Eastern Railroad Discussion > The true magical moment

A true railroad photographer has a magical moment which you hear the shutter recording the image.

From looking at numerous railroad photographs by TO railfans images as well as my own, I see common similarities. A huge one is the angle of which the photographer's point-of-view is oriented to the locomotive, in the case of he/she is taking photos of a train in a straight stretch of track. By my opinion, there is only one second, or less, that sincerely captures the train's true power, beauty, and much more, that would not have been present in any other instant of time within the train's movement.

I have found a photo, in my collection, that can easily and clearly illustrate what I mean, despite the clutter on the right.

By your opinion, what is it about that angle (XXX degrees) that makes this magical moment?

Matthew J.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/14 22:09 by sandpatch25.

---

from your description of a professional photographer i'm a novice photographer in his infancy ... you image is nice but i have no clue to the details pertaining to the differences you described

Out_Of_Service Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> from your description of a professional
> photographer i'm a novice photographer in his
> infancy ... you image is nice but i have no clue
> to the details pertaining to the differences you
> described

Sorry about that. I thought there could be issues with my thread. Thank you for your input. First, in the context of the word "professional," I just wanted to portray the idea of someone who has a good sense of what they want to have their work contain. Please let me clarify. If you were going to have one of these two images, used as a screensaver, say, which one would you choose and why?

---

Honestly, I don't think I would select either one. For me, neither one has the "wow factor" that really sets them apart. A great photo isn't just about the alignment of one element. It is the combination of elements, how they are placed in the frame, the lighting, and the technical mastery (noise, focus, etc) blended together in the right amounts that determine whether it is something special.

Posted from Android

The first one is, IMO, the much better picture. The image is much sharper and crisp - the 2nd one is blurry. Having said that, the head & ditch lights in the first image seem to overpower the rest of the image a bit. Other than that, I like it. I like the location, that the sun appears to be trying to come up through the break in the trees in the back & the colors of the whole image in general. Just my $.02

I know what you're asking Sandpatch25. Viewing a still photo that conveys motion, speed or power. An image that causes you to feel something. The rumble of the ground, the smell of the crossties or the diesel exhaust. TRAINS magazine publishes lots of those type of photos.

Not to hijack the thread, but the term "professional" is one of the most incorrectly used in our language.
It's most often used when the word "avid" or , though almost equally incorrect, "expert" is meant.

Professional means purely that one derives his or her livelihood from that craft. It isn't a pastime for them. It's their bread and butter. Long ago it meant an occupation done for the public good, not material gain. Doctor, lawyer, Newspaper publisher. (Two of those are way off that list now)

Are there any true "professional" railfan photographers? There are quite a few damn good ones, some I would consider "world class". But how many derive their sole income from the pursuit?

I would love to be a professional railfan video producer, but the market... and my skill level prevents it.

Danny Harmon
Tampa

Narr8rdanny Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I would love to be a professional railfan video
> producer, but the market... and my skill level
> prevents it.
>
> Danny Harmon
> Tampa

The only thing that limits you to not being able to do videos "professionally" is the market. Your narrating skills and knowledge of railroading in the southeast is second to none. For those who want to see what I'm talking about, look up Distant Signal on You Tube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCW3ztjFA4AoU4pXCTKb4rMQ

That said, I totally agree that there are few, if any "professional" railroad photographers out there. The market just doesn't support it. Shooting this stuff is a labor of love and if you can make a few dollars along the way, more power to you.

Now after hijacking the thread a bit I'll return to the topic. I didn't find either image "magical". If I had to pick one I'd pick the first one, because it does convey a sense of power.

Andy

For me personally when I set up for a shot I have a place in mind of where the lead engine is located when I want to depress the shutter to capture the angle of light on the train at that particular spot. Usually this "spot in my mind" has to do with composition - the including of something else in the shot other than the train. I also try to eliminate what I call detractors when choosing my location - keeping MCI poles/overhead wires/large manmade things growing out of the engines and foreground garbage out of the image. Everything around the train scene matters in the capture of a good image - not just the train.

FDF

I also like the first image more than the second. The headlights do take away from the pic some. I try to angle away from the headlights for this reason. I look for things like location, weather conditions, and perhaps what train it is to help determine a "great moment".

The one thing I have learned in this hobby is A LOT of trial and error is required. You find out what works and what doesn't. And a little bit of luck helps too...

Thank you for your insight on how the word "professional" is used. I will definitely think about that in future threads. The word probably came to me, due to the fact that there are quite a few photographers, who have created photos displayed around my house, that ARE known nationally. In addition, I am listed as a "professional" graphic designer, so the word is used very often.

