Please take this as constructive criticism as I hate it when people are too critical of others work.
My knowledge of photography techniques lighting, depth of field etc. could fill have of an HO scale 50 ton hopper car. They designed the pint n shoot camera's for guys like me but my two cents worth.
I "think" the others are on target when they suggest lighting changes as it looks like your rock scenery is kind of "washed out" maybe the lighting causes that? Your Shays all nice looking locomotives are in fact too nice. They could stand to be weathered down some to add more realism to the shot. One thing I've noticed from looking at track side photos is that many of them appear to show the trains at eye level which makes it more believable, the more you give someone to look at the more fault they can find with it. Maybe cut the shot down to the front two shay's with that back one being slightly out of focus, enough that you know what your looking at of course but not so much as to take attention away from the front one, stagger the two locomotives so as mentioned not to take away from the gears mechanism the signature of a shay.and lastly loose the passenger car and replace it with freight rolling stock.
Personally I wish my stuff looked as nice as yours but, the scene is a tad bit too busy
HoosierLine Yes, hallogens will work also. You can get those at Home Deptot. Here's a link to tutorials by 'the master' Bob Sobol who has helped me a lot: http://bobsobol.smugmug.com/Trains/Photo-technique Bob's work will make you drool and he his tutorial is very helpful. If I recall he actually prefers hallogens. Lance
Yes, hallogens will work also. You can get those at Home Deptot. Here's a link to tutorials by 'the master' Bob Sobol who has helped me a lot: http://bobsobol.smugmug.com/Trains/Photo-technique
Bob's work will make you drool and he his tutorial is very helpful. If I recall he actually prefers hallogens.
Lance
Thanks for the link to the Sobol site, its the first time I've seen it. I do question his suggestion re using Canon tilt-shift lenses. Way too much overkill, since they are priced on the B&H Photo site at between $1200 and $2200! And dedicated macro lenses, while they are great, they too are a bit too much for a hobbyist model railroader unless there are major uses outside of model photos. I've gotten along just great for 35 or so years without either type of lens.
The suggested Canon 500D close up lenses are spendy too, around $85.00; less expensive ones are available. I have two sets of close up lenses, but rarely need to use them any more, as most of the lenses for my DSLR focus plenty close on their own.
Bob Boudreau
CANADA
Visit my model railroad photography website: http://sites.google.com/site/railphotog/
Oakhurst Railroad Engineer HoosierLineGo to a camera store and purchase two tungsten photo bulbs (seven bucks each). Tungsten bulbs seem to be pretty hard to find, especially on a weekend. Anyone got any lighting suggestions that I can buy at Lowes or Home Depot? Hallogen, daylight florescent, cool light, high color temperature, etc? Marty
HoosierLineGo to a camera store and purchase two tungsten photo bulbs (seven bucks each).
Tungsten bulbs seem to be pretty hard to find, especially on a weekend. Anyone got any lighting suggestions that I can buy at Lowes or Home Depot? Hallogen, daylight florescent, cool light, high color temperature, etc?
Marty
Visit Miami's Downtown Spur at www.lancemindheim.com
Oakhurst Railroad EngineerCan you give me a critique of the photo, so that I can make improvements the next time I compose, photograph, and submit a photo to MR?
You asked, these are my opinions and observations.
The photo is dark and has no real contrast. It needs better lighting to bring out the details. Also it would help if there was a stronger direct light (spot light) to create some shadows that would hint at the position of the sun. You probably don't want too much direct lighting though unless you're purposely trying to make a statement with the shadows. If you get too much lighting and/or the direct light is too strong, you can soften it up a bit by either using a white reflector to bounce back some of the light onto the model to soften it up a little, or else bounce the direct light off the ceiling or else a white reflective surface to soften it up a little. A reflector doesn't have to be expensive. It could be a piece of paper, a white paper plate, a white t-shirt, pretty much anything that is white and can bounce some light back onto the scene to soften it up (even out the shadows). Many people take their models outdoors on a good sunny day to take advantage of the natural light. Obviously that requires whatever you're photographing to be portable.
