I often look at these and think that I could take some pics on my layout and send them in and see what happens. I already have the picture in my mind. The only thing I need to do is get some weathering done on a pair of my BNSF Heritage II SD70Macs and 4 or 5 BNSF Trinity 5161 hoppers w/BNSF swoosh logo. I know the scene on my layout would make the cut but all my locos and rolling stock are brand new with no weathering or details added so I'm not sure about that part. I will be beginning to weather all my equipment when the layout is 100% in running order. Right now my layout is only about 25% scenicked and about 75% operational so it will be a while yet , unless I get the weathering bug and go for it.
Have any of you guys ever sent in photos to try to get in Trackside Photos? If so did they make it in the magazine?
N Scale Diesels......I like 'em
Yes, a number of times over the course of the past 15 years, with the submitted images being published variously in Trackside Photos, Along The Line and the Annual Photo Contest features.
CNJ831
From the captions accompanying the photos that are printed, it seems that both the modeling and the photography have to be up to a certain minimum level for serious consideration.
Most of us probably don't have good enough technique, or good enough equipment to fulfill the photography requirements, thus many of the successful submissions are from professional or semi-pro photographers.
Good photography usually takes some fairly pricy equipment, lots of know-how, and at least some talent.
Personally, I have none of the above, but I do find the photos and their techniques interesting.
loathar wrote:I've noticed lately some of the pics are "less than stellar."
Ditto. (stupid missing smiley!) The recent editions made me think I might actually have a shot at getting something in there. Once I finish my scenery and weather my rolling stock, of course
Dan Stokes
My other car is a tunnel motor
loathar wrote:The pictures need to be in a certain format. (RAW???) I think they have the info on how you submit them on their web site. I've noticed lately some of the pics are "less than stellar."
I doubt the files need to be in .RAW format. Camera Raw is a specialized file type in which higher-end cameras capture everything that comes into the lens. This allows you to then mess with stuff like ASA setting, ISO setting, etc in a software enviroment like PhotoShop.
All I can imagine the folks at MR wanting to do is maybe color-adjust the photos slightly and they can so that to a .jpg.
Also with raw I don't think you can save PhotoShop 'magic' like smoke and fog... raw is for only saving what the camer captured.
No need to speculate wildly (and/or incorrectly).
http://www.kalmbach.com/kpc/objects/pdf/digital-image-submission.pdf
Many publications prefer to receive digital photos in RAW format so they may apply their own corrections and adjustments.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Jimmydieselfan wrote: Have any of you guys ever sent in photos to try to get in Trackside Photos? If so did they make it in the magazine?
Yes and Yes.
Go for it. Get those trains weathered and send in the photos. I am sure there are quite a few folks that put off sending things in and they miss out. If it doesn't get in right away, try again. You are the people who support MR, so they like to see your stuff.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.
cuyama wrote: No need to speculate wildly (and/or incorrectly).http://www.kalmbach.com/kpc/objects/pdf/digital-image-submission.pdfMany publications prefer to receive digital photos in RAW format so they may apply their own corrections and adjustments.
I knew I'd seen something about them preferring .RAW a while back. Maybe it was one of their contests that wouldn't accept anything but.
Hmm.... Maybe some of my photos have a chance then...
TrainManTy wrote: loathar wrote:I've noticed lately some of the pics are "less than stellar."Hmm.... Maybe some of my photos have a chance then...
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot Visit my blog! http://becomingawarriorpoet.blogspot.com
kcole4001 wrote:[snip] Good photography usually takes some fairly pricy equipment, lots of know-how, and at least some talent.[snip]
[snip]
You're only partly right. While a $5000 camera is pretty nice it's not a prerequisite for taking dazzling model railroad photographs. In fact I'd suggest that it's more the person behind the viewfinder than machinery around the viewfinder that is responsible for good photography.
So what is the minimum camera for decent model railroad photography? Here's a list of features that (imho) are necessary...
You don't have to have a dSLR and a bag full of lenses.
You will have to turn off any flash on the camera. It is insanely hard to take good pictures with flash. Pros have thousands of $$ of flash equipment for this.
When you frame a shot, don't have any non-railroad stuff in the background. Your garage, shop, or TV will look strangely out of place there. The very worst is a window in the background - the light coming in will make a mess of your exposures (and look out of place too).
Try to get the camera down to a level where a scale person might be taking the picture. A high level shot may show more of the railroad but it will typically be boring (the exception is the sweeping vista picture - but even these look best if the camera is located in a plausible place for the camera-dude to have gone to shoot the pic). An advantage of a compact digital camera is you can relatively easily place it within a scene to take a picture. You'll get shots this way showing your pike in a way you've never seen before.
When lighting a picture try to use 1 (one) strong light directly on the scene. Put this light as far back as resonably possible to make the shadows it creates have relatively sharp edges. A big bulbous lamp up close to the scene will have unrealistically vague shadows. Or don't have much direct light at all and go for that cloudy day effect.
Use some other lights where aren't directly pointing at the scene. Bounce their light off the ceiling, off a wall, off a piece of white foamcore your assistant is holding. Don't use lights that are radically different in color - ie. don't mix regular fluorescent tubes and incandescent lighting - you'll give the cameras white balance fits. (but if you plan on making a black and white out of a picture this won't matter).
Practice, practice, practice... With digital cameras practice doesn't cost anything. The year I won the photo contest I shot 14 rolls of slide film getting the winning shot. That was a fair amount of $ of film that digital photogs don't worry about.
Have a thick skin. If you proudly show some of your pictures to other photographers and ask for their opinions don't fret or get unhappy if they point out flaws in the picture (and sometimes photo feedback can be unfortunately tact-less). They're not saying you're a loser dweeb geek. Listen so you hear "here are some ways you can improve" (of course if they are saying you're a loser dweeb geek then get some new friends).
Experiment. Try differnet lighting angles. Try different exposures. If your layout has building lights in it try some night time shots. Get some dry ice, dump a chunk of it in hot water and try some fog shots DO NOT EVER TOUCH DRY ICE WITH YOUR BARE HANDS UNLESS YOU WANT TO GET FROSTBITE.
Did I mention experimentation? Don't give up.
If at first your modeling doesn't look so hot to you in the pictures, pick one thing you can change and do it (for example, shiny, unpainted wheel sets will reflect light back at the camera and look rather unlike the muddy, rusty, greasy wheels you see on real freight cars).
And experiment some more.
You should be able to get a suitable compact digital camera for model railroad photography for a couple hundred dollars. Forget the Canon ELPH series - they don't have the manual control you'll need. Forget those 14 megapixel cameras - 6 mega pix is enough to get started. A camera with a flip out view screen is a bonus.
And practice and experiment.
Then share your best shots!
Regards,
Charlie Comstock
(I got an honorable mention in the photo contest with a 4mp Canon powershot G2 )