Anyway, I know, from experience, that TO indicial questions can make their way to other topics but I would appreciate it if this one not to.

Matthew J.

---

In the internet world of photographers, the term 'professional' is generally construed to apply to someone who derives all, or most all, of their income from photography. Sports photographers, wedding photographers, and the disappearing breed of newspaper photographers. More specifically, they have the skills, experience, and equipment to handle just about any situation possible in terms of lighting, movement, 'feeling', etc. They are also artists, for the most part and understand 'composition' and various 'elements' of what makes a good looking picture. Photography professionals usually have 'professional' quality gear, and backup equipment, whenever they shoot. They are also proficient at one or more post processing programs (formerly known as a darkroom, in the film days) to produce results that are a 'cut above' what most amateurs can produce.

Several things I've learned being behind a camera for over 50 years. Paramount is understanding and applying the exposure triangle, followed closely by understanding depth of field and how the exposure used has to be an 'acceptable compromise' of all 4 elements. Throw in moving/non-moving subject issues, distance to subject and/or background issues, etc. Consistently getting 'good' or even 'great' shots is far more complex than point-and-shoot-in-auto-mode.

I'm no pro. I'm just an amateur that has never accepted payment for any of my work. While some of my work has been viewed by 100s of individuals, the large majority is for my own enjoyment. The age of digital photography has allowed me to shoot largely 'for no cost' other than my time, so I can take more pictures and be more critical of the results I've gotten...then go out and improve upon the methods I've used and do better the next time.

As for the 'magical moment' shot at the top of this thread, it's a great shot. It's got the subject well placed in the frame and ones eye naturally follows the line of the train into the distance. But as mentioned by another respondent above, the headlight and ditch lights are a bit overbearing on the overall picture. I also thought it could use some sharpening as well. In particular, if you have a clear or UV 'protective' filter on the front of your lens, your shots will be sharper without and you may find that the 'star filter' effect of the lights is reduced or eliminated completely. For lens protection, nothing beats the appropriate hood for that lens. My lens hoods have a fair number of bumps, scratches and dings in them proving they really do the job.

So...I took the liberty of spending a minute or so with Photoshop Elements 10 on your first shot and 'dialed back' the highlights (the headlight and ditch lights), brought up the mid-tones, and then applied some sharpening to the image. Here's what I ended up with. I could have spent more time, but I'm in short supply of available time at this point. By the way...the 'clutter on the right' actually helps the picture drawing ones' eye to the entire train.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/14 10:10 by BRAtkinson.

---

BRAtkinson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> As for the 'magical moment' shot at the top of
> this thread, it's a great shot.

Under no circumstances in my book is the shot in this thread a "great shot" by any decent photographic criteria that one might impose.

No sun, mismatched power set, dominant headlights, blurry and minimal depth of field (lack of decent light) are among the issues that I see with this shot. No WOW factor element whatsoever.

This thread also shows that there is no standard when viewing photography (specifically of trains). One person looks at the shot and thinks it is great and another looks at it and doesn't.

FDF



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/14 11:04 by TrainCatcher.

TrainCatcher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Under no circumstances in my book is the shot in
> this thread a "great shot" by any decent
> photographic criteria that one might impose....


TrainCatcher, I'll have to look for a copy of your book on the rules of railroad photography the next time I go to Borders.

To the original author: I believe your photo is perfectly fine, and it looks like a great location for shooting the trees in fall color! How you compose your photos, is your personal choice. Some people prefer to shoot wedge shots, others prefer head on photos, while someone else may only like roster shots of locomotives or railcars - everyone is different.

If you only go out and take photos when there is perfect nose light, and a set of matched power in a perfect location, you won't get many pictures. There are photo opportunities in almost every type of lighting condition, it's all about going out and finding them.

-Dalton

> To the original author: I believe your photo is
> perfectly fine.....

Well, as you say, to each his own. I wouldn't consider either to have that "wow" or "magic" other than the ability to view a photo that brings back a good memory of a particular day or event. Those of us on "our end" of the photo have no idea how it actually felt for the photographer as he snapped the shutter. If the photo brings the smile of a good memory for him, more power to him. It's the "you had to be there" thing. Where the photos fail for me is the soft focus and harsh lighting and the all too common 3/4 angle. The "clutter" off to the right actually works ok for me as it leads the eye to the train and the horizon. Just my 2 pennies since you asked :)
RAD

Posted from Android