The scene itself is well made but it doesn't add a lot to the overall "interest" to the shot. So, instead the "interest" in the photo is pretty much the trains themselves. Looking at the trains there are two shays in essentially a "static" pose. I realize there is a third shay and train along the top, but it is so close to the top it is nearly out of the picture and ends up distracting from the two in the center and confusing the shot. Because these are models, its hard to convey a sense of "action" out of what is fundamentally a "posed" picture. So it helps if you can do something to have them "tell a story". Do something to set up the shot so that the viewer supplies the action by moving his/her eyeballs. Depending on the intention of the photo, that could be something as simple as using the lines in the scene (train, track, buildings, skyline, ridge-line, road, cars, people, whatever) to implicitly suggest the "lines of interest" for the viewer. These are lines that either draw the viewers attention to particular locations within the shot, or else direct them along a path toward (or in some cases away from) something interesting. Help the viewer answer the question "Why am I here?" ("Why am I looking at this?")
Next, regarding the general scene composition, a centered broadside shot, often seems more like a "snapshot" (a "grab shot") as opposed to a considered, compose scene. There are many ways to set up a shot, but one simple technique (and one that even the "pros" use), try reading up on the "rule of thirds". It is not an "absolute rule" but rather a set of guidelines that assist in the development of a composition. Here is the Wikipedia page for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thirds. Briefly the rule of thirds states:
"The rule of thirds is a compositional rule of thumb in visual arts such as painting, photography and design.[1] The rule states that an image should be imagined as divided into nine equal parts by two equally-spaced horizontal lines and two equally-spaced vertical lines, and that important compositional elements should be placed along these lines or their intersections.[2] Proponents of the technique claim that aligning a subject with these points creates more tension, energy and interest in the composition than simply centering the subject would."
(Follow the link above for a more expansive write-up on the rule of thirds. Also there are additional links you can follow from there for more scenic compositional advice.)
Also be mindful of what creeps into the edges of the shot. Sometimes of course you simply can't help it and you get what you get. But if you're setting up the scene, you have a lot of control over the end result, and of course there's also photoshop and similar programs to remove distractions after the fact. You can do a lot with careful setup in getting the shot, and judicious cropping and editing after-the-fact with software tools.
Some general stuff you can do.... Take *lots* of pictures-- with digital cameras there is no film. Try bracketing your exposures (up / down an F-stop or two, or if depending on the aperture, a shutter-speed or two). Don't be afraid to use the manual settings on your camera. Learn how to set the white-balance on the camera correctly if you don't know how, so that it will be properly "biased" to the scene. That's a good generic tip for any type of digital photography. Put your camera on a tripod since its typically hard to hand-hold the camera at typical layout light levels. Use your self-timer to take the actual shot. Put it on its longest setting if you have a choice. This will let the vibrations from handling the camera and pressing the shutter dampen down / die out before the camera actually take the picture.
One thing that might surprise you is how easy it is to get good pictures with your digital camera sometimes-- but the method is counter-intuitive: set your white balance correctly, and then turn *OFF* your bright lights and just let the camera take the shot with the ambient light in the room. It doesn't always work, but you'd be surprised how often it does. Don't hand-hold it though, the light levels are probably going to be very low. And play with the settings. Two pictures of the same shot, same setup, but taken with F-stop or shutter settings a half step apart (or two) can make all the difference between a good shot and a so-so shot. Bright lights are good, but don't make the mistake of completely depending on them. There are other things you can do to greatly influence the results-- and use your reflectors!!!
Hope this helps ya!
John
Hey Marty, Give me a shout. I have a Canon 1D that can take some awesome pics with the correct set up and format. We need to work on the lighting and the subject. I'll bet you a Subway sandwich we can get you published sooner than later. And maybe I can take my Sierra loco home. LOL!
San Dimas Southern slideshow
This is a small detail, but little things make a difference. In the upper left corner, there is a bare white wall. A backdrop there would add something. A blue sky with some clouds would provide a color which is otherwise missing. Also, the tree up there is casting a shadow on the wall. Additional lighting could be used to wash the shadow out, or move the lighting you are using to shift the shadow out of the picture.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
www.oakhurstrailroad.com
"Oakhurst Railroad" on Facebook
Oakhurst Railroad EngineerIn the MR photo guidelines, they say: "Digital files should not be corrected or manipulated for color, sharpness, size, cropping, or color mode. Image files that have been altered for content or aesthetics must be labeled as altered images." I would guess that you recommend going ahead and making the color corrections before submitting the photo?
