only going 10 mph, with the telephoto I was using, I felt like I needed a fast shutter speed to ensure sharpness. I also felt the depth-of-field effect of blurring the foreground corn would be a good effect, though Trackside readers seem split on whether that's a positive thing or a negative one.

As far as the haze, the big factor here is the distance. The humidity had to be right around zero percent. If you look at the sky, you don't see the characteristic white that typified shots from the Midwest in summer that comes from haze and humidity. While I was out there, I was going through eye drops like crazy, and my lips were chapped all the time, kind of what it's like here in winter. But those mountains are probably 20 miles away, and the sheer distance involved led to the hazy, fading kind of look. Personally, I like that look; it reminds me of a sand painting, or some such thing.

Actually, Andy, I think I'm the only one who questioned your depth of field choice, but that's part of what makes your photo YOURS - the artistry you put into your shot through the technology of the camera. Monday morning (afternoon?) quarterbacks can say whatever we want. Your shot is pretty awesome, and I appreciate the effort that went into it!

But you're correct - SD45's snaking along a river are pretty cool!

[Andy Cummings]

Thanks, guys, for the compliments. I didn't have a tripod with me, so even though the train was only going 10 mph, with the telephoto I was using, I felt like I needed a fast shutter speed to ensure sharpness. I also felt the depth-of-field effect of blurring the foreground corn would be a good effect, though Trackside readers seem split on whether that's a positive thing or a negative one.

As far as the haze, the big factor here is the distance. The humidity had to be right around zero percent. If you look at the sky, you don't see the characteristic white that typified shots from the Midwest in summer that comes from haze and humidity. While I was out there, I was going through eye drops like crazy, and my lips were chapped all the time, kind of what it's like here in winter. But those mountains are probably 20 miles away, and the sheer distance involved led to the hazy, fading kind of look. Personally, I like that look; it reminds me of a sand painting, or some such thing.

But to be honest, I can't fault anyone here for voting the other way. The river really makes Tom's shot shine, and I'm a sucker for SD45s.

Andy Cummings
Associate Editor
TRAINS Magazine
Waukesha, Wis.

[gapotter09]

Having lived in Montana for a period of twenty plus years, I can not let a scene with a Big Sky, Mountains, a River, a Railroad, much less with a nice operating Local; go by without my vote.  If you take particular note, I capitalized the important things that MONTANA provides.  One can also put into this great state good fishing.

Thank you Tom for a great entry.

 

 

[jrhambone]

What a task to select one from two great shots!  My vote went to Tom because of the incredible detail in his photo.  "Trackside with Trains" has made my Monday evenings a lot more enjoyable.  Thanks for the interesting viewing.

[TOMinTN]

Another tough choice, but this time Andy gets my vote (he didn't last time)...mainly because his entry is slightly more colorful and interesting.

I, too, love the west, and both photos included parts of the country that I really enjoy.

I think it was Andy who wrote, "Did you know that an area North of Missoula has the largest population of nesting common loons in the western United States?"

I suppose it's only natural to speculate that the eastern equivalent of that Montana lair of loons lies within the DC "Beltway".

Thanks for two good solid contendors.

TJB

Nashville, TN

[LU-Trains]

These were two great shots and I was torn between them.  I loved the long shot across the cornfield, but gosh, what a scruffy looking train!  I voted for the Missouri River shot - I was born and raised along that Big Muddy and anyway, the train was a bit neater in this shot.

That's right folks, I'm ALL about vanity and clean looking trains!  Pitiful.  I know.

[acy1]

Once again, very hard to choose. Two excellent photos.

[asnjoe24]

Two Western America trips in one edition of Trackside - pretty awesome!!

Given that they are much closer to my area (and thus more relatable to me), Andy's photos from Utah caught my attention immediately. Tom's Montana photos also give a good look at railroading in the high mountain range of Montana, somewhere I've never been.

This week's vote was a quick one for me: I had to choose Andy's UP shot (sorry Tom). Both photos are wide shots, but I think Andy's gives more of a inviting painting-like landscape with the towering line of mountains in the background. To me, the cornfield in the foreground almost doesn't look like a cornfield at all, but rather like the kind of shot one would get if they placed their camera on a field of astro-turf or something similar. Tom's MRL shot also has great background scenery, but admittedly to me it doesn't feel as breathtaking as Andy's. This along with the fact that I'm more familiar with Utah and UP, led me to favor Andy's.

Personally, I thought Andy's first shot of the empty UP coal train was vote material, as well, since it had great altitude, a curve in the track, and a patched ex-SP engine and old Rio Grande coal hoppers (something you don't see everyday outside of that region). Great shot, Andy!

- Bryan

[Partsman_ba]

Point taken, CopCarSS - didn't think about 1/60 and motion blur (looks like a pretty slow local, though!) Maybe f11 to sharpen the foreground a little and reduce diffraction? To me, that fuzzy corn in the bottom foreground draws the eye away from the majesty of the rest of the shot - my 2 cents! Would a polarizer cut the haze?

Lastly, the colors seem kind of juiced - I haven't seen a UP loco that Armour Yellow in years!

In case you couldn't tell, I voted for Tom's shot as well for much the same reasons as you, not just because of the nostalgia factor. Composition is pretty much textbook!

[edalsie]

Tom, why didn't you submit the BNSF shot? -- a much higher angle, and it appears that you can see the train arcing off into the distance. It caught me the moment I saw it. The MRL is good though. This was a very hard decision, but I think I'm going with Andy this week. And thanks Andy for not shooting down a row of corn (assuming you had the angle to do it). The 'forest' of green lying before the bare and rugged background of those mountains won it for me. Except, Tom's was so good as well (even if it wasn't the BNSF one) . . . nope. Andy gets it.

