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?
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.
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”.
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}.
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.
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:
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.
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?
I do not have enough photo expertise to give you any advise but I do have some comments. It 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. I do like the scenery and the scene could be a meeting at a switch back. Perhaps one could be posed taking on water. Peter Smith, Memphis
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.
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.
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.
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, I thought this was the answer. My loggers are still all wood burners which I prefer even though ,the SP which services my freelance sawmill have been forced by the State of California to convert to oil. Maybe they will soon catch up with me too. Peter Smith, Memphis
Marty, I thought this was the answer. My loggers are still all wood burners which I prefer even though ,the SP which services my freelance sawmill have been forced by the State of California to convert to oil. Maybe they will soon catch up with me too. Peter Smith, Memphis
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?
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.
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!
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 sup