Good question. MR says they'd prefer to do the clean up themselves but in my experience they usually do not. My guess is that they just don't have the manpower or time to edit every photo for every publication. But....having said that it gets tricky to do it yourself because the photo may look one way on your monitor and look another way on theirs. Then the printer may get a different look. I take my chances and do the editing. Often I'll find a picture I know is properly edited, say a clear shot on ESPN or CNN and use that as marker and compare mine to that. Do make sure that you follow MR's advice and save the image at 300dpi resolution.
There is only one way to get better and that is what you're doing. Take the pictures. Get advice. Make adjustments and repeat.
Marty -
You need to read some stuff on photography or basic art composition.
There's no focus (composition focus, camera focus will be next) - what do you want us to look at? The rock face is centered, sorry it's boring.
The lines are parallel. That sometimes works in modern art, but not in this genre. Look up the term "right triangular composition", I think that still being used. The top train detracts from the overall image, doesn't add to it.
Too dark, as has been said and too homogeneous, everything blends in, see the above focus part.
Blurry, lack of detail. Need to work the camera focus, shutter speed, aperture, lighting etc (if available).
Just for giggles, try the same shot from a 3/4 forward angle with a wider angle focusing between the two lower trains. Angle up slightly if possible. On thing that always makes a picture of a model look like a picture of a model is the angle of the picture vs. the angle you'd view the 1:1 article.
Just some thoughts.
Archer
I would definitely adjust color and brightness. cropping would show for sure. They may not want modified images because when working with JPG files any changes and follow up saves would degredate the image quality. They probably want the file as pure as possible so they have something that their pro's can modify if they decide to use it. DSLR users have a picture type called raw which allows them to change whatever they want and still keep the original quality. When submitting it may also help if you note that the raw image is available.
Springfield PA
PASMITHIt seems a ltttle odd to me that No 5 is a wood burner and No 6 is not . Also I think that a bit of weathering would add some realism to the scene. The Shays seem to be a little too shiny and bright.
This comment is right on as well. You caught my railroad in the middle of transitioning from wood to oil. I have 4 other locomotives that are more highly weathered, but they are not DCC and getting less and less use. At one time, #5 was treated as the newest locomotive, and I was happy with it looking newer. Then #6 arrived and then #7 and I never re-weathered #5.
Back to an earlier comment: Although pulling a shortly passenger car with a Shay would be very rare, it isn't at all unexpected on the Oakhurst Railroad, as we carry passengers to Wawona in Yosemite on our steep route up the mountains.
Thanks again for the comments. You guys can really spot the details.
You guys are giving me exactly what I wanted. With today's digital cameras (I'm using a Canon PowerShot SX110 9 Megapixel) and an extra lightbulb, an inexperienced photographer like me can take remarkably "good" photos of their layout.
However, your work (I've seen your photos) is "great" and your suggestions will help me make progress in that direction.
The photo I posted is the 2nd version of the photo, as in the first series of shots I could see that the rock wall was too light and didn't have enough detail. For the photo you see, I added foreground detail, darkened the rock, added small bits of vegetation, swapped the locos to put the more detailed ones in the front, and added chains to the log cars. So, your comments are right on.
Your sugggestions on improved lighting seem very important.
Another question. In the MR photo guidelines, they say: "Digital files should not be corrected or manipulated for color, sharpness, size, cropping, or color mode. Image files that have been altered for content or aesthetics must be labeled as altered images." I would guess that you recommend going ahead and making the color corrections before submitting the photo?
Thanks again ...
Along what others have said, composition is the biggest problem. Too many Shays a lined up in a bunch, does not tell a story. Check out some of the suggestions in my model railroad photography website in my signature. I've had over 800 of my photos printed in hobby magazines, including Trackside Photos.
I'm no expert but have been slowly learning from others on this and other sites.
I won't repeat what the others have said but they do apply.
There basically isn't a scene and nothing is happening. The end result is a picture of 2 shays with one in the background. Everyone knows what a shay looks like.