[LVJJJ]

This one is close and kinda fun flipping between the two photos.  After several flips, I chose Andy's.  Liked the green corn, yellow engines and big ol' mountain in the background.

[Phil-jmw]

This weeks vote was so close to being a dead heat that I had to flick back and forth between the two pics but Toms MRL shot by the Missouri River just clinched it. In two weeks time I'm heading over to Montana all the way from the UK and I'm sure looking forward to getting some similar 'big sky' shots of both the MRL and the BNSF hi-line over Marias Pass, shots I was prevented from getting when I visited the Pacific North West in late January when the heavy snowfalls blocked I-90 for 4 days at Snoqualmie, hampering my journey out of and back to Seattle.

[CopCarSS]

I felt the opposite about Andy's depth-of-field. f22 with a lower shutter speed would have kept that corn in focus as well and improved the shot to me.

f22 would have killed the shot, for a couple of reasons:

1. The shot was taken at 1/1000 at f5.6. At f22, the shutter speed would have had to be lowered to 1/60. It's been my experience that unless the train is moving exceptionally slow, keeping the shutter speed north of 1/500 is absolutely necessary for shots featuring lateral motion. 1/60 would definately have led to motion blur. I guess the ISO could have been bumped up, but that would have led to decreased image quality. Additionally, at 1/60, one could pan with the train, but then what's the point of trying to get enough depth of field to render the foreground in focus?
2. Image quality would have been affected at f22, even if the train was standing still. By f22, diffraction is starting to really soften up the picture, especially on a cropped sensor body like the D70. I don't think having that much depth of field would have been worth the loss of overall image quality.

Personally, I think f22 would have been overkill even if it had been technically easy to do. It's obvious what's in the foreground, so absolute definition isn't necessary. On the contrary, the blurred foreground actually leads the viewer's eye into the shot. The sharp train and mountain backdrop jump out of the shot because of that. Just my .

P.S. I voted for Tom's shot. While I like Andy's shot, I think the composition of Tom's shot works more effectively to draw the viewer through the shot and force him/her to contemplate the whole image. It was definately a good week for Trackside, though.

[mandelswamp]

Andy's photo is very nice but when I saw Tom's empty BNSF shot I was even more impressed.  Since Tom's Montal Rail Link photo uses the same locale, I voted for Tom.  I agree that the green corn in the foreground of Andy's photo and the mountains backing the train in Andy's picture makes for a great picture but the mountains seem to be covered in a haze the made it just a little less appealing then Tom's pictures.  I've been swtiching back and forth between Tom's two pictures at the Missouri River at Trident, Montana and I think I like the slightly darker (perhaps more overcast) one with the empty BNSF coal train over the brighter MRL 640 photo.  In both, I think the contrast of the darker blue of the river against the lighter blue of the sky and the tans & whites of the mountains plus the sprinkling of green plant growth plus the bonus of the train makes it more impressive than Andy's very fine picture.

[Rocket Man]

Both nice photos. Tom's river shot gets my vote. I sympathize with Andy's shot however. I recently tried shooting what I hoped to be awesome shots of the San Luis Central with the Sangre de Cristo mountains in the background, but the haze just killed the definition in the mountains that I was hoping for. I also want to mention how much I like Tom's Clark Fork River photo... very railroady, nice workin' exhaust plume, the bridge, the depth of layers created by the low hanging clouds, highlights of sun on the mountains. Very nice. Was hoping to see a 1.4 elk, but I guess they are pretty elusive.

[Partsman_ba]

I like Andy's extreme foreground corn being slightly out of focus while the far distant mountains are sharp and hazy at the same time.

Tom's image is nice, and I liked it alot, but the colors seem a bit washed-out.

I felt the opposite about Andy's depth-of-field. f22 with a lower shutter speed would have kept that corn in focus as well and improved the shot to me.

Zardoz, those colors aren't washed out, that's just what the Mountain West looks like except for a few weeks in the spring - brown and dry! As a kid raised in Eastern Oregon, that picture really resonated for me.

[wcfan4ever]

I am going to have to go ahead and vote for Andy's shot of the UP with 8 cars.  I look at this and say to myself that with gas prices being so high, somebody has to draw the line somewhere and the UP looks like they did.  They have just downsized thier loads so they can save on gas. 

 Otherwise, both shots were about equal, niether shot has one certain 'Eye Catcher' than the other.  They are different from getting the Wisconsin Shots however.

[CShaveRR]

Both are absolutely great shots guys.

I'm with Chad--I'm sure it would be hard for a Judge of Great Photography to choose one of these photos over the other.

But I'm not a JGP--so I picked Tom's, just because it had a river visible in it, and I like MRL blue.

[chad thomas]

Both are absolutely great shots guys.

[zardoz]

I like Andy's extreme foreground corn being slightly out of focus while the far distant mountains are sharp and hazy at the same time.  I also liked how the profile of the UP train more-or-less follows the profile of the mountains--a very interesting touch (IMHO).

Tom's image is nice, and I liked it alot, but the colors seem a bit washed-out.

Voted for Andy.

[Modelcar]

....I debated with myself whether to call it a draw....I thought they were rather close in qualifying for a rail scene and quality....But decided to vote for Andy's photo just for a reason...{small}, that his photo shows depth perception in his composition.

[Bergie]

This week, Andy Cummings from Trains magazine is joined by Trains art director Tom Danneman. Read as they share 11 photos from trips to Utah and Montana. 

Read Trackside with Trains.com Volume 94

Click here to vote then add your comments about this week's photos here.

Erik