Click here, Joe: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=214124greeningep wrote:What is the 118?Raildudes dad wrote:GRE then went west to Marne to get the 118. The 118 was on the interchange track by 5:00 (wasn't there at 4)
CSX GRE MQT Train Location Update 5-29-08
Q327 cleared Plymouth diamond about 2:10pm this afternoon. CSX 468 pulling almost 40 cars. That's fairly long compaired to what I was seeing a few weeks ago.
Here's my picture of him in Plymouth by the old C&O Depot:
Here's my picture of him in Plymouth by the old C&O Depot:
"...and I was in the front and Matt grabbed and pulled my ears from behind me and made horsey sounds."
-
- Sofa King follower
- Posts: 6159
- Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:59 pm
- Location: Toledo, OH.
Somthing funky about that photo. It a very good photo, but somthing funky. Looks like a painting.
https://flic.kr/ps/jSuAb My Flickr photos!
-
- Railroadfan...fan
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:19 am
- Location: Riverside, MI
- Contact:
Yeah, it is a HDR. I just started trying HDR out. I still have a lot to learn.sd70accsxt700 wrote:Somthing funky about that photo. It a very good photo, but somthing funky. Looks like a painting.
Thanks for the comment though.
Edit: I actually did this one differently to look even more like a painting.
Steve
- SD80MAC
- Ingersoll's Mr. Michigan
- Posts: 10468
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:59 pm
- Location: Grand Rapids
That's really cool, Kartracer. What's HDR? Is it a program like Photoshop?
"Remember, 4 mph is a couple, 5's a collision!"
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
How is it HDR? Was the train stopped for you so you could take multiple exposures? If you made that from one exposure, it's not HDR.Kartracer wrote:Yeah, it is a HDR. I just started trying HDR out. I still have a lot to learn.sd70accsxt700 wrote:Somthing funky about that photo. It a very good photo, but somthing funky. Looks like a painting.
Jon, HDR is the practice of combining multiple exposures into one image, typically with a program like Photomatix or Photoshop (the newer versions have an HDR-merge feature). I haven't used Photoshop's HDR feature, but from what I've read from the experts, Photomatix is better. Read about it here:Conrail Jon wrote:That's really cool, Kartracer. What's HDR? Is it a program like Photoshop?
http://www.hdrsoft.com/
Here is an HDR image I created with Photomatix using three different exposures. One was an "even" exposure (meter at 0), one that was 2 stops overexposed and one that was 2 stops underexposed. Three exposures isn't the rule, either. I've seen some made with as many as seven exposures.
This tractor is sitting in the woods near the ROW on the hill in New Richmond. I believe it was used for something when a train derailed in its location back in the late 60's.
-
- Railroadfan...fan
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:19 am
- Location: Riverside, MI
- Contact:
Thanks. JT explained it right. Photomatrix is the software I used. The main use for it is in high contrast situations where some parts of the photo would be "blown out" under the proper exposure and other parts may be underexposed. You take a few pictures at different exposures to bring out the different areas in the photo and then combine them.Conrail Jon wrote:That's really cool, Kartracer. What's HDR? Is it a program like Photoshop?
I shot it in RAW which allowed me to modify the exposure in PS afterward, save each different exposure, and then combine them as HDR. It may not be exactly the same as multiple exposures, but I bet it would be really hard to tell the difference. Shooting RAW gives you lots of options.J T wrote:How is it HDR? Was the train stopped for you so you could take multiple exposures? If you made that from one exposure, it's not HDR.
JT I really like that photo.
Steve
Thanks. But virtually what you're doing is creating a shadow/highlights effect that you can easily do in Photoshop. True HDR is taking multiple exposures of a scene and combining them. Boosting or darkening levels in Photoshop is technically not creating new "exposures." Once you've taken one exposure, regardless if it's RAW or not, there's no way to achieve the same dynamic range had you taken multiple exposures at different settings to begin with. That's what makes the process you did different from HDR processing.Kartracer wrote:
I shot it in RAW which allowed me to modify the exposure in PS afterward, save each different exposure, and then combine them as HDR. It may not be exactly the same as multiple exposures, but I bet it would be really hard to tell the difference. Shooting RAW gives you lots of options.
JT I really like that photo.
HDR from 4 exposures taken in camera:
-
- Railroadfan...fan
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:19 am
- Location: Riverside, MI
- Contact:
Again, I like that shot.J T wrote:Thanks. But virtually what you're doing is creating a shadow/highlights effect that you can easily do in Photoshop. True HDR is taking multiple exposures of a scene and combining them. Boosting or darkening levels in Photoshop is technically not creating new "exposures." Once you've taken one exposure, regardless if it's RAW or not, there's no way to achieve the same dynamic range had you taken multiple exposures at different settings to begin with. That's what makes the process you did different from HDR processing.Kartracer wrote:
I shot it in RAW which allowed me to modify the exposure in PS afterward, save each different exposure, and then combine them as HDR. It may not be exactly the same as multiple exposures, but I bet it would be really hard to tell the difference. Shooting RAW gives you lots of options.
JT I really like that photo.
HDR from 4 exposures taken in camera:
I don't know what to call it, but it seems that it is quite common to "HDR" from one single RAW. Like I said, it may not be exact, but it would be hard to tell the difference.
Steve
I know, I hear ya. I guess it's just one of those things that commonly gets incorrectly classified (like a lot of train stuff that I still screw up! haha).Kartracer wrote: I don't know what to call it, but it seems that it is quite common to "HDR" from one single RAW. Like I said, it may not be exact, but it would be hard to tell the difference.