Chances are that if you angled the pic to include the layout to the left or right there would be some interesting scenery.
Besides lighting what camera are you using and what lens?
There are some basic settings that will do a lot of good.
Also take a picture of your set-up. I.E how you set the picture up. Here's a couple I took before when hinting for comments or suggestions: I've since added filler lights picked up from a camera shop:
Marty,
A few things to put in perspective. First, I wouldn't be discouraged at all. I do a fair amount of writing for MR and even then very few of my trackside photos get used. Don't take it personally and don't give up. Second, you have the hardest part down...the modeling. Your modeling is excellent.
You've gotten some constructive tips from the previous posters. I'll add one comment that the cab of the front loco. overlaps the valve gear of the one behind it in a distracting manner. You can correct this by adjusting angles.
My primary suggestion would be to change the lighting. You need more contrast and pop. Go to a camera store and purchase two tungsten photo bulbs (seven bucks each). Go to Home Depot and buy two clamp on reflectors. Take the reflector off of one and don't use it.
Assuming you are inside, clamp one light to post or other stand eight to ten feet behind you and point it away from the subject so as to provide diffuse lighting to the room. Now take the second light, the one without the reflector, hold it in your hand from about six feet away and point it at the models. This is the 'sun'. Play with different angles. Take lots of shots.
If your camera has light settings other than auto, set it for tungsten light.
Pick up an old copy of Adobe Photoshop elements on ebay. Don't pay more than twenty or thirty bucks. Play with the levels tool to make the majority of your corrections.
Take lots of photos. I probably only use one out of five or six. Starting out I had to take ten to get one good one.
Lance Mindheim
I would say that
1}it is too dark
2}too much yellow in the over all pic
3} too much "activity" {that is the three trains instead of two} in the same shot in this case doesn't work so well because back loco is too "far away" from the two front locos.
4}There's a fair amount of details in the forefront of the pic, but the middle is a glaring patch of yellow/brown "wasteland" and there is very little detail showing in the back
5}I like river_eagle's representation of your photo better. Try his style representation and resubmit it and see what happens.
6} MR mag. doesn't have time to answer all inquiries of why photos are or are nto picked from the thousands they receive, so asking them probably won't help you.
{My opinions, which is what you asked for. Your opinion and that of others may differ to varying degrees}.
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
I would contact them and ask them specifically "why", just rejecting them without a reason is like someone telling you you can't do something but not telling you why or offering any suggestions in it's place. It would only have taken a very few minutes to write you a note with reasons "why".
Mark
I will answer the way I see it.
Your photo shows an unlikely arrangement of tracks...so credibility suffers immediately. Don't fret; my own layout suffers from the same defect. Live and learn.
The colour balance seems off...to much yellow and red.
It is a bit dark and dull...few vibrant colours.
The focus is the engines. What is happening...are they being staged for this photo shoot? Why is a Shay trailing passenger cars? Again, credibility suffers a bit with this image. I think most good model shots tell a story of some kind, and they show more details and greenery. There is very little green.
-Crandell
1,too dark
2.not enough depth of field
3, center focal point of the image is an out of focus loco and a basicly blank rock wall,
so I would lose the top train for this shot.
4. while I wouldn't shoot it as 3/4 front shot, rotating slightly toward the front, maybe 10-15 degrees or so would take the "flatness" away.
I'm looking for your photo hints. This photo was recently rejected by Model Railroader for the "Trackside Photos" section. Can you give me a critique of the photo, so that I can make improvements the next time I compose, photograph, and submit a photo to MR?
Thanks,
800x600 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
"Shays are busy on a warm summer day on the Oakhurst Railroad. Shay #5 is bringing back a string of empty flat cars from the sawmill, but will have to wait until the daily passenger train from Wawona hauled by Shay #6 passes the junction at Yosemite Forks. Both will need to clear the junction before Shay #7 arrives with a load of logs after winding down the steep grade from Sugar Pine.
The Oakhurst Railroad is an HO scale model railroad set in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in the 1920’s. The locomotives are all Bachmann 3-Truck Shays and the rolling stock are from Roundhouse kits."
Note that the image file size has been reduced a bit from the actual